Slashdot Mirror
New Company Set To Resurrect the Aptera
Zothecula writes "Ever since it was first unveiled in 2007, many people were captivated with the sleek, futuristic looks of the Aptera. When Aptera Motors went out of business in 2011, not having commercially produced a single vehicle, those same people were understandably disappointed. Now, word comes that a new company may be manufacturing and selling Apteras as soon as next year."
Says the article: "Aptera USA has most of the original company’s prototypes, equipment, patents and designs, so it wouldn’t be starting from scratch. Given that fact, Deringer hopes that Aptera USA could be making cars as early as the first quarter of 2014. He’s currently in the process of hiring engineers, and the company has already put in an order for 1,000 bodies from its Detroit-based supplier." Until there really is a super-charger network from central Texas to California, I wish I could get one of the gas-powered (or gas-electric hybrid) Apteras. Why should Tesla have all the fun?
Just wait until you hit a pothole with the dame thing.. Sheesh! Picasso, Calder, or Dali could have made a better design.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Studebakers, DeLoreans and Austins?
Oh my. I'm very enthused by this news. I really hope that it rolls. I think they need to stay away from the all-electric pitch and go for the hybrid angle first. I hope also that they are permitted to borrow, perhaps with some government assistance, to get the product launch going.
.. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
I was so disheartened when they closed their doors in 2011. Jay Leno bought one of their prototypes it seems looking at his car collection.
They tried, but the gov denied the loan due to only having three wheels.
So you have to be rich to buy a $30,000 car?
Since when?
Is an Aptera a kind of butterfly?
http://www.twike.com/
Or buy one from Neiman Marcus?
http://green.autoblog.com/2006/10/06/neiman-marcus-tries-on-some-green-for-the-holidays-christmas-bo/
It's at least better looking than the Aptera.
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
In the US three wheeled vehicles are legally classified as motorcycles. Helmet laws by state. There is another company that makes a motorized tricycle that is working on getting the helmet laws changed.
"The 2g could end up in the US$50,000 to $55,000 price range"
If you are paying 55,000 for a 3 wheeled Honda Fit, you are a rich asshole.
The Chinese-built mass-produced 2e should be less expensive than its American sibling, but Deringer believes that US buyers will want what his version has to offer. “From the initial research that I’ve done, I get a lot of people in Silicon Valley and California and Texas and other places who would like the car hand-made, not Chinese-made, and they want it to match to what their requirements are,” he tells us. “We can do that in the US, it can’t be done in China.”
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
I hope they reconsider and decide to pursue the early prototype using batteries with a ultra-high efficiency motor/generator configuration. Without a model such as that in their lineup Aptera will be relegated to urban-toy status and will NEVER be taken seriously as a viable commuter vehicle.
So you have to be rich to buy a $30,000 car?
Since when?
No, why would you say that? A Nissan Leaf or Chevrolet Volt is well within the means of most upper-middle-class people.
But we're not talking about a $30,000 car. We're talking about a $55,000 impractical toy for people who have more money than sense.
Nearly any accident in a motorcycle involves you being thrown from it. A convertible is a car; the only accident where this would be an issue is a rollover, and due to their lower center of gravity, this is less likely than in a regular car. Convertibles also have roll bars and stiffer A-pillars to provide some protection.
Now, word comes that a new company may be manufacturing and selling Apteras as soon as next year."
And be out of business the following week. Seriously, I can't really see these things selling in any meaningful quantity. Certainly not enough to keep this company as a going concern. They're weird looking and impractical. Some might like the aesthetics but most won't. (Personally I think it's pretty ugly) Few people could use one as a primary vehicle which puts it into the expensive toy category. It apparently is fuel efficient which is great but it seems to have made a LOT of compromises in other areas to get there. Basically it seems to have sacrificed everything on the altar of fuel economy.
Exactly! How are you supposed to tie a canoe to the roof of that thing, for example?
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Companies fail.
For reason.
Respect that...
.. I see them rolling off of the assembly line.
So you have to be rich to buy a $30,000 car?
Since when?
Well, I am technically upper middle class, and there is no way I could afford a $30,000 car, so I would assume I would have to be rich to afford one. However, a lot of the entry level people in my company who make 1/4 of what I make have $30,000 cars, so maybe you have to be rich or below poverty level to have a $30,000 car.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
These things are going to be worse than Corvairs/Volkswagens when they hit the road. Three wheeled vehicles are very unstable, having the poorest handling characteristics of cars and motorcycles.
Have gnu, will travel.
Until there really is a super-charger network from central Texas to California, I wish I could get one of the gas-powered (or gas-electric hybrid) Apteras.
