Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Motorcycles / Scooters
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-05-2014, 02:29 PM   #331 (permalink)
CFECO
 
CFECO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Vail, AZ.
Posts: 552

X-Car - '11 Homemade 2+2

Velbly1 - '17 Toyota Camery XSE
90 day: 29 mpg (US)

Velbly2 - '13 Toyota Tundra
90 day: 18.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 60 Times in 56 Posts
"Edison2 has taken heat from Ecomodders because their vehicle isn't available yet as a kit or production model. "
As one of the "Requirements" of the X-prize, there was supposed to be a Production Plan detailing the way the Team projected the construction of several thousand vehicles within a couple of years.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-05-2014, 03:54 PM   #332 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 83
Thanks: 28
Thanked 32 Times in 18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by CFECO View Post
"Edison2 has taken heat from Ecomodders because their vehicle isn't available yet as a kit or production model. "
As one of the "Requirements" of the X-prize, there was supposed to be a Production Plan detailing the way the Team projected the construction of several thousand vehicles within a couple of years.
Yes - a lot of people who learned about the production plan requirement expected Xprize vehicles to be produced in a handful of years….with what? It takes immense capital to produce vehicles at a scale that doesn't make the price tag an insult to the average consumer.

When hundreds of millions didn't magically materialize, people blamed Xprize teams for failing to raise it. And many have written off their achievements and subsequent efforts simply because they can't buy one right now.

Even if you win, you lose.

This is where many, including ecomodders, have missed the point: designs like the VLC, Xtracer, Aptera, Illuminati and more mean the day you can buy a hyper-effient vehicle is closer.

I wanted a hyper-efficient car yesterday. And it's a huge disappointment that teams haven't convinced those with capital to make this happen because the money-holders are moving too slowly, are too short-sided, too risk-averse or too-whatever to bring affordable efficiency to the masses.

That doesn't mean anyone has failed. Those Xprize teams have shown us - with very little time/money (compared to OEMs) - that real-world, safe, well handling 100MPGe vehicles are within our grasp.

These efforts need support and advocacy, not disappointment and disdain. Every time the public, including ecomodders, writes off someone's efforts, we push the purchase date of a hyper-effient production or kit vehicle into the future.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 04:01 PM   #333 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,739

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,572
Thanked 3,508 Times in 2,195 Posts
Too bad there are so many scams mixed in with the legitimate efforts.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
CFECO (01-05-2014)
Old 01-05-2014, 05:05 PM   #334 (permalink)
CFECO
 
CFECO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Vail, AZ.
Posts: 552

X-Car - '11 Homemade 2+2

Velbly1 - '17 Toyota Camery XSE
90 day: 29 mpg (US)

Velbly2 - '13 Toyota Tundra
90 day: 18.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 60 Times in 56 Posts
Too bad the "winning" cars were not mainstream enough to be widely acceptable, and designed for mass production.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 05:42 PM   #335 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 83
Thanks: 28
Thanked 32 Times in 18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by CFECO View Post
Too bad the "winning" cars were not mainstream enough to be widely acceptable, and designed for mass production.
+1 If people want affordable efficiency, they need to accept vehicles with different architecture and design.

Without an energy breakthrough we have two choices for hyper-efficient vehicles:
- looks different, is affordable
- looks the same, is expensive

And since there's always an exception, the VW XL1: looks different, is expensive.

Last edited by XprizeRoadTrip; 01-05-2014 at 07:37 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to XprizeRoadTrip For This Useful Post:
renault_megane_dci (01-06-2014)
Old 01-05-2014, 06:08 PM   #336 (permalink)
.
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: The Berkshires, Massachussetts
Posts: 885

Ruby Sparks - '01 Honda Insight
Team Honda
90 day: 64.27 mpg (US)
Thanks: 111
Thanked 362 Times in 202 Posts
Is this still based on a Honda cub? The tires and forks look to beefy to have come from a cub.
__________________
I try to be helpful. I'm not an expert.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 06:23 PM   #337 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,739

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,572
Thanked 3,508 Times in 2,195 Posts
Start from the beginning.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2014, 07:12 PM   #338 (permalink)
.
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: The Berkshires, Massachussetts
Posts: 885

Ruby Sparks - '01 Honda Insight
Team Honda
90 day: 64.27 mpg (US)
Thanks: 111
Thanked 362 Times in 202 Posts
Thanks, this seems to be my answer.
http://ecomodder.com/forum/384673-post305.html

Unrelated:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside View Post
Thanks for the reply Visionary, I didn't want to highjack your thread, a brief description follows :-
1981 Honda 90zz, basically standard frame, forks and wheels. The original 90cc motor was replaced with a Honda 125 4 speed motor after the original motor seized (3 times). This was probably due to over revving because of the decreased wind resistance and standard gearing.
The new motor came out of an ATC 3 wheeler farm bike and fitted straight in. It has a Hi/Low ratio gearbox which at the moment is geared for 65 mph at 8500 rpm. which it will achieve under favorable conditions. Those extra 35cc's and the fourth gear make a world of difference.
It will do in excess of 120 mpg with the throttle pinned while drafting HGV's even though the carburation is not fully sorted. I have located a 'dustbin' fairing, which I hope to fit soon.
I'm unable to post a photo of the wee beastie yet (less than 5 posts) so I've put 3 photos into my album, I assume these will be available to anyone who is interested.
You should really start your own build thread, that is a fascinating vehicle you have there. I seem to have arrived at the same line of thinking about the Honda Cub a little late, but look at all of these wonderful examples i've stumbled upon!

I'm curious about the Cubs handling at 65mph. For a motorbike that normally wouldn't reach that speed. Is the frame strong and stiff? And how much weight could it reasonably hold? Tire's good? I've read tubed tires have greater rolling resistance, but those tires are really skinny compared to most motorcycle tires.
__________________
I try to be helpful. I'm not an expert.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2014, 11:48 AM   #339 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: West Wales,UK
Posts: 80
Thanks: 15
Thanked 57 Times in 24 Posts
Yes I agree, I should start my own thread, and will do so very soon. In the meantime I'll attempt to answer your questions.
The frame is plenty strong enough, it's a 1981 zz90 frame which is heavier and stronger than the later models and handles just fine. 1000 mile round trip last year, fully loaded with camping gear. Although having said that, I'm sure the later frames would be adequate, as proved by some of the C90 club members who have installed 140cc motors with no complaints.

Tyres are Conti Go rated to 93 mph, and a good compromise between grip and wear. Tubeless tyres would require alloy wheels, a lot of expense for very little advantage.

The biggest problems are the brakes (or lack of), just not meaty enough, and the front suspension which rises as the front brake is applied. Both of these issues will eventually be sorted by fitting telescopic forks and a disk brake.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2014, 12:22 PM   #340 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 9
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
So, what is the long range plan for weight reduction on this? Could you eventually (maybe mark II redesign) go with less heavy duty front suspension? More aluminum? Also, is there a plan for climate control? Once fully enclosed, this may be an issue.

Bob

__________________
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com