The Zing! (Custom-built prototype hybrid tadpole trike)

[drmiller100]

People believe they already know how to drive. No ones to be improved, ESPECIALLY men. You'd do better selling ice cubes to Eskimos then teaching guys how to drive.

I'm with old mech, and Ken. Build a car so people can't hardly help but get good mileage. Prius is successful for a reason.

I think there are other opportunities as well.

[dcb]

Originally Posted by mcrews

dcb,
Sorry,
but you are uot of touch

Lol, says the guy in the pink q45 ZING!

[Ken Fry]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

So, MPGe is only really useful to compare different energy sources with a common denominator. The Aptera 300MPGe number would be better if we also knew the conditions of the test.

The "test" was an approximation of 130 mpg at "highway" speed. (50, 55, 60? -- not specified.) This was not a test in the EPA highway cycle -- just some arbitrary constant speed. Here is the text from the part of the Aptera site that explained the calculation: "Sure, it's asymptotic, after 350-400 miles it eventually plummets to around 130 MPG at highway speeds where it will stay all day until you plug it back in and charge it up."

The actual test condition makes little-to-no difference, because using the Aptera rationale of the time, you can make up any figure you want: the idea is to pick one that's very high but plausible. This requires a very long daily drive (to bring the number down to plausible) so the site provided some explanation for how they thought 43,000 miles a year would be a reasonable Aptera usage, (whereas the EPA seems to think 15,000 is typical).

The "300" quoted by Aptera in late 2007 was 300 mpg, not 300 MPGe. There is a huge difference (with the first being just like the 230 mpg Volt first claimed -- just marketing math.) 300 MPGe, on the other hand, represents a very efficient electric car in a standardized EPA test. I think the only reproducible standard test of the Aptera, (at the X Prize) indicated 140 MPGe: better than a Leaf; more like a GM EV1. This test was of a somewhat heavier version than the "300 mpg" one but even it (in plug-in hybrid version) could be advertised as 300 mpg -- because the rationale makes that number have no real meaning.

As if to make the number seem more "real" they sometimes said "up to 300 mpg" as if there was some limit or rational stopping point there. They should have, more accurately, been saying up to infinite MPG. But then maybe people would "get" that mpg measured across charge depleting and charge sustaining modes, is meaningless as a measure of the vehicle.

There are no accurate test conditions required for this kind of marketing calculation, just as there are no test conditions required for me to quote 1000 mpg, 2000mpg 3000mpg, etc. (Which I do for demonstration only.) Truthful... if you are willing to ignore the electric energy consumed.

Edison2 competed in the X-Prize with E85, and they got 110Mpge on the EPA Combined test. They now have built an electric version called the VLCe, and it got 245MPGe on the same EPA Combined test.

I've been intending to look into the actual equivalency figures used by the XPrize for E85. Given the 110 MPGe on ethanol, 245 MPGe seems low. Maybe the AC motor will do better.

Back on topic: Ken do you know an average Wh/mile kind of number for your 39 mile drive? And getting 100MPG in charging mode is an excellent achievement!

The actual drive was 29 miles on electricity, and 1 on gas, which produces an equally meaningless 3000 mpg. (I was extrapolating to the production range. The actual figures don't matter, when using the mpg rationale Aptera did. You can come up with any figure for any car: the Popular Mechanics cover could have been of a 1200 mpg Volt.)

I've been using almost 100 Wh per mile, measured out of the battery. Rolling resistance will be better on the production version, despite weight being higher, because the sticky tires on the POC have high Crr. Aero will be cleaner on the production version. But grades will require more energy in the production version. So I am not expecting any better. I don't think I'll be far below 300 MPGe, but I doubt I will go over that.

Thanks re the 100 mpg while charging. It, too, should be close in the production version, but I am not expecting any higher than that.

Regards, Ken

[pete c]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

Pop turns 91 this May 8th. He hypermiled his B17 in WW2 to compensate for the bullet and flack holes in his self sealing tanks. Here is a picture of his left wing after another B17 dropped it through his wing when it was hit by flack on the bomb run. White phosphorus thermite cluster bomb. When he got back to his base they removed the wing and replaced with another wing that was painted. After that the plane would not fly straight due to the painted wing, and they had no paint remover to get the paint off.