If you're really making the Texas -> California road trip often enough that it's not an outlier, then an electric vehicle is not the right vehicle for you even if Tesla's Supercharger network (which is proprietary to Tesla, BTW) comes to fruition. The good news is that the (in)ability to make outlier trips like that doesn't have much bearing on the utility of EVs for the 3-4 standard deviations of driving that we do.
That 30,000 car costs half what I paid for my last house! I have a $30,000 car, but I bought it used and only paid $10k. Buying any new car is foolish unless you're rich. Cars today last a long time, and as soon as you drive it off the lot it's lost 1/3 of its value. New cars break down too, the last new car I foolishly bought (I was married, she insisted that we buy a new one for dependability) was a 1984 VW Rabbit, which stranded us eighty miles from home a month after we bought it; the alternator went out. New cars are only status symbols, which to me are symbols of foolish waste. Only the rich and/or foolish buy new cars.
When my ten year old car costs more to repair than replace, I'll buy another used car.
While I agree it is financially prudent not to spend more then $25,000 on a car if you are upper middle class many people can and do without serious financial harm. I am also upper middle class and felt that i could get everything I wanted for $23,000 on the road. $30,000 is not too bad especially of the cost of ownership is lower due to lower fuel and maintenance costs. You do not need to be rich to spend $30,000 or even $50,000 on a car, it is just a matter of priorities.
Why carry 1.5 tons of steel and plastic with you, if all you really want to move is yourself?
Because much of the time I don't move just myself and spending an extra $30,000 for the occasions when I do is a rather poor economic choice. I could accomplish much of the same result just by buying a (much cheaper) motorcycle or scooter. Furthermore where I live this thing would be pretty much useless between the months of December and April due to the weather. My pickup truck however is useful year round for any reasonable use I have even if it isn't ideal from a fuel economy standpoint.
I looked at the Aptera when they were viable. Great style, but far too expensive.
Elio is 1/3 the price, more useful (600+ miles/tank) and greener. $6800
It's the first ultra-economical car that makes sense by being low-cost and leaving the hybrid and electric crap OUT.
http://www.eliomotors.com/
Well, I am technically upper middle class, and there is no way I could afford a $30,000 car
fyi, upper-middle class in the US is more in the range of $200,000 - $400,000 per year...
You have to gradually change styles. Coming out with a design that's aesthetically too radical will turn off a lot of consumers. "Radical" implies untested and unproven to some.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Why not import a Twike? Or buy one from Neiman Marcus?
Because it has the same failings - limited utility and poor performance in pursuit of fuel economy. And anything you buy from Needless Markup is going to be outrageously expensive. Plus saying the name "Twike" makes you sound like Elmer Fudd.
It's at least better looking than the Aptera.
Even if I agreed with you (and I don't - the Twike is hideous) that is like saying your boat leaks less than it used to. They're both really quite unattractive.
Um, how about it's because Tesla makes real cars and not bad sci-fi movie props.
--- Void where prohibited. Your mileage may vary. ---
So you have to be rich to buy a $30,000 car?
Since when?
Well, I am technically upper middle class, and there is no way I could afford a $30,000 car, so I would assume I would have to be rich to afford one.
The 67th percentile for income in the USA is $70,000/yr.
The 80th percentile for income is about $100,000/yr
Not sure what you consider to be "upper-middle class," but if you're in the top third of incomes, a $30,000 car really ought to be within your means, unless you live in New York City or have half a dozen kids. It may not be the best use of your money, but it should be easily doable if it were important to you.
Or be willing to take debt to buy a car.
You can claim these are the same things, and Libertarian and Republican fat cats will totally agree with you, but they simply aren't. Let me explain.
A government can use empirical data of existing damage and cost externalization to guide taxation - thus picking losers or it can make uninformed decisions based on hypothetical projections - thus attempting to pick winners.
Notice that one of these two processes is easily manipulable by nearly anyone - when you aren't using empirical data, it's all just handwaving and shouting and the loudest sociopath wins. Tax breaks for Solyndra and Fiskar? Please. Those companies never had a chance in the market regardless of taxation because they had no customers or business plan. Giving them money was a political handout even though the clueless, technically ignorant politicians doing it had no way to know that.
But when Congressman Whitenose can look up and actually see smokestacks belching filth into the sky, and his staffers can analyze real data showing who is driving up healthcare costs in the Congressman's district, he doesn't have to guess at a mythical future, he can examine the past and present and know the truth.
So picking losers is not the same as picking winners. It's the difference between creating harmful market distortions and creating a fair market - not a totally free laissez faire market (where Murder Incorporated always wins) but a FAIR market, where cost displacement onto taxpayers by favored entities is not permitted.
