1/12/09 - Aptera's EV aims for sweet success, just don't call it a car - Autoweek.com

[jstdadd]

There's not a lot of new information, but there is a great picture of the author with a hand-held sledgehammer, on top of an Aptera body (raw composite), beating the hell out of it. He said it left hammer marks, but did not break the body.

I don't see the article on the Autoweek website, but I didn't spend a lot of time looking.

[KarenRei]

If you want to see the pictures, including the great shot of the reporter standing on top of an Aptera and slamming a sledgehammer into it, you'll have to pick up a copy!

The State of the Auto Enthusiast
BY ANY OTHER NAME
Aptera's swoopy EV aims for sweet success-- just don't call it a car
By Mark Vaughn
January 12, 2009

There we were, standing on top of the high-tech, ultra-efficient, composite-body Aptera 2e electric commuter vehicle of the future, with a sledgehammer beating the crap out of it.

Bang!

Not your typical new-car intro program.

Whack!

"Are we hurting this thing?"

Crash!

"The hammer is bounding off!"

Bang!

The sound of each impact ricocheted through the Aptera assembly building, to the amusement of company CEO Paul Wilbur, at whose request we were committing this vandalism.

"See? Look at that," he said after we climbed down, exhausted. He was rubbing over the hammer-shaped marks we'd just made. "Some rubbing, and they're out."

Indeed, the biggest worry for anyone given this same opportunity is the hammer's rebound into the wielder's mug, which almost happened to us and would have maxed out our dental coverage if not for our catlike reflexes.

So we believe it is a tough car, capable, as Aptera claims, of meeting all federal safety standards for cars. NTSA considers it a motorcycle, not a car, because of its three wheels; but it's not a motorcycle, either, according to Aptera. It's a "vehicle," an efficient commuter vehicle, or ECV. Any Aptera employee who calls it a "car" has to put a dollar in the tip jar. The jar has about $20 in it.

Aerodynamically, the Aptera makes your average raindrop seem like a city bus. It has no lift at either axle and has a 0.15 drag coefficient, about half that of the most aero production car out there.

Indeed, the company's aim is to produce a vehicle with only half the bad stuff (drag, weight, pollution, batteries) and twice the good stuff (efficiency, range, a small carbon footprint) of the market's best.

Efficiency explains the somewhat airplane/submarine look. Many who see it think it is a new Weinermobile made to promote a flying-shoe company.

Flying is right: Pilots are the first ones to understand the superefficient shape, said Wilbur. Then others come around to it.

"The first time I saw it, I thought it was odd," Wilbur admitted. "Yet the more (company co-founder) Steve (Fambro) explained it to me, the more intelligent it became. I got it."

With a molded composite honeycomb unibody, the Aptera is a vehicle reduced to its pure functional elements. It seats just two people, and there is little room to carry anything not in the pockets of one of those two.

So far, 4,000 people have put down deposits, and another 60,000 have signed up at www.aptera.com for the newsletter. The car (oops, $1) is scheduled to come out late next year. It will be powered by fewer batteries than a Tesla, Wilbur said, consisting of Aptera's own mix of lithium-ion phosphate "and pixie dust." The batteries can be recharged at a regular 110-volt outlet. Specifications are not yet released, but Wilbur said to expect a price somewhere between Toyota's Yaris and Prius. Earlier speculation listed the price at $20,000, but that was a couple years ago.

Hang on a second, haven't we seen this before? Someone with a good idea wants to build a car, we write about him, he gets a pile of money, and then nothing happens -- except that money can't be located any more. Remember the Corbin Sparrow? Three wheels, an electric drivetrain and a nice manufacturing facility.

Other pipe dreams usually go to high-end cars such as Unique Performance Mustangs, or does anyone remember the Shelby Series 1 fiasco? How long did that take to die? Even the previously well funded Tesla electric car hasn't had smooth sailing to production.

But this time it's different, really!

"We have a completely different product, a completely different plan," said Fambro. "We have all studied them (previous automotive start-ups), and we know why they failed."

One thing Fambro has going for him is that he doesn't seem to be a screaming egomaniac, which can't be said for some of the others. ("I made a bazillion dollars trading pork bellies. I am a genius. I cannot fail. Bwahaha!")

"I asked, 'Am I the guy to take this forward?'" Fambro said. "The answer was no."

Rather than insist on demagogic control, Fambro hired a search firm to find a CEO and the other key executives he would need. The result is an impressive list.

