Anyone else becoming more disgusted with gas-sucking vehicles?

[Apteratude]

I find myself pulling up to the store seeing others in an SUV/sport sedan which is obviously to fit their style rather than their needs. I see it as excess and it's really starting to get to me.

I'll say this, I don't think going on a gas diet on a whole as a nation will bring prices down. We've proven that we're willing to pay $4 a gallon for gas and not alter our driving habits for the most part. If we reduce consumption by 10% nation wide, they'll just reduce production to compensate and again create a demand, commanding higher prices. Not exactly sure to blame Bush, the war, Industrialization of China and India, or OPEC getting wiser.

Anyway, I'm happy that the Aptera will solve these issues at least for those of us buying one. I just think it's such a waste of financial resources to be blowing this much money on gasoline. Or that people have one kid, and decide that they need an SUV/minivan to fit their stroller in it. It may simply be an education problem. I find that most people I talk to are completely unaware of the amount of $$$ they spend on fuel.

For example, my co-worker drives over 4k miles a month, lives at home and is 19(only lives 3 miles from work). He drives a 4WD Jeep Grand Cherokee V8. He avg's about 13 mpg's. At present fuel cost here in CA he(his parents) is spending $1200 a month on gas! He was shocked when I showed him the math. I was wondering why it took me to help him figure that out. He is now on a quest to buy a more economical car...Except that he is majorly upside down on the loan for his Jeep, and is pretty much stuck with it unless he can come up with $5k out of pocket!

We could be doing some serious good in the world as a nation, or as people individually if we weren't so financially stapped due to high fuel prices. I'm pretty much hating on the diamond industry too. Thought I'd mention that while I was ranting. How they've duped every young or even old couple that spending thousands on a little clear stone as a necessary ingedient to marriage is beyond me. My wife feels the same way. She has a CZ I bought her for $51. All her fake friends think it's real. All her real friends know it's fake, and think it's so cool that I gave her the choice. Of course that was 14 years ago. I'm an old man now at 33!

Comments? How do you feel?

[3wheelingfreek]

Every time I see a SUV with a American Flag or some other cheesy patriotic slogan.

It looks like a whore with a rosary to me.

[LQUAN]

Yup, obviously people who unecesary drive SUVs have more money than brain.:)

[KarenRei]

Ever since I learned about the Aptera, every time I've seen a car commercial, I laugh. They're trying to make their car sound sleek and sexy, but all I hear in my head is something like:

"Some horse-drawn carriages just can't thrill you. That's because they're not Smith's Horse-Drawn Carriages. Zero to ten in five seconds, with a top speed of 15 miles per hour, and a smooth ride all the way -- can your carriage do that? With the impressive performance of a Smith's carriage, you won't be stopping to rest your horses as often. In a Smith's, you'll know that all those other carriage-owners looking your way are green with envy."

The commercials that brag about things like 30 or 35 miles per gallon are especially funny. ;)

[G-Jet]

What cracks me up is all the new supercars from major and minor manufacturers. that is really lame. 200+MPH!!!! who cares. 500 plus horsepower?! stupid. mostly coming from big German guys too. like you really need a V8 in a 3 series.

G

[basjoos]

I've been disgusted with gas-sucking vehicles for a long time. That's why I'm driving a 16 year old Honda Civic with almost 500,000 miles on the odometer. When I thought about replacing it in 2000 (with about 200,000 miles on it), I looked the new Civics and got EPA MPG sticker shock at how low their mpg's had dropped (highway mileage dropped from 47mpg to 37mpg), so I just kept driving my current car. In 2006, I finally got tired of waiting for the car manufacturers to introduce a moderately priced high-mpg vehicle (they considered 37mpg to be "great" mileage at a time when I was routinely getting mpg's in the upper 40's), so I modified my existing car to improve its mileage.

