Cool carbon fiber tandem – not what you think

[RPS]

This VW 1-liter car (named for needing only one liter of fuel to travel 100 km) is a cool example of what can be done if cars were designed like high-end bikes by emphasizing lightweight and aerodynamics. I think that works out to over 200 MPG for this sleek 660-pound automobile. Something like this could bring back the $10 fill-up. :)

BTW, have you guys seen pictures of next year’s new Honda 5-door Insight? The Prius will finally have a little direct competition.

[fiamme red]

The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b4099060491065.htm)

http://images.businessweek.com/story/08/600/0904_mz_ecocar.jpg

[RPS]

That's a cool car concept.
The Insight below will be approximately as economical and runs on gasoline. Pricing much lower than the Prius is a major Honda objective.

[mosca]

That VW reminded me of the GM "Ultralite" from 1992. As I recall they worked with Scaled Composites on the lightweight composite structure and the aerodynamics. It was rated at 88 mpg, not bad for a four seater at that time. It's really unfortunate to see GM struggling now when they had such good ideas available to them way back then, but maybe these types of concepts are finally viable and acceptable to consumers - let's hope. :)

[Tobias]

That VW reminded me of the GM "Ultralite" from 1992. As I recall they worked with Scaled Composites on the lightweight composite structure and the aerodynamics. It was rated at 88 mpg, not bad for a four seater at that time. It's really unfortunate to see GM struggling now when they had such good ideas available to them way back then, but maybe these types of concepts are finally viable and acceptable to consumers - let's hope. :)Mosca, was the Ultralite part of the 80 MPG car project the Big 3 worked on? That car by the way reminds me of the police cars in Demolition Man.

The VW is a tough call since crash survivability in a 660 pound car is so minimal unless we have massive downsizing of vehicles on the roads. On the other hand it can’t be much worse than a motorcycle or bicycle.

The article below lists many of the car’s details. Its way out there by automotive standards. The rear view reminds me of a time-trial helmet. Apparently it takes that goofy teardrop shape to get the Cd down in the range of 0.16.

http://www.greatchange.org/footnotes-1-liter-car.html

Other articles seem to suggest VW has given it a green light for very limited production as early as 2010. I hope it makes it as an expensive 4-wheel motorcycle although IMHO the anticipated high cost makes it an R&D exercise.

If this VW actually functions (even if at diminished capacity) at over 200 MPG it should lead to shattering of the recent 40 MPG target with a real-world car. No doubt combining light weight, small frontal area, low Cd, and small engine makes for incredible economy. It's not rocket science.

[palincss]

I see that it has a heater -- but what about A/C? Did I miss that, or does it not have interior cooling?

[A.L.Breguet]

Is there a place for the Lightweight rear derailleur?

[RPS]

I see that it has a heater -- but what about A/C? Did I miss that, or does it not have interior cooling?The pictures above are probably of the original prototype that dates back to 2002 or so. This is the only reference I’ve seen regarding A/C. From US News & World Reports:

That sparse interior doesn't allow for many creature comforts. Autoblog notes, "Safety features like airbags, anti-lock brakes and stability control aren't lacking, but convenience items like air conditioning may be optional."


In any case it looks like VW is serious about producing a limited number of 1L cars (about 1000 reported). The very high cost (above $30,000 anticipated) due to the carbon fiber body, use of magnesium and titanium for light weigth, and the fact the cars will be essentially hand built will limit market penetration.

The original prototype design was more of a show car with weird wheels (guessing carbon fiber), rear view cameras, etc… The one below appears much closer to production and has normal-looking alloy wheels, rearview mirrors, and what appears to me like a significant revision of the rear compartment to make it more spacious.

Looks better in blue too.

[H1449-6]

The VW is a tough call since crash survivability in a 660 pound car is so minimal unless we have massive downsizing of vehicles on the roads. On the other hand it can’t be much worse than a motorcycle or bicycle.


Exactly what I thought when I read the weight of the vehicle (after "boy that seems light"). My motorcycle weighs about the same, so I can't imagine there's enough weight budget, so to speak, for a whole lot of safety reinforcement or equipment.