Semantic quibblers and corporatist meme-shoppers will always claim that taxing known bad actors is the same as funding hypothetically good actors. Don't fall for it. You could also claim that Achilles can never outrace the tortoise, because the Greek continually has to cover half the ground and then half of that et cetera ad infinitum. But Achilles kicks the tortoise's armor plated ass in the real world. Future prediction is fundamentally different from acting on empirical data, and government should always favor the latter.
While at RSA '09 they parked an Aptera in front of the hotel.
I looked at the car, small tires, low ground clearance, small fender clearance, and being from the Northern Climate I asked "How does it work in snow?"
Response "Why would you want to live anywhere like that?"
PROTIP: Don't build a car that only works in moderate climes.
Its called credit.
Pretty much the same as me. $70,000 house paid off in 11 years, and drive a 12 year old Cadillac that cost $55,000 new, but I paid $5900 for 2 years ago. $30,000 for a car is too much. I guess it depends on if you want to live in debt or not. I choose not to.
Buying any new car is foolish unless you're rich. Cars today last a long time, and as soon as you drive it off the lot it's lost 1/3 of its value. New cars break down too, the last new car I foolishly bought (I was married, she insisted that we buy a new one for dependability) was a 1984 VW Rabbit, which stranded us eighty miles from home a month after we bought it; the alternator went out. New cars are only status symbols, which to me are symbols of foolish waste. Only the rich and/or foolish buy new cars.
I think I have to disagree a bit here. Buying a new car is not foolish unless you are only worried about resell value. It is a shame you had one new car that was dud but that shouldn't be an indictment of all new cars. I've bought new cars for a variety of reason, none of which I think is particularly foolish.
1) I know the complete history of the vehicle. I can make sure all preventative maintenance is completed and I can be sure not to slam on the brakes or jack rabbit start all the time. If you buy a used car, do you know it wasn't a rental beat to death, always had oil changes and basic PM, wasn't in an accident at some point, wasn't repaired with substandard after market parts, was a smoker's car, or any other variety of problems
2) I get what I want in it. I don't have to take what is on the used market. I love convertibles but I find people cheap out on accessories to afford them (the convertible version of a car is often several grand more than the normal model). I personally care that I have the features I want in a vehicle I'll drive for 6 or more years.
3) Often you can get good interest rates (like zero) on new cars which depending on how late the model of used car you buy might actually be a better deal
I think the Aptera is all kinds of cool, but I can't see enough people shelling out the bucks for it to make it viable. Teslas are luxury vehicles sold to people with money to burn. I don't see those folks getting excited about an ultra-light 3-wheeler.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
what era is that dinosaur from?
The Honda 600n was sold in the USA starting in 1970.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I don't consider myself wealthy by any means, but I buy new. As long as you intend to own it for a while, it is a good thing. My truck comes with a pretty long warranty, though I have not had anything break on a car in like 10 years. The worst repair is the tires, and those just wear out over time. The battery also tends to go in about 3 years. Maybe I am wasteful, but I bought the truck for Boy Scouts, and it has been invaluable for storage space and for towing the troop trailer, a used truck just wouldn't tow as well as the longer it is driven, the less towing capacity as the cylinders wear in.
I have tried towing with a 10 year old truck, and it wasn't anywhere near the same, backing the trailer in, the truck had to actually work to move everything. My truck towing the same trailer can practically idle pushing the trailer. I also tend to only lose 2 mpg to towing, where an older truck would lose much more just in age. I can deal with my 15.4 mpg normal and 14 mpg towing.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
It depends where you live. Upper middle class in Maryland is around $90k
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
fyi, upper-middle class in the US is more in the range of $200,000 - $400,000 per year...
Oh, well then I am not upper middle class at all, then. Since I make less than half of that I guess I am lower middle class. No wonder I can't afford a $30,000 car.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Its called credit.
Oh, sure I could buy one on credit. No doubt that even though I have essentially zero disposable income, they would still be more than happy to finance a $30,000 car for me. But that would be just plain foolish of me to do.
If you can't afford to buy the car outright, then you should not buy it. If you can afford to buy it outright, then by all means buy it, on credit, and put the cash you would have spent into a mutual fund or something.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
One thing they both have in common: neither is actually available for sale
I have always like this vehicle, very attractive, efficient and if it comes with an 80KW+ electric motor it'll have lots of acceleration too.
Looks a lot like my 1999 white Civic DX 2 door with black trim.
I hear that it is a part of ZAP motors? I hope the Zaptera doesn't have braking issues like on the Zap cars.
Make this happen!