What really strikes me about most of the vehicles on the road (and especially the SUVs and pickups) is how poorly they are designed for a machine whose main function is to penetrate the air. Those blocky shapes, the huge low-pressure eddy trailing out behind them, the parts hanging down in the slipstream underneath them, the massive amounts of water spray being kicked up in the air from their open wheel wells and cut off rear ends, and with so much energy being wasted that their wake can sweep debris off the road behind them. The emphasis on stying driving the shapes of these vehicles rather than their aerodynamic function. I'm disgusted with the almost sheer incompetence in the aerodynamic design of most of the vehicles on the road, especially after seeing how easy and cheaply it was to improve the aerodynamics of my current vehicle.

[Apteratude]

I calculated the nationwide expenditure for gasoline this way. These are all guesses. If anyone has real data, please share.

300 million americans
Assuming 200 million licensed drivers driving an avg of 15k miles per year @ $3.60 per gallon. That's approx $2500 per year per driver on avg. Multiply that times 200 million drivers and you have 500 billion dollars a year spent annually just in the private sector on gasoline. Add in commercial transports and you probably add another 200 billion for the trucking/shipping and other transportation industry and you have 700 billion dollars. That's 1/3 of the entire U.S. budget!

Sickening really. Think of what the US could do with 500 Billion dollars! We could take several years of that and convert the whole country to solar power, and get everyone an Aptera. And Voila...energy independence!!!

I can dream can't I?

[Apteratude]

I've been disgusted with gas-sucking vehicles for a long time. That's why I'm driving a 16 year old Honda Civic with almost 500,000 miles on the odometer. When I thought about replacing it in 2000 (with about 200,000 miles on it), I looked the new Civics and got EPA MPG sticker shock at how low their mpg's had dropped (highway mileage dropped from 47mpg to 37mpg), so I just kept driving my current car. In 2006, I finally got tired of waiting for the car manufacturers to introduce a moderately priced high-mpg vehicle (they considered 37mpg to be "great" mileage at a time when I was routinely getting mpg's in the upper 40's), so I modified my existing car to improve its mileage.

What really strikes me about most of the vehicles on the road (and especially the SUVs and pickups) is how poorly they are designed for a machine whose main function is to penetrate the air. Those blocky shapes, the huge low-pressure eddy trailing out behind them, the parts hanging down in the slipstream underneath them, the massive amounts of water spray being kicked up in the air from their open wheel wells and cut off rear ends, and with so much energy being wasted that their wake can sweep debris off the road behind them. The emphasis on stying driving the shapes of these vehicles rather than their aerodynamic function. I'm disgusted with the almost sheer incompetence in the aerodynamic design of most of the vehicles on the road, especially after seeing how easy and cheaply it was to improve the aerodynamics of my current vehicle.

SO True!!! We need someone to make aero stylish! Cars are about as aero as you can get right now and still be acceptable stylisticly to the general population. I'm willing to forego style for aero, lightweight instead of safety...and yet with the Aptera, I feel like I win all the way around! Maybe a great ad campaign for Aptera could be:

What did you buy with the money you save owning an Aptera?

Everything from vacations, charity work, Big Screen TV's, early retirement, College for kids, etc.

[Blur]

Thanks for starting this thread and allowing us to vent a little. These are my feelings exactly! I just finished watching the full-length version of Who Killed the Electric Car. It confirmed many suspicions I had ,regarding Big Auto and Big Oil, but was still in denial about. The level of collusion between the big 3 auto makers, our Federal Govt., OPEC and ,more recently, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) left me feeling like a tool.

The one quote from the movie I will never forget was from Frank J. Gaffney Jr. (Dep Asst. Sec of Defense during the Reagan administration)


'The Saudis made a very calculated decision in the mid-eighties to drop the price of oil dramatically, principally to prevent the alternative energy and conservation programs from continuing.'

Did the Saudis plan work? Let's see

From 1975 to 1985 the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards initiated and promoted during the Carter years had increased the average fuel economy of new production cars by 50%.

