Auto X-Prize sucks! - Page 3 - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum

Duffman · 10-21-2008, 01:52 PM

To my understanding there is no limit in Montana.

captainslug · 10-21-2008, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CobraBall

90 MPH limit in Montana??? Source is...?

Looks like it was changed to 75MPH in 1999.
Montana: No Speed Limit - Safety Paradox - Press Releases - National Motorists Association

Duffman · 10-21-2008, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bennelson

I measured the trunk of the Metro, even if the car could get 100 mpg and go at least 200 miles on a fueling, it wouldn't meet the minimum STORAGE REQUIREMENTS for the X-Prize.

While to many on this board the metro seems like the gold standard, trust me the public does not share your exubriance for the model. The sales sucess that the metro had at the time is more attributable to the fact it was the cheapest car on the market at that time ithan its stellar fuel economy.

captainslug · 10-21-2008, 02:04 PM

Minimum top speed of 100MPH is still a bit absurd though considering nobody should ever be reaching that speed on highways. 85mph is far more sensible.

200 miles of range is obtainable, but very expensive if you're trying to do it with only electric drive.

trebuchet03 · 10-21-2008, 06:03 PM

100mph - I can agree to that for the reasons stated earlier... Flat out, with a 20mph headwind, you're moving at 80mph. Which is enough power to move at 70, with a little throttle room to compensate for gusts. Also imagine someone with bike on their roof (or butt) or etc. That will destroy your aero and require even more power. Watch how fast the car is rejected when John and Jane put their car topper on and can't merge while feeling safe.

200 mile range - I feel this is reasonable... I'm biased to say on the low side of reasonable because my drive home to visit family is 200 miles

0-60 in 12 seconds... That, I feel, is unreasonable. My Jetta's 0-60 is something like 18 seconds.

55 on 7.5% grade.... Potentially a little fast as the interstate highway system in the US never exceeds 6% (maybe 6.5%). But again, uphill with headwind and/or surfboard on roof is an issue. In the city, I don't want to see anyone go 55mph up a 7.5% grade...

10cuft cargo... reasonable... Geo Metro has 22.5cuft max according to this. (10.3 for 2 door)

.7g lateral.... Acceptable (potentially even fun)

--------
These are design challenges. If they weren't challenging, it wouldn't be a worthwhile competition. And so great, you got 100mpg with a max speed of 55, 35 second 0-55 time etc. etc. etc. Big whoop. It's really something to get 100mpg with something a little bigger. Because honestly, I think most of the SUV complaints go away if they got 100mpg

Shoot for the stars, maybe you'll land on the moon.

almightybmw · 10-21-2008, 07:58 PM

55mph on a 7.5% grade is wild. That takes my car to the limits, and its not gutless. And think of the trucks doing 20mph up that same grade. sure you want to pass them that fast?

10cft is small. small sports cars have 7cft, just enough for the day bag and clubs. 15cft is more reasonable.

200mile range is pathetic. I live in big states, I NEED 500 mile range. I don't want to stop at every little podunk town just to fuel up AGAIN. 200m may work for the competition, but fails practicality on US highways.

0.7LG is pathetic as well. 0.8G minimum. Take a 90 degree right hand at 25mph, that was approx 0.7G. Just seems slow to me.

0-60 in 12 seconds is averagely slow. both my cars can do that in under 9 seconds, and I think they're slow. Had a car that would do that in 6.7 seconds. My dad's 3/4T truck does that in 7.4 seconds.

Now someone said 100mpg also. That's a good high bar to achieve. The rest just make sure it meets mainline consumerism. Basjoos car doesn't even do that, and it'd fail half the other requirements.

I doubt we'll see anything useful from the X-Prize however.

And thanks for clearing up the "no speed limit" about MT. Amazes me people still think that. Do we still think Alaskan's live in igloos too? haha just kidding

(we actually live in fur and timber tents)

trebuchet03 · 10-21-2008, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by almightybmw

0.7LG is pathetic as well. 0.8G minimum. Take a 90 degree right hand at 25mph, that was approx 0.7G. Just seems slow to me.

The reason they specify in G's.... It depends on the mass of the car.... What's .7G @25 in your car will not be the same in my car (I'm assuming our cars have different weights). The claim you just made is a classic fallacy.

Quote:

200m may work for the competition, but fails practicality on US highways.

It will be more than enough for most of America - with commutes averaging slightly over 40m round trip

A different tool for every job, of course.

MetroMPG · 10-21-2008, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duffman

The sales sucess that the metro had at the time is more attributable to the fact it was the cheapest car on the market at that time ithan its stellar fuel economy.

Wasn't the Yugo the cheapest car on the market?

Duffman · 10-21-2008, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Wasn't the Yugo the cheapest car on the market?

Maybe, but the Yugo was not universally available. I have never seen a Yugo in real life, yet there were 4 dealerships that sold swifts/sprints/fireflys in my city.