Wilbur came to Aptera after four years at Ford, 17 at Chrysler, and six at ASC -- the final year included Saleen. Tom Reichenbach, formerly with Ford Racing, worked on the GT just before coming aboard. David Swietlik spent 30 years in independent procurement, including the Dodge Viper program. Dave Oakley, manufacturing vice president, most recently was at Callaway Golf. Laura Marion, the CFO, worked at Kmart and Delphi. Marques McCammon, marketting and communications boss, built the Dodge SRT4 concept before helping to found SRT and working at ASC and Saleen.

These people have their work cut out for them.

The manufacturing plan requires no metal stamping machines or spot welders -- the bodies are composite. And since it's a motorcycle in the NTHSA's eyes, the vehicle doesn't have to meet as many crash-test standards. Even so, Aptera officials say the vehicle will meet those standards, and it will have airbags.

"We're doing all due care on all (the safety) standards," said Wilbur. "I'm not sure we're going to do all tests, but we'll make sure, through our simulators and testing, that it meets them."

Success will come because of the product, Wilbur said.

We drove an engineering mule around the parking lot, and it worked. We will get into a more finished vehicle in a month or two. After the launch date next year, plans call for a slow, determined ramp-up to 10,000 units a year. In five years, the plan calls for 100,000 units a year of this and other models.

Will the Aptera be the next Model T or the next Sparrow? Its success will require buyers to reimagine the definition of a car.

Oops, that's another $1.

[KarenRei]

A couple notes:

* It's lithium *iron* phosphate, not lithium-ion phosphate.
* If he thinks there's no room for any cargo save what you carry in your pockets, he never turned around (either that or his mule was full of testing gear).
* I think that'd be a miracle if it had a base price between a Yaris and a Prius, honestly, given that the more expensive of the two, the Prius, has a base price of $22.5k. I wonder if that was a mistake.
* I wonder if the author is under the mistaken impression that the Corbin Sparrow is consigned to the dustbin of history rather than still being made under the NmG name.
* I'm guessing that the remark about it coming out "next year" is due to the actual tour being conducted late last year.

[Apt3448]

And we are being a tad vague on the crash tests, aren't we?
Quote: And since it's a motorcycle the vehicle doesn't have to meet as many crash-test standards. Even so, Aptera officials say the vehicle will meet those standards, (...). "I'm not sure we're going to do all tests, but we'll make sure, through our simulators and testing, that it meets them."
I guess the whacking job by the writers was to suggest that it's OK anyway? Personally I'm not worried, but some here have expressed a deep need for formal tests.

[G.M.]

Well currently I ride either a 230 pound scooter, or a 500 pound maxi-scooter. Or a 21 pound bicycle.

So the Aptera will be much safer than anything I currently ride.

I can even drive it without a helmet!


I would love to see them do some testing. But it isn't the end-all be-all.

G.M.

[KarenRei]

Besides, while simulations aren't the be-all, end-all of safety, they're pretty good these days. For aero/CFD and crash sims, Aptera is using CD-Adapco and Abaqus (now Simulia) software, respectively, which are used by the major automakers. They use the software because they don't want to spend the money developing a vehicle only to find out that it won't pass crash tests. In particular, for Abaqus:

http://www.simulia.com/solutions/aut...orthiness.html

Example of it's usage at BMW:

http://www.simulia.com/download/solu..._auc05_bmw.pdf

I'm not at all uncomfortable with the combination of limited physical crash testing, crush testing, and extensive simulated crash testing, given the current state of the art.

[Ardie3301]

Yeah, I have come to the conclusion that Aptera is not doing *actual* crash testing.
For one, it will be expensive. For two, it is (legally) unnecessary. I conclude that Aptera has decided that computer simulation is good enough for the 3-wheeler.

-- Ardie
(P.S.: I wonder if anyone is bringing a sledgehammer with them to Long Beach?)

[Apt3448]

Originally Posted by Ardie3301

Yeah, I have come to the conclusion that Aptera is not doing *actual* crash testing.
For one, it will be expensive. For two, it is (legally) unnecessary. I conclude that Aptera has decided that computer simulation is good enough for the 3-wheeler.

I think I agree: I will certainly not cancel because of that, and I think their 'due care' will do, and anyone concerned can try that sledgehammer trick - just not on my Aptera

[speculawyer]

Originally Posted by Ardie3301

Yeah, I have come to the conclusion that Aptera is not doing *actual* crash testing.
For one, it will be expensive. For two, it is (legally) unnecessary. I conclude that Aptera has decided that computer simulation is good enough for the 3-wheeler.

I'm starting to think that too. Maybe they'll do one eventually but I don't think it will happen until after they are shipping to customers. It is so hard to raise money these days that they need to watch every penny.

[IanO]

Originally Posted by KarenRei

It's lithium *iron* phosphate, not lithium-ion phosphate.

Has the final battery chemistry been confirmed anywhere? I thought it was one of the design decisions they stopped making public.

Ian