Oh yeah I almost forgot, forgetful, check. middle of the night trip to the bathroom, check, LOL I have an aunt that smoked from age 12 to age 92, she just turned 100 this last week. May we be cursed with their presence for a long time, eh .

regards
Mech

awesome story. tell your dad, thanks. unfortunately we are losing these national treasures at a high rate.

i've been honored to know a few of those guys.

my step dad was a WW2 paratrooper. my old neighbor was a WW2 merchant mariner. i remember him telling me how much fun it was being on a defenseless freighter in the south pacific, loaded to the brim in 55 gallon drums of av gas. yikes! i had a real estate agent that made it through his 25 runs over germany driving a B-17.

as for your aunt, i would have to question her wisdom about quitting smoking, if it had gotten her to 92!

i'm a relative young pup of 48, but, i think i have a few things on that list already.

[JackMcCornack]

Originally Posted by Mr. Previa

Gotta say that is the coolest trike I have ever seen!

Ditto moi, Ken. The POC prototype styling looks fabulous. I love the SpaceshipOne portholes (I'm a fellow Rutan fan man) and the front end treatment sets an aggressive mood. The body style is (relatively) easy to build, reasonably efficient, and to quote The Incredibles' neighbor kid, it is totally wicked. Styling-wise, it's sort of a cross between a battlebot and a Formula Junior car prepped for Death Race 2000.

I wish you every success and am looking forward to your two-seater with great interest. If I understand correctly, the two place model is the model you are selling and the single seater is strictly for testing and promotion. You're not offering the single seater to the public and I'm sure you drive it with considerable care. It isn't likely as safe as the current crop of nanny-state production cars (I sure know MAX isn't) but to quote Dick Rutan (the other brother), "Freedom is more important than safety," and I'm with him on that.

While researching another subject, I clicked the Buy one now! menu on your two seater Home home page, and read...

"These will have the same hard-edge styling of the proof of concept prototype (instead of the rounded styling of the home page rendering.) (In fact, later production vehicles are likely to have the same styling, partly because we have received positive feedback, and partly because the process is more easily scaled for high or low production.)"

If you haven't finished your body tooling, I'd like you to consider...hang on a minute while I bring in the U.S. Navy Band Sea Chanters.

[shuffle shuffle shuffle stop, 18 singers clear their throats and stand at attention]

Hit it, sailors!

"Ankles away, my boys, ankles awaaaay..."

That's enough, gentlemen and ladies, thanks for coming by.

Now then, Dick R said that about homebuilt airplane pilots, and I think it applies to us car folks too--we have a moral right to trade our own safety for our own satisfaction. However, he didn't mean we can trade the safety of bystanders for our own satisfaction. The NTHSB standards for pedestrian protection are what keeps production cars from having edgy pointy aggressive front ends (or have for about half a century--before these standards were in place, many car manufacturers had bullet noses on the front, teeth in the grill, and similar hard-edge styling).

The badass vehicles in movies and car shows look threatening because, well, because they are (Out of my way if you know what's good for you). Despite the positive feedback your styling inspires, and despite the ease of construction of the current look, rounding the forward-facing pointy and edgy bits will make your trikes safer for the folks in the crosswalk, and could save your customers a lot of paperwork.

Besides, rounding the front will improve streamlining and save fuel, as long as you keep your trikes subsonic.

[pete c]

I think Ken's deathrace front end treatment is actually pedestrian friendly.

If I have a choice of being smashed in the shins and flipped over the top or battered by a waist high grill, I'll go with the former every time. I don't give a crap how round and fuzzy the higher vehicle is, because blunt force trauma doesn't much care what shape it comes in.

[Dreamer]

Perhaps round it, then replace the edge in a forgivable rubber.

[mcrews]

Originally Posted by dcb

Lol, says the guy in the pink q45 ZING!

THank goodness it's just photoshopped!!!!!

[Ken Fry]

Originally Posted by JackMcCornack

Besides, rounding the front will improve streamlining and save fuel, as long as you keep your trikes subsonic.

There's the problem -- I'm hoping that the cars are not that slow. I'm thinkin' if anyone gets hit by this thing at 600 mph or so, better to slice them in half cleanly (like surgery) than to smash them to smithereens. Would you rather have your heart surgery done with a scalpel or a sledge hammer?

Your point is well-taken though, and I've been planning something more rounded. Even though I have developed lots of OSHA training, and worked with Volvo in promoting some of the cool things they have done for safety, I'll admit to liking the original knock off hubs much more than the octagonal ones. I remember thinking at the time: wait... how many people have been injured by those wings?

(Funny how small irritations remain in memory for so long: It used to bug me when I'd see the wings peened over by people using steel hammers.)

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I don't see the material being covered in driver's ed (but then I wouldn't know. Is it?)

Over here, trainee drivers are taught to shift up early and stay in gear (DFCO) when slowing down.
It's only an attention point on the practical examination, they don't pass or fail because of it - yet.

But coasting means failing the exam.