Affordable EVs: The Future Is Now

Stability with 3 wheelers is not a problem. There are several blistering 3 wheelers out there with admirable performance characteristics on the skid pad. All you armchair physicists need to spout less and read more.

Crash Test? I like riding motorcycles compared to which this is a very safe vehicle. At 300 mpg’s, heck, even at 120 it’s beautiful. I have read everything out there on this vehicle and I want one yesterday. Creature comforts, performance,safety, and economy that literally has me paying less to own one each month than my current gas costs alone. Imagine what that will mean next year when gas is $5/gal?
Fred

Hey all, I’m a dude on the Internet. I’m much smarterer then all of you. Oh I like to argue. And eat Cheetos.

Anyway, if you use Google like someone who is smarterer might, you’ll find out the car has not been physically crash tested in the real world yet. Its going through simulation testing to tweak, then they’ll be doing real world crash testing.

You may now un-bunch your panties.

I want to see one of these things with yellow and black marks on the sides and a test dummy, hitting a block in an offset frontal crash MINIMUM.

I STILL have yet to hear someone address my question of whether this vehicle was subjected to independent crash safety testing.
-
Oh, and paint me as some dinosaur or closed-minded pseudo-intellect, that’s fine but what I’ve been reading is a bunch of dreck.
-
Regarding “rolling resistance” or whatever the term was, When a 3-wheeler has to compromise for not having a 4th wheel by widening the third, GUESS WHAT… that just defeated the purpose of having only 3 wheels because of having less resistance.
-
NOT having a wide tire on the back NO MATTER WHAT the center of gravity, OR other spiffy features are included in the design… DOES mean the back will HAPPILY SLIDE all over the place when compared to a 4-wheeler. LEMME CLUE YOU IN: the AVERAGE driver DOSEN’T like having the rear of their vehicle sliding. – When the ground is dry, I guess one of these things would be okay but when it rains? That’s a whole different story and it is being IGNORED because the hype in here is about as dense as Depleted Uranium.

“While a design like this dosen’t even seem compatible with having 2 wheels in the rear… c’mon. Will one of these eggheads just do all of us 4-roller addicts an apparently HUGE favor and just add one more damn wheel???????????”

Nope. If you add that 4th wheel you buy in to all the legislation written by congressmen who were convinced that lawyers should design cars. The Aptera is classified as a motorcycle, not a car. That means that a startup with some venture capital can hope to get into the game. An ordinary new model automobile costs several billion dollars to develop thanks to all the legislation. That effectively freezes competition out except for the big three and their Japanese clones.

I think that Aptera should seriously look into silicon nanowire technology for baqtteries; in the tests that they have done on batteries with silicon nanowires, the batteries had a tenfold increase in life. Imagine a 1200 mile life for the battery instead of 120.

You did not address whether or not this vehicle has been independently crash tested.
-
The T REX did look like a blast to drive, but note that the back tire was so wide, that it equaled TWO tires. Having that much tread width on a 3-wheeler that is designed for efficiency defeats the purpose, thus the rear tire would be thinner, thus the rear would have less traction than the T REX did in the rear.
-
…tread width does have something to do with traction, right?
-
The inverted wing idea in the rear, well that’s a nice idea. Pretty much like a spoiler, except most spoilers on cars these days are for looks only because the extra downforce generally isn’t needed for typical driving.
-
Believe it or not, I am impressed with the Aptera, but I’m very skeptical that it will catch on bigtime. At best it will capture a niche market that over a longer period of time may grow.
-
That is, unless gas goes to $8.00 per gallon. If that happens people will be scrambling to buy anything that dosen’t run on gas within affordability.
-
As far as whether the Aptera specifically can hold its own against a 4-wheeler in comparitive performance testing… I’ll bet money it can’t. Not to say it’s not a decent vehicle, but there is hype and there is real life. In real life, big differences always have trade-offs when it comes to vehicles.

Also, for those who haven’t noticed, the Aptera’s shape is an inverted wing. The faster it goes, the more traction it puts on the rear wheel.

The handling characteristics of a 3-wheeler, stance and weight distribution or not… simply CANNOT equal that of a 4-wheeled vehicle, period. It simply boils down to physics.
-
If the cost of a 4-wheel version of an electric car is a mere $5000-$7000 more, making it say $32,000 as opposed to a 3-wheeler being $25,000… I bet the $32,000 4-wheeler would sell better than the $25,000 3-wheeler.
-
On another note, some ideas from long ago aren’t so easily dismissed. Yes, vehicles have had 2 axles and 4 wheels even long before thy were self-powered. This came naturally. It was a practical evolution, and straying from 4 wheels has taken reasoning and excuses, like efficiency, specific application or purpose (i.e. landing gear on a Caessna), etc. – - – simply put, if someone has to make an effort to explain and defend a 3-wheel concept against the common 4-wheel configuration, it cannot and should not simply be written off as innovation vs. complacency or innovation vs. the status quo because that is a biased assertion, and it misrepresents the true nature of this debate. Yes, people have a comfort margin with 4 wheels, but there’s more to it than that.
-
I really hope I’m not losing you here. My words aren’t meant to impress. I’m making a serious case and playing devil’s advocate. If you can’t take the heat… you know.
-
I’ll bet you one thing. I bet that vehicle can fishtail easier than a 4-wheel vehicle of comparable weight and weight distribution. It simply will not have the rear-end traction that a 4-wheel vehicle has. Yes, the braking is stabilized by having 2 front wheels, but the rear simply cannot take cornering like a car (as we know them) can. This is a performance issue where the design is very likely lacking.
-
Another issue not covered in anything I’ve read so far is how this would handle a collision offset from the rear. The fuselage is also narrower than a typical automobile’s. Having a strong cage is great, but restriction in the cabing increases the chances of head and bodily injury. Does it have side-impact airbags? Has it been tested for a T-bone hit?
-
Sorry, I’m picking at this but these are things people think of when they entertain breaking with the norm. Registering one of these as a motorcycle would be great. Very inexpensive to insure, but wouldn’t that also mean that this vehicle skirts the collision testing requirements associated with 4 wheels… leaving assurances only from the manufacturer?
-
I have an I.Q. of 136, supposedly. “Whatever” was a digression, thinking the conversation would die out. I guess it didn’t

