Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard
The XL1 is the lowest CdA of any "production car" - the frontal area is just 1.5 square meters (16.146 sq ft), and the Cd is 0.189, so the CdA is 0.2835 sq m (3.05 sq ft). The tandem seating is a big compromise, and the the staggered side by side allows the 5.5kWh battery pack to be located in front of the passenger; which reduces the frontal area vs a location under the seats.
The side by side seats are quite close together, and the passenger's seat is angled slightly to get it closer to the diver's seat; and the offset allows the shoulder room to be much better than otherwise.
|
Is tandem seating that much of a compromise though? Most cars are used most of the time with a single occupant. If it did nothing else a tandem (or single) seat car might encourage people to realise that.
There are a several other advantages to a single centrally located driving position, including tandem seating:
Visibility. Although arguably less around a car that is being followed. It will depend upon whether the space between the driver and road centreline is made wider or the passenger side of the car reduced (conceptually).
Yes, crush space, both in a side impact (possibly better than in a "conventional" car, even in a narrower vehicle) and frontal impact where the front wheels are less likely to be pushed back into the driver's feet.
The possibility of a head clash between occupants in a side impact, is eliminated
A narrower vehicle is more fun to drive. It can have a wider range of positions within a lane and squeeze through gaps wider cars cannot.
A smaller car is (hopefully) a lighter car.
A narrower car is a smaller target to hit. Particularly in an offset frontal impact, a glancing hit is more likely.
Packaging is better. The occupants can "overlap" in terms of the space they take up within the cabin.
Weight distribution is less affected by occupant weight, something particularly important in a very light car.