The future of vehicle designs? Your thoughts & ideas.

[Grant-53]

Design and use of any product hinges on consumer 'value management' decisions. Convenience, average annual cost of ownership, and self image have long been key issues in selecting a vehicle. Fuel costs and distance traveled have lead to domestic cars becoming smaller again and foreign makes marketed here becoming larger. National defense and transportation policies come into the market place. Airports and interstate highways were favored over railways after WWII. Cars also meant jobs and promised a higher standard of living. Buses and trolley services were reduced. The overall transit mix is shifting. Urban and rural transportation needs are diverging. Telecommunications and the need for exercise will influence the mix. The mode of transportation selected will depend on cost vs travel time. We will continue to analyse our choices and lobby for changes we deem appropriate for our conditions. For me that means better bus schedules, legal use of bicycle motors up to 30 mph, and more accomodation for bicycles on buses or trains. My targets are having a streamlined upright bike for every member of my family and a small station wagon or van capable of 65 mpg highway within 3-5 years.
We can expect more restrictions to private car ownership in the major cities and more diesel electric vehicles everywhere else. More smaller cities are opting for natural gas powered bus fleets that have smaller streamlined vehicles and more flexible schedules. Buses and trains will likely have racks for bicycles on board. Air travel and car rental have successfully partnered. We will see more Third World solutions being adapted here. The 125cc motorcycle, three wheel taxi, minivan taxi, buses, and passenger trains are being tried.
Whatever 'the car of the future' looks like it will reflect our geography, our self image, and our economic priorities. Compare a 1961 Chevrolet Impala to a 2011 model. The basic configuration of wheelbase and engine size may be similar but the efficiency, comfort, and safety are amazingly different.

[Big Dave]

What is an SUV but a station wagon on a pickup truck chassis?

If you can afford only one vehicle, it has to accomplish as many missions as possible. So you see people commuting in SUVs.

What is needed is a low-cost (relatively) high speed (50-70 MPH) commuter car for the guy who makes a long commute on the super slab every day. Diesel engine, manual transmission, tandem (1+1) seating (if not a single seater. Good aero. But this is a single purpose vehicle and you cannot expect people to pay $25,000 for it. Maybe $10,000. it has to be overpowered enough to maneuver easily in normal traffic. Something that accelerates like a Mercedes 240D ain't gonna cut it. It needs a heater/defroster and an air conditioner. You don't want to have an excuse for not using it. Carbon fiber is too expensive.

There are a lot of people these days that commute 45-50 miles from one 'burb to another. Not so much heavily urban but more two-lane state roads. If this guy is driving a 15 MPG SUV that is a lot of fuel a year.

A pure city car isn't worth the effort. If you only drive a couple miles in city traffic, you couldn't justify much extra cost of ownership if you fuel cost dropped by 90% because it wasn't that much in the first place.

But the guy burning 6 gal/day has some scope for improvement. by cutting his cost by 66% (to 2 gal/day with an honest 45 MPG vehicle) you have saved him 4 gal/day x 200 days/yr x $4/gal = $3,200/yr. If the commuter special only cost $10 grand he pays for it in three years and everything is gravy after that. but if it costs him $30 grand and doesn't do anything else it takes him almost ten years to pay it off - driving it about $170,000 miles.

Can you build a $10,000 economy car and make a profit doing it?

[Frank Lee]

If you can afford only one vehicle, it has to accomplish as many missions as possible. So you see people commuting in SUVs.

That's a pretty big if, since observation and statistics both bear out that the overwhelming majority of households are multi-vehicle, even more than 2 vehicles/household.

it has to be overpowered enough to maneuver easily in normal traffic.

That's funny, I'd wager just as many VW old Beetle, diesel Rabbit, and Metro owners successfully operated their vehicles in traffic and survived as anyone else.

Maybe people just need to "adjust the nut behind the house buying decision" and decide it's not feasible anymore to have such long commutes.

[RunningStrong]

Originally Posted by Big Dave

. it has to be overpowered enough to maneuver easily in normal traffic. Something that accelerates like a Mercedes 240D ain't gonna cut it. It needs a heater/defroster and an air conditioner.

I don't get this argument. Europe has far smaller cars and generally higher speed limits. All these cars have heaters, most modern ones have air conditioning too.

And yet I've never heard of a car deemed dangerously slow. Slow, paintfully slow, but never dangerously slow.

[user removed]

With the new high strength steels I don't think steel will be replaced very soon, at least as parts of the unibody structure that is welded together.