From 1985 to 2005 the average fuel economy of new production cars from major manufacturers has increased 0%. In this same period the most technologically advanced electric car in history was introduced and killed(EV1); and the largest and heaviest and least fuel efficient personal vehicle was introduced (Hummer) and has become one of GM's most popular and profitable.

The H2 was introduced in the wake of the EV-1!

[G-Jet]

Blur,

You are forgetting all the safety legislation that added ALOT of weight to cars during the same period. Cars today pollute 95% less than 2 decades ago, all while being massively safer. You should look into Rolls, Bentlely, Lambos, Porsches, and Ferraris as being the least efficient in gas mileage and not just the H2. At least a hummer can carry more than two people. Besides, it may be popular, but they only sell now many per year? (not many at all).

The EV1 was ahead of it's time, with too few people accepting it.

Basjoos, you may have improved your aero numbers and gas consumption, but the emissions on that 16 year old are not good.

G

[Apteratude]

I think I cried when I saw that movie. In the part where they were crushing the Honda EV's. When the guy at the dump/shredder was saying how they were dropping off these almost new cars. I was in shock. I sorta see it as a point we'll look back on as when we doomed ourselves as a nation. I see us (the USA) as collapsing financially based on the greed of a few that wanted to sacrafice the nation's future/welfare to satisfy their own desires for a larger mansion.

At the time, EV's didn't make all that much sense because of low gas prices. But we knew then that Oil is not a renewable resource. Now, I'm really bummed because when C.A.R.B. voted to reduce the number of EV's mandated in the coming few years, I know our politicians/lawmakers are under the power of the Auto Industry, and that 1 lobbyist with a blank check can do more to change the direction of the nation than millions of votes.

[KarenRei]

I looked the new Civics and got EPA MPG sticker shock at how low their mpg's had dropped (highway mileage dropped from 47mpg to 37mpg

You sure you're not comparing new EPA mileage numbers with old EPA mileage numbers? The new ratings system revises the numbers downwards. Let's check:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp

You said 16 years old, so let's compare the '92 and '07 versions (they don't have the '08 on the site). I'll assume automatic for both. The '92 gets a combined cycle of '29 (old EPA mileage: 33):

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=8713

The new also gets 29mpg (33mpg old):

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=25082

Where did you get your numbers from, out of curiosity? The closest I can find to your numbers is the Civic Hybrid, which gets 42mpg (50mpg old):

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectEngine.jsp?year=2007&make=Honda&model=Civic%20Hybrid

300 million americans
Assuming 200 million licensed drivers driving an avg of 15k miles per year @ $3.60 per gallon. That's approx $2500 per year per driver on avg. Multiply that times 200 million drivers and you have 500 billion dollars a year spent annually just in the private sector on gasoline. Add in commercial transports and you probably add another 200 billion for the trucking/shipping and other transportation industry and you have 700 billion dollars. That's 1/3 of the entire U.S. budget

The US consumes about 20 million barrels of oil a day. If that was all turned into gasoline (it's not, but the majority of it is), it'd be about 400 million gallons per day, i.e. 146 billion gallons per year.

The US GDP isn't 2 trillion; it's almost 14 trillion.

The Saudis made a very calculated decision in the mid-eighties to drop the price of oil dramatically, principally to prevent the alternative energy and conservation programs from continuing.

I'm anything but a conspiracy theorist (and I've gotten people mad at me on this board before for debunking conspiracy theories, like some of those presented in "Who Killed The Electric Car", so I'm not going to go there again). However, this statement is entirely true. If there were no other factors, OPEC would just drive the price of oil up endlessly. In practice, two things hold them back. One, if oil prices rise too high, it slows down the world economy, lowering demand -- so they don't really make any more money. Two, if oil prices stay high, people invest in alternative energy and conservation programs.

Now, that said, "alternative energy" doesn't necessarily mean "renewable energy" or "clean energy". The 70s may have led to a lot of work in renewables tech, but it also led to a lot of work for alternative sources of oil. The foundation for today's bitumen recovery technology was developed in the 1970s. So was recovery of oil from shale, which isn't widely used yet but may be in the future.