This is the car of the future. I help manage a forum dedicated to the New Aptera automaker at http://www.apteraforum.com

Also, it’s important to remember, “two wheels up front, wide stance” for stability. Picture what happens when you slam on the brakes in a standard, one-wheel-in-front trike: you’ve just created an inverted pendulum, the classic unstable shape. Picture the three wheels as forming a triangle, and picture balancing the triangle on its front wheel; that’s the net effect. Now switch to the two wheels up front, one in back variant, like the Aptera. You have a stable shape when braking.

Ted: You can’t have everything. If the Aptera was a four wheeler, not only would it be less environmentally friendly, but the extra cost (including the extra batteries needed) would probably push it up to ~$35k instead of $27k for the Typ-1e. As for the sales numbers, they already have over 1,200 reservations and most of those people are going to have to wait at least a year. And they’re currently only allowing reservations from California residents. Compare that to the Tesla, which has gotten a huge amount of press for years and allows reservations from anywhere, and has, what, 800 reservations? Tesla’s cars are a lot pricier, but in a way, that’s the problem. As for Aptera, they think they’ll be selling 10k of them per year three years from now, and I don’t doubt it, given how fast they’re selling even in the current situation.

In time, the cost constraints won’t be as big of a deal. Right now, the limited production of batteries is the real factor driving the price of electrics up.

Rei and Gary (”Meow”…sorry, it’s a Spongebob thing) are more right, I think. If we design from a clean-slate mindset, shouldn’t we be asking, “Why do we need 4 wheels?” 4 is overkill…not necessary for the 2.5 person load. 2 wheels would be even better but for the obvious safety advantages of the stable triangle.

Ted,

Sorry, I had to laugh but when my daughter was 13 “Whatever” was her favorite reply when she didn’t have an intellegent one.

As long as people get what they want there will never be change. It’s not at all unlike getting comfortable with the thermometer in your home. If you simply don’t learn to make changes to what you are comfortable with cures will never be found and then nobody benefits. That is unless you propose putting a sail on a covered wagon like the old prairie schooners did. Based on your theory of a required 4 wheels that should keep everyone happy.

Don’t get me wrong, I am far from being a tree hugger but as long as the majority of us don’t open our minds to change many will suffer and things will get a lot worse before they get better.

But I will agree with you that it is that type of thinking that will help prevent change in a much needed time. Like you I enjoy 4 wheels but I bet with some hands on I could have just as much fun in some new developed rides as well and if it just happens to get 300 MPG while doing it hey! There is no reason why we can’t have our cake and eat it too by driving something economical whenever possible and then still enjoy something with 4 wheels.

Whatever, Gary. I’m just saying what most people WANT. You’re trying to compare this with a time when self-propelled vehicles were first introduced. It’s NOT a valid comparison. This time, people know what they want. The self-propelled personal vehicle has been on the road longer than the oldest person has been alive.
-
We don’t have to make concessions such as subtracting a wheel. While there is merit to less drag, yada yada… just watch the sales number not even come near that of a 4 wheel vehicle… NEVER. It’s just the way people are… they want 4 WHEELS , period.

Ted,

Regarding your thoughts of “freaky”, “Why”, “turning heads” and “having two wheels” and so on… Try and imagine what people who were at the time driving a horse and buggy thought the first time they say a “Horseless Carriage” coming down the street. I have no doubt they asked the same questions as you are now.

Over the years I have seen many such examples of people asking why. I saw the Chaparrals Can Am “vacuum car” and the Tyrells F-1 with four front wheels both of which were so successful that they outlawed both of them almost immediately. Many people say the same thing when they see Hummers and a big share ask the same question when they see muscle cars.

The bottom line is that if nobody ever took a chance on being different technology would never change and there would be no advancement. And if those who dare to dream of change never made their dreams become a reality we would either still be riding a horse and buggy. Speaking of ugly, there have been many but remember how the first Corvettes looked? But look at them today. Time will change the look of trikes but the concept is what is worth selling.

what the hell is it, and can i step on it? damn little bug

There are several reasons for one wheel.

1) No driveshaft required.
2) Only one wheel and tire required
3) Lower wind resistance
4) Legally classified as a motorcycle, which has many advantages for new companies.

The reason it’s affordable with battery prices as expensive as they are is because it’s so light and low drag. And #4 moves up their schedule and lowers costs.

As for those who want a four-wheeler, their Typ-2 will be a five-seat, four wheeler.

I just checked out the garageblog. Read my reply below before following that link…

Hmmm. Mixed feelings. Elated that it’s approaching affordability, and that it has a useful range and supposedly stable handling characteristics… and that it has safety in mind with the structural design.
-
But it’s, I don’t know… freaky looking at best. No doubt it will turn heads on the street… but the question is why they would be turning.
-
While a design like this dosen’t even seem compatible with having 2 wheels in the rear… c’mon. Will one of these eggheads just do all of us 4-roller addicts an apparently HUGE favor and just add one more damn wheel???????????

They are closer than you realise.

http://thegarageblog.com/garage/it-seems-tomorrow-was-here-yesterday/