I like hydraulic in wheel drives, but would like to see carbon fiber accumulators, with tubular structural components for fluid transfer.

I also like the idea of a removeable instrument cluster that can also act as a PC, basically a modular design that would contain all of the vehicle functions which could be removed to disable the vehicle while also functioning as a hand held phone, wireless internet, PC device that was upgradable without having to buy a new vehicle.

Engines and motors, batteries and fuel tanks, would be plug and play separate components which could be used seaprately or combined to provide local all electric and long distance combined power systems.

regards
Mech

[TheEnemy]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

That's a pretty big if, since observation and statistics both bear out that the overwhelming majority of households are multi-vehicle, even more than 2 vehicles/household.

Especially when the majority never come close to using the full capablities of the SUV they purchased.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Maybe people just need to "adjust the nut behind the house buying decision" and decide it's not feasible anymore to have such long commutes.

Not always feasable, my wife and I were able to select a home close to where both of us work, but as gas prices continue to rise people will re-evaluate their job/housing arrangements.

[Big Dave]

In today's job market, housing market, and culture, it is rarely practical to move from one place to another merely to cut your commute.

If you cut your fuel cost by 80%, does that offset the skinning you'll take to sell your old house and buy another one?

Do you know a good divorce lawyer? That sort of housing decision could find you living single.

What happens when you have to change jobs again? Maybe you pay the fuel costs or get skinned again on the new house.

I drive the limit, but an often glad I have my 7,000 lb truck with a Smith & Wesson in the door. For all its rational wisdom, hypermiling is widely disdained.

[3-Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Tesla

Interesting ideas,
I'm not really one for the automated driver or major technological controls, definately go for the lighter stronger materials though.
My thoughts were more along the lines of reducing the dependance on ground contact by using active aero controls in conjunction with the ground controls.
Reduced rolling resistance was mentioned, but this usually goes hand in hand with friction/traction/braking, so if we go with skinier tyres, then braking suffers, could a flip up spoiler/wing/bucket be incorporated as an additional braking device. We already rely on power assisted brakes, and most people would not realise how hard you used to have to push the brakes in the older vehicles, so what' the difference having power assisted aero braking as well?
This type of aero effect could also be used to improve steering function as well as other vehicle functions.

Instead of giving the kinetic energy away for free when braking, why not put it back into a battery? Anytime one brakes, the energy loss should be stored somehow.

Jim.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Big Dave

In today's job market, housing market, and culture, it is rarely practical to move from one place to another merely to cut your commute.

For young renter's that is not true, but for the rest of us, you are correct.

A living choice I made 20 years ago which allowed me to walk to work for 18 years (school for the first 2 years and 3-different offices). For the past two years I've worked out of my home saving even more gas.

And the last two years my wife has seen the light (sort of) and can walk to work, but rarely does.

It takes some long term planning but it can be done. My choice was based on driving 18,500 miles for six years and having only a worn out car to show for my labors. I got smart, you all can too if you have not already done so.

[Grant-53]

The house vs job location decision calculation is a straight foward annual average cost matter. More subjective are the preferences involving lifestyle.

A commuter vehicle such as a fully faired 250cc motorcycle or diesel sportscar can be had for around $10,000 and may get 130 mpg hwy. See the Vetter Challenge vehicles from Mid-Ohio last year. You may have to use a cool suit instead of AC.

The big issue is perceived vs actual safety. The notion that mass alone is the deciding factor in vehicle safety belongs in the Unicorn Corral. Material strength and design geometry are key in determining the amount of impact energy a car can convert into deforming itself instead of the passengers. I have taken the slide-for-life in a Corvair, a Cadillac hearse, and a Corolla all without injury. Was the 6000 lb. Caddy safer? Not really, the smaller cars stopped quicker before impact. The Caddy had fewer dents in the sheet metal because it collapsed a culvert hitting head on. The little cars allowed more control so I could pick my spot and angle of impact. Back in the day, we engineers refered to this as the "lead sled" effect. A good uni-body or monocoque tub will take a horrific beating and still protect the driver. A truck frame may be very rigid but the body is connected by only a handful of bolts. Once these shear, the lighter cab and driver keep moving toward the next impact. Nowdays SUVs or crossovers often share the same platform as a sedan. The sedans brake quicker than a pickup truck by about 10 ft from 60 mph and have lower air drag. If you need to haul materials or more than 8 passengers then a diesel truck or van makes sense.

If you are the tail gunner on the ice cream truck or the trunk monkey in a security detail, I can recommend a mag fed 12 ga.