[Apteratude]

Thanks for the reply Karen.

I did mention in the first post or so that 2 tril. was the annual budget, not the GDP. I do admit to the movie "Who Killed the Electric Car" being a bit emotional, and that probably why I teared up. I chuckled to myself also why people were fighting so much to keep such an ugly car.

BTW, as a side note...A friend of mine mentioned several years ago that Bill Clinton had worked some sort of contract for oil at $32 a barrel but that Bush II failed to ratify it or had a chance to lock it in permanently due to the fact that oil was selling at the time for $22-$23 a barrel. Know anything about that anyone?

Having worked in the automotive/motorcycle industry in all aspects before from sales,parts,service...I understand the manufacturer's desire to rid themselves of the few electric cars they had produced. These cars necessitated a parts network, special tools, service manuals, required additional tech training, and on an on and it wasn't economically viable for GM to even let the remaining customers buy the old EV1's back. As much as they(the customers) wanted them back at the time, from GM's and other's perspective, the next several years of ownership may not have been as rosy or trouble free as the first few. Resulting in disgruntled customers who become disenfranchised with the brand and vow to not buy from them again.

Looking back now at the controversy, maybe they might have done differently. But I see how they were looking ahead, and out for their best interests at the time.

Similar why Aptera will not sell to an out of state buyer for now. Let's say that someone for the sake of an extreme example, buys one and ships it to New York. Then weeks after purchasing, there's a problem with the controller, or other part requiring service. By circumventing the rules and getting one as an out of state customer, Aptera is not responsible for getting it to CA. Yet, where does that leave yo the customer? It leaves you with a 1500lb mass of composites and metal that is going to cost $1000 to ship to California each way and 4-6weeks of downtime, leaving you without your Aptera. A week or two later the drive belt becomes worn and fails to work after discovering that someone one the third shift of production used some improper shims to shim the assembly, causing the belt to wear out rapidly. Same Shipping Dilemma. Or, lets say you get into a car wreck with it, and Aptera says we'll fix it, but you need to get it back to California to our headquarters. Same thing. A 15 minute tow for me, is a 3 day tow for a New Yorker. A couple of recalls and tows back and forth cross country, and you can imagine the bad press/hate mail that Aptera could receive. Even though you broke the "rules", they get the bad press. Really they're protecting themselves.

Whether or not these will even be legal for sale in other states is also in question in my mind. I know Aptera will have to look into this as they expand, and maybe they are planning to have it legal for registration as a new vehicle in all 50 states at some point. Maybe it will be ok to register in another state after it's been registered in CA first. What if I bought one and then decided to move to AZ? My former employer dealt with these issues somewhat when they produced a lighting kit for offroad motorcycles that were not legal for registration. That is, not without jmping through some hoops that involved the state of Vermont, and then registering it back in CA.

I worry a little bit about production quality in a warehouse. I also hope they get some good people to run inventory and QC on production. A company I worked for produced an aftermarket lighting kit which necessitated some 50-100 parts all with different quantity price breaks and shipping times/availabilities. Some with 45-90 lead time from China. It takes careful planning and monitoring to keep all parts in stock for production. And for production quality, it's not partially robotic like US or Japanese Automakers are. These are going to be all handbuilt inside a warehouse from what I would guess.

[KarenRei]

BTW, as a side note...A friend of mine mentioned several years ago that Bill Clinton had worked some sort of contract for oil at $32 a barrel but that Bush II failed to ratify it or had a chance to lock it in permanently due to the fact that oil was selling at the time for $22-$23 a barrel. Know anything about that anyone?

That doesn't make sense. Presidents don't negotiate oil contracts; people like my father do. The president can try and influence OPEC production quotas, but that's one issue that the POTUS doesn't have that much negotiating strength on. Picture Bill Gates coming to you and trying to negotiate with you to voluntarily make less money... it's that sort of situation. OPEC will set quotas to whatever they think will make them the most money without weakening the world economy and encouraging research into alternatives.

