I just don’t see one of these things zipping along I-40 ( ok, sand-bagging traffic ) nor can I see them out here on the rez roads either.
big city…in city only ?
Can you just see one of these with two bales of hay strapped to the roof ?
Where do we put the 250 gallon water tank ? the week’s laundry and groceries ?
I’m not just blowin smoke, these are my customers’ daily or weekly commutes.
VW was just using a Porsche and Audi feature when they put the retractable spoiler on the VWs. I think they stopped it because the added expense did not create enough new customers.
Triedaq, VW still uses that feature… on the Veyron! It probably makes a big bang when it retracts, but probably the engine is so loud nobody can hear it.
I gotta say, a retractable spoiler on a Beetle seems like a serious misapplication. Expensive on a car trying to appear economical.
@the same mountainbike–I’m glad to know that this feature is still available. I’ll look up the VW Veyron. I have no idea why the retractable spoiler makes any sense, but, as I said before, if the retractable spoiler makes the noise when it slams down similar to the flaps moving and the landing gear being lowered on an airplane, it’s worth the price. It’s a neat feature when your speed drops on the interstate when you get off on an exit to have your high speed spoiler drop down. It makes you feel like you’ve really been traveling fast. Actually, I think the retractable spoiler on the VW is about as useful as a screen door on a submarine.
The Veyron is a Bugatti, now owned by VW.
Quick, get the new model before it’s all sold out. Bring a check for about $1.2million.
You’ve heard about the guy who ran into a closed screen door. He had to strain to get through.
I’m extremely cynical of these kind of things because it seems that most are geared towards obtaining grants and venture capital with perpetual grandiose promises as the main objective.
That thing reminds me of the Carver or the VV1 which became the Persu and which is still being hyped as being available in 2014 with the same BS being used in every year since 2006 or thereabouts.
@MikeInNHBy the 1990’s regulations were in full swing.
As I stated…cars built BEFORE regulations…got WORSE gas mileage then they do now. So that GENERAL statement that cars suffered because of it is FALSE. Yes there were some vehicles that suffered from regulations…but overall…regulations have been extremely good for the consumer and our environment.
My 73 Vega is lighter, slower (MUCH SLOWER), less nimble, not as safe then my wifes 07 Lexus…and the Lexus gets BETTER gas mileage. Most cars from the 70’s before regulations get WORSE gas mileage then vehicles today?
While true, it does not prove that the regulations caused better gas mileage nor does it disprove the theory that gas mileage could be even better if they didn’t have to be so safe.
Manufacturers have just learned how to make better cars over the years, perhaps in spite of regulations and not because of them.
Government didn’t mandate air conditioning and satellite radio in cars, nor did they mandate automatic transmissions and cruise control, yet many cars have this today. Give private corporations and competition for customers some credit, will you?
A lot of the older cars would get very good fuel mileage considering the weight, aerodynamics, and the use of carburetors.
A friend had a '61 Pontiac that would tick off 30 MPG on the highway and some Subarus from back in the mid/late 70s would get 40+ as crude as they are.
Even the old '59 Corvette I had would get 21 MPG at a 70 MPH cruise and that was with a 4:11 rear axle ratio. It would be interesting to have