Lightyear One - from solar racer to commercial product

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

When a company designs, presents and actually builds the most economical car ever you'd think the incrowd of Ecomodder would show at least some enthousiasm.

Instead the reception is like what you'd get if you hand out iPhones in a pensioners's home. Probably worse, even.

OK boomers, I wasted my time. Beam me up Scotty, no life here.

That's a load.

Putting solar panels on a 150,000 dollar car doesn't make it the most economical car ever. Far from it.
A $55,000 version isn't a whole lot better.

If my leaf lasts 250,000 miles its only going to use about $6,300 worth of electricity.

So a $35,000 car using under $7,000 worth of power over a 20 year life is way more economical.

Furthermore more I think it would be a cool car if they gave up on the hub motors. Those stupid hub motors are going to be the source of all the problems from getting the car made to keeping it on the road.

[Vman455]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

When a company designs, presents and actually builds the most economical car ever you'd think the incrowd of Ecomodder would show at least some enthousiasm.

Instead the reception is like what you'd get if you hand out iPhones in a pensioners's home. Probably worse, even.

OK boomers, I wasted my time. Beam me up Scotty, no life here.

It costs $165,000, so labeling it "economical" is a bit of a stretch. As a design and engineering exercise, I'm all for it. But since it costs as much as an Aston Martin, I'll never be able to afford one, whether or not I could justify it.

I feel about the Lightyear One the way I do about the VW XL1: I find myself much more interested in Honda Civics, Chevrolet Silverados, and Ford Explorers--cars that sell in droves and everyone drives. Efficiency improvements in those models have a much more profound effect than a handful of ultra-efficient, ultra-expensive solar cars ever will.

[RedDevil]

Yeah. The initial price is high, but they aim for €50,000 in 2023 assuming a yearly production of 100,000.

The whole point of the car is the drive for efficiency without compromises.
No cheap solar cells but expensive ones to get that 50% extra power.
No back window to enhance the space available for solar cells. Cameras should do.
No drive train and linkages but hub motors; if the latter cause problems they need to be sought out and fixed, not avoided by taking a less efficient approach.

It ends up as a 5 seater EV with a range of 465 miles at night, and more by day.
It has a lot of trunk space and probably also quite some frunk space.
As a concept it is all right. If they can iron out all potential problems and really make it lo large scale production then it could go big.

[All Darc]

Solar roof could be usefull for some price reduction (if the roof it's not too expensive), and if the car it's not a standart design but a ultra lightweigh design.

For example, if somebody built a car like Aptera, but lighter (Aptera it's not so lightweight as many people imagine) and add solar roof, the roof would be more significative to the car (Apetra design/Moreli design) than in ordinary cars, since the weight would be 1/3 or less, and the aerodynamic would be incredible.
A lightweight and great aerodynamic car needs a fraction of the electric energy of a standart electric car, making the 1,2Kw of the solar roof much more relevant to the vehicle's energetic needs. So the battery pack required would be much smaller, much cheaper.

I think a Moreli design with solar roof would be great car. For heavier cars maybe in future, when solar cell efficience reach 45%.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

The whole point of the car is the drive for efficiency without compromises.
No cheap solar cells but expensive ones to get that 50% extra power.
No back window to enhance the space available for solar cells. Cameras should do.
No drive train and linkages but hub motors; if the latter cause problems they need to be sought out and fixed, not avoided by taking a less efficient approach.

Absolutely every single thing in life is about compromises. Nothing can be done without sacrificing something else. With time, you sacrifice an infinite number of things once you choose how to spend it. With solar cells, you sacrifice having a lower center of gravity by placing more weight at the worst place on a vehicle (the roof), you sacrifice the ability to sell the vehicle in the US because our laws require a rearview mirror, you sacrifice affordability because high efficiency solar cells are expensive. You sacrifice durability and repairability because solar cells are fragile and would be extremely difficult to repair if damage occurred. There is an opportunity cost placing the cells on the vehicle instead of a fixed location where it would generate several times more electricity...

I'll put aside the compromises for using hub motors for now.

There's zero chance of a 100k annual production. I expect less than 100 total to ever sell.

As Vman alludes to, if the real point is to pollute less, then the best bang for the buck is improvements in the vehicles that are most widely sold. It doesn't matter if a car gets a bazillion MPG if they only sell 5 of them. The earth doesn't care.

To reiterate, I'm interested in the engineering and technology, but have no expectation of the vehicle meaning anything in terms of the environment, or causing a disruption in transportation.

[NeilBlanchard]

This car is the quintessential high efficiency car, that is better in almost every way - than any car ever before.

And they are selling it for a high price - so that they can finance their company, and get up an running; in the Tesla model.

This design is the confirmation of everything that we on this site, have been striving for - super high efficiency drivetrain, super low aero drag, lowest reasonable weight possible.

What's not to love?

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

This car is the quintessential high efficiency car, that is better in almost every way - than any car ever before.

This design is the confirmation of everything that we on this site, have been striving for - super high efficiency drivetrain, super low aero drag, lowest reasonable weight possible.

What's not to love?

I'm curious to know what it's better at. I don't know of a single thing yet. 3.7 kW L2 charging is what the 2011 Nissan Leaf has. 0-60 in 10 seconds is Toyota Camry territory.

The VW XL-1 has a 0.19 CD


It's better at costing more than most cars, at $135,000.

They claim a 135Wh/mile consumption, but there's zero chance they achieve that in real world conditions.

I see lots that I like in the car, such as a streamlined shape and what appears to be a very usable interior space.

What's not to love is that ridiculous solar panel attached to the car. It's like the gold chain of green-boasting. Practically worthless, but sure to draw a lot of attention.

[oil pan 4]

I can confirm that. My leaf does 0 to 60 in about 10 seconds and charges at about 3.8kw.
Is the light year 1 really stuck with slow pre2013 L2 charging? Ha!
It's a 120,000 dollar base model Gen 1 leaf with solar panels and aero mods.
I had to look up the euro exchange rate, Man it's getting clobbered.

If I was going to spend 40 or 50k on a car I would just get a used S Model.

[Vman455]

OK, according to this InsideEVs article posted two days ago, production of the Lightyear One will be limited to 946 examples and Lightyear wants to develop a new, $55,000 model that they hope to sell 100,000/year starting in 2023.

My opinion: All that is code for "not going to happen."

Edit: Here it is on their website.

[oil pan 4]

If they stick with hub motors it's definitely not going to happen.