Having worked in the automotive/motorcycle industry in all aspects before from sales,parts,service.. I understand the manufacturer's desire to rid themselves of the few electric cars they had produced

I wish you'd been here when I had been trying to convince other people of this. ;)

Looking back now at the controversy, maybe they might have done differently.

Yeah, they've been publicly hitting themselves on the head over that one. The cost savings bought them a tremendous amount of bad PR.

Similar why Aptera will not sell to an out of state buyer for now

Yeah. And even those who are working around the system consciously know that we're working around the system, and any problems like this are our own fault/responsibility. Although I think the belt example is a bad one, as any mechanic should be able to change a drive belt. But, for example, if I get into an accident, or there's a manufacturing defect in the batteries, or whatnot, it's going back on a car carrier.

Some with 45-90 lead time from China. It takes careful planning and monitoring to keep all parts in stock for production.

Until they're rolling for a while, I expect slow production. I expect to see the same sort of hiccups that Tesla has had. They're planning to start off at, what, one per week? Something like that.

[basjoos]

Basjoos, you may have improved your aero numbers and gas consumption, but the emissions on that 16 year old are not good.

G

I guess it depends on whether you consider NO or CO2 to be the worst pollutant. Is it better to have a car that has lower NO levels, but higher CO2 outputs or a car that gets better mileage (less CO2) but has higher NO levels? NO is reactive and doesn't last long in the atmosphere, but CO2 is going to be there for awhile.

[basjoos]

You sure you're not comparing new EPA mileage numbers with old EPA mileage numbers? The new ratings system revises the numbers downwards. Let's check:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp

You said 16 years old, so let's compare the '92 and '07 versions (they don't have the '08 on the site). I'll assume automatic for both. The '92 gets a combined cycle of '29 (old EPA mileage: 33):

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=8713

The new also gets 29mpg (33mpg old):

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=25082

Where did you get your numbers from, out of curiosity? The closest I can find to your numbers is the Civic Hybrid, which gets 42mpg (50mpg old):

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectEngine.jsp?year=2007&make=Honda&model=Civic%20Hybrid .

That 47mpg versus 37mpg were the numbers from the EPA highway mileage sticker on the 1992 and 1999 Honda Civic CX 5-speeds at the dealership in 1999, long before the EPA thought about revising their mileage standards.

Those 92 and 07 Honda Civics you compared were both automatics and their identical EPA ratings is a tribute to how much Honda has managed to improve their automatic transmission. But if you look at the manual transmission models, you'll see an entirely different picture.

The 1992 5-speed gets a combined cycle of 38 (new EPA).
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=8714

The 2007 5-speed gets a combined of 29 (new EPA), a 9 mpg drop compared to the 1992 model.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=23503

On that fueleconomy.gov site, the 1996 Civic 5-speed has a combined of 31 (new EPA), so the mileage of the 5-speed Civic took a tumble with the introduction of the 1996 model year.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=12609

I rest my case.

I don't think there was any conspiracy going on, just that Honda joined the other car companies in deciding that the American market preferred muscle over high mpg's and adjusted their models accordingly (although the death of Soichiro Honda, the founder of Honda Motors, in 1991, may have allowed the company to begin drifting from their original focus of small economical cars).

[yoursailor05]

Ya know i laugh at all the car commercials on TV these days. All of them that show how fast, stylish, sporty, and high tech they are b/c they have a mp3 player with GPS in them instead of a cd player :D

Gas is ridiculous, but sense i own a paid off vehicle it's hard for me to get into a newer vehicle that has excellent economy, b/c i would be spending more a month in car payments than i would when i just put gas in it.

I own a 1999 Bravada that gets around 17 or so if i peddle it. I only use it when I'm taking a bunch of people out or pulling something. But for quick trips i take my motorcycle that gets 65 mpg. People need to have there commuter vehicle and then there work truck that they can use for hauling. Why are people using there gas sucking 4x4 to the grocery store?!