[rwsaunders]

The problem with a tandem, is that it could truly lend credence to the term "back seat driver". :cool:

[RPS]

My motorcycle weighs about the same, so I can't imagine there's enough weight budget, so to speak, for a whole lot of safety reinforcement or equipment.Given it’s a car with seatbelts and air bags, IMO it should be safer than a motorcycle of equal mass. Safety certainly wouldn’t keep me from driving one, particularly it they were allowed to use the counterflow lanes which are protected from traffic in my area.

Two things to consider when comparing to motorcycles in this area is that the weight of the powertrain is much lighter than most large motorcycles (the original prototype had a 300 CC single-cylinder engine), and also that the use of carbon fiber can make for a very strong yet light unitized body/frame structure (not unlike Indy cars).

The issue I see is not that of strength, but lack of mass when crashing against another car of much greater size. Even if the structure can maintain the shape of the passenger compartment intact during a crash with an SUV, the impact’s acceleration could be too much to survive. With some luck maybe it would be like an Indy car at high speed crashing into a wall and having the driver walk away.

[Ahneida Ride]

If the frn is backed by anything .... it's oil.
Oil is traded in frns.

As gas mileage improves, They will increasingly dilute the frn so that
fill ups are still a painful 50 - 100 frn.

We pay for oil with frns. 50% of the discussion should focus on oil supplies
and monopolistic oil corporations, the other 50%, the fed reserve non note.

Think I am nuts ? .... I would too .... but check out the recent action at the
fed discount window. (frns created outa thin air .... It's party time ! )

http://images.moneyandmarkets.com/1067/feds-discount-lending.gif

[Tobias]

The problem with a tandem, is that it could truly lend credence to the term "back seat driver". :cool:The carbon fiber body will dampen vibration, muffling all sound from the back seat. :rolleyes:

[Tobias]

As gas mileage improves, They will increasingly dilute the frn so that
fill ups are still a painful 50 - 100 frn.I don't follow your point.
Regardless of the value (or lack thereof) of frns, won't it still be much more economical to fill up a car that gets 200 MPG than one that gets 20 MPG?
If fuel gets to the point of 50 to 100 frns for a 2-gallon tank, won't SUVs require 500 to 1000 frns?
Since efficiency should be a good thing in any denomination, I’m not sure what you are trying to state. :confused:

[palincss]

If fuel gets to the point of 50 to 100 frns for a 2-gallon tank, won't SUVs require 500 to 1000 frns?


Our club has a regular ride on Memorial Day weekend that goes out to Chesapeake Beach. The first rest stop is at a convenience store/gas station. 2 years ago, while I was at the rest stop a guy pulled up with what looked like a Cigarette boat on a trailer, and filled it from the gas pump. Gas had taken a huge run-up that week, and those boats take a whole lot of fuel as much as 200 gallons. I think back then gas had reached $3 per gal, and his bill came to around $600.

We didn't see any cigarette boats on trailers this Memorial Day weekend. But it led me to imagine - suppose gas went to five bucks. So here's this guy, racks up a bill of over a thousand dollars. Can you see him dropping a ten thousand dollar bill on the counter to pay for his gas?

[RPS]

We didn't see any cigarette boats on trailers this Memorial Day weekend.Same thing seems to be happening in other fuel-intensive industries. I just came back from a Texas to Florida road trip and was amazed at how much driving and camping habits have also changed in the last year or two.

With the exception of a few high-end diesel pushers, I don’t recall seeing many large campers on the road. And when we got to the camp ground on the beach I was surprised to find that only about 20 percent of the sites were being used when a couple of years ago the same place was sold out.

Fay and Gustav could have made a little difference, but it seems the RV industry has fallen on bad times – far worse than the auto industry. Between high fuel costs, the credit crunch, and unparalleled depreciation their future is in question.

As an enthusiast it’s sad to see because after the first oil crisis a few innovative RV companies created some small lightweight RVs which got decent mileage for a camper, but as soon as fuel prices went down these innovative RVs were history. One of my favorites was the Vixen, a micro-size low-profile Class A with a BMW straight 6 diesel that reportedly got up to 30 MPG on the highway. I hope similar designs will make a comeback.