Autonomo Concept Is Half Car, All Driver

Linking off that page lead to the Aptera, which, while not as smart as those cars, has a very streamlined composite body and a diesel electric drive train that gives it a fuel economy of 200 mpg.

They also just shut down the shop.
 
well that three wheel car is crap... no wonder... looks like it wasnt really a company to begin with.. more like a handful of ideas
 
theonestonecutter said:
well that three wheel car is crap...
Click to expand...

Actually, I believe it's a motor bike. And if it doesn't crack 60 km/h then it's a scooter. If it tops out at 30 km/th then it's a bicycle.

That, at least, is the way things go around my neck of the woods. I knew a guy who built a 3 wheeler electric and the reason he did was because that was the only practical way for him to license his vehicle for the street. Add one more wheel and things suddenly get much more difficult.
 
Personally I think two wheels is safer than three. Not sure how the laws are written, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had problems there. One major state like California with strict laws could be enough to make it nonviable. Also, the thought of reducing the wheel count from 4 to 3 just to get around laws doesn't exactly reassure me either. Not sure I'd take my kids in that, doesn't look very survivable. Does it even have a crumple zone? Doesn't look like it. Of course, that's assuming that thing in article is their only model.
 
Glaucus said:
Personally I think two wheels is safer than three.
Click to expand...
Three wheels with two at the front is much better than one in the front - and I think that three is generally safer than two but four is better.

Also, the thought of reducing the wheel count from 4 to 3 just to get around laws doesn't exactly reassure me either. Not sure I'd take my kids in that, doesn't look very survivable.
Click to expand...
If you are a car then you have to have crash testing, airbags, all sorts of cost and weight adding things.
Does it even have a crumple zone? Doesn't look like it.
Click to expand...
If you want to get 200 mpg you have to give up a few things, and one of those things is weight. If you are in the same vehicle class as motorbikes then you can have the same crumple zones as motorbikes. With one more wheel and a full enclosure you are already safer than a motorbike. Then again, if you want to go 200 mpg you probably also have to give up speed which makes you safer again.
 
Ya, I suppose it's hard to say what is safest. I did a quick googling and it seems some three wheelers (two at front) can be safe so long as they have a very low center of gravity, wider stance than cars and allow for tilting. If they don't tilt, then there is a chance of tipping over. Under emergency situations, a good motorcyclist can maneuver quite nicely but skill is required. A friend of mine once had to spill his bike and slide it under a semi trailer once. That takes balls but better then being part of the road. My thinking is that a three wheeler with wheels that far apart just can't change direction fast enough, at least without some fancy tilting mechanism.

If you are a car then you have to have crash testing, airbags, all sorts of cost and weight adding things.
Click to expand...
Well ya, that's kinda what I was getting at. If these things start to get mass produced, it'll only be a matter of time before they force the same kind of safety requirements on them, making them a lot heavier. You know, English and Italian sports cars from the 60s/70s were also pretty small and light but they also lacked a lot of the safety equipment we expect today. You definitely wouldn't want to be in an accident inside an old Spitfire or TR7. I don't see how this thing will provide substanially more protection than a motorcycle if it's in a collision with a 3000lbs car.
 
Glaucus said:
You definitely wouldn't want to be in an accident inside an old Spitfire or TR7.
Click to expand...
You definitely don't want to be in an accident ever. However, I dearly loved being in my old Spitfire.
I don't see how this thing will provide substanially more protection than a motorcycle if it's in a collision with a 3000lbs car.
Click to expand...
But people are allowed to buy and ride motorcycles so people should be allowed to buy and drive cars that have motorcycle like safety (or slightly better). And you never want to get hit by one of those 3000lb monsters whether you are in a car, on a bike or on foot. They shouldn't be on city streets.
 
3000lbs is around the average curb weight of an average car. My Prelude is around 2900lbs, as was my Supra. Sedans will weight a bit more and SUVs average around 4000lbs or more. The H2 Hummer has a curb weight of over 6600lbs. Fire trucks can weight between 30,000lbs and 60,000lbs. Motorcycles are closer to around 500lbs.

I have seen three wheeled motorcycles in town, but they look like motorcycles with three wheels. That thing looks more like a fancy car. As such, you'd expect more, but really, the only difference is you have some rain protection. I guess my feeling is that people may not understand that they don't get car-style protection just because they have a roof over their head.
 
Glaucus said:
3000lbs is around the average curb weight of an average car. My Prelude is around 2900lbs, as was my Supra.
Click to expand...

My vehicle is closer to 2400lb but, then again, it doesn't put a roof over my head.
 
Actually, convertibles tend to be a bit heavy. Maybe not so much for a Miata, but the bigger they are, the more extra support they need to keep it rigid. A smaller two seater probably needs less of that, but a lot of those 4 seater convertibles can be heavy. So if you were racing against a Mustang, racing against the convertible type would probably give you an extra advantage (especially on turns). At least, that's what I heard, can't say I ever bothered to look up their curb weights.

Mazda did do a good job of reducing weight on that car. They probably learned a lot from their work on the RX7, which was a masterpiece as far as I'm concerned.
 
OMFSM! Now I know why I'm here. It's my 1969 Triumph Spitfire. (And to think the DMV rejected my application for '69 Spit' on my plate.)
 
Glaucus said:
So if you were racing against a Mustang [...]
Click to expand...
Rented a Mustang convertible some time around 2004 in San Fransisco. What a disappointment. Being an automatic didn't help. Like my car much better.
 
faethor said:
OMFSM! Now I know why I'm here. It's my 1969 Triumph Spitfire. (And to think the DMV rejected my application for '69 Spit' on my plate.)
Click to expand...

Mine was a '72. It's gone a long time ago. My brother's is a '68 or '69 I think and he still has his - but under a tarp for at least 10 years. I hope there is still something under the tarp when he finally retires and decides he can work on it.
 
In your original post Fluffy you said something about a diesel electric car. But this seems to be purely electric. I'm guessing this "car" also lacks air conditioning and heating, limiting it's market to places like, well, where you live. Most other places get either too hot or too cold, so that would be a huge strike against it and make explain why the company failed. I'd expect that from any purely electric car.
 
Glaucus said:
In your original post Fluffy you said something about a diesel electric car.
Click to expand...

The video mentions a hybrid option.

I'm guessing this "car" also lacks air conditioning and heating
Click to expand...
The video mentions that solar cells on the roof help keep the car cool while parked. (I presume that means it provides power for cooling).

[...] explain why the company failed.
Click to expand...

Out of funding before they could produce a sedan. People want those and they are very very expensive to develop because of all the regulatory requirements. This helps keep competition at bay in the auto industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top