Maybe in a few years... 4 or so... the whole series-hybrid, electric car, or aptera takes off and it will be affordable for the average Joe.

[evolutionmovement]

My Mazda3 weighs close to 3000lbs. That's as ridiculous as the poor aerodynamics of most 'modern' cars. I wish there was an option to forego safety features in a practical car in exchange for less weight since I couldn't care any less about safety beyond a well sealed fuel tank. I guess the only option is 3-wheelers like the Aptera. I wouldn't be surprised to see more vehicles like these in the future.

A T-Rex drove by me in Boston yesterday and it made me more motivated to get going on my own 3-wheel project. With all the stuff I do, building one will take me a while, though.

There's not too much to an electric vehicle so I'd happily take the chance on an Aptera and sign away warranty repairs to get it. I've worked on machines and vehicles all my life, so there's little I can't handle.

As for licensing a 3-wheeler like the Aptera, MA seems to be about the worst state I've looked into (and have the misfortune to live in - damn the beauty of Cape Ann!). Most states are pretty straight forward - less than 4 wheels, under 1500 lbs. is a motorcycle, but MA has no definitive standard. An hour long discussion with the DMV about my own vehicle design (same layout as the Aptera) went nowhere. They didn't like the side by side seating, conventional doors, or the engine they said was too big for a motorcycle (originally, I planned to use an 1800 Honda Goldwing engine - an actual motorcycle engine!). Neither could they give me a straight answer on wearing a helmet or having a motorcycle license. In the end, I'm building it to passenger car spec minus the one rear wheel and they can call it whatever they want - now that I figured out the safety-glass windshield issue, there aren't any more concept design obstacles (just plenty of engineering ones. Yippee.).

Worse case, I can register it as a custom motorcycle in NH, then transfer it to MA. I imagine the same could be done with an Aptera were I able to acquire one outside CA. If Aptera can eventually get themselves cleared for motorcycle registration in MA, that could help me out if I do end up going with my own project instead of buying the Aptera.

It would've been nice if GM could've at least used the EV1's body for a gas car if they didn't want the logistical issues of the electric. The low drag shape with a small engine would do quite well mileage-wise and would've bought them some much needed respect.

[GCustom]

yeah, the Prius is a heavy beasty too, and the batteries on the current one only weigh 99 lbs

[KarenRei]

That's the funny thing. People always cite battery weight as a primary issue, but really, the issue is often overblown, at least for lithium-ion**. Well, unless you're GM and your cells inexplicably double in weight when you put them in a pack, but apart from that... In practice, battery price more often seems to be the limiting factor.

** I did a bit of calculations over here:

http://www.daughtersoftiresias.org/greenwiki/Electric_vehicle#Addendum_2%3A_Doesn.27t_gasoline_ have_a_lot_more_energy_density.3F

Basically, batteries aren't competing for weight with gasoline (which is far more energy dense). They're competing for weight against the engine block and everything related to it, since electric motors are lighter. By my estimate, battery packs at 340Wh/kg, which is achievable in the next few years if just one significant cathode advance and one significant anode advance for lithium ion, or one of the great alternative battery techs, out of the many that have been done in the lab recently, pan out, would break-even, weightwise, with a gasoline car that burns fuel at 20% tank-to-wheel efficiency, delivers the same power output, and has a 12-gallon tank. That is, an electric car with hundreds of miles of range would have the same weight drivetrain (including batteries) as your average gasoline car that does that, *without* the usual weight reduction tricks, drag reduction tricks, etc that electric cars currently have to rely on.

[Chupacabra]

I love 4x4s and used to have a cool one, but then the company I was with at the time moved and I was spending tons on gas. So I got an economy car, but current gas prices still make it really expensive to operate. I'm not going to get mad at the industry for giving us shitty products when it's us that keeps buying them, but I'm looking forward to more Aptera type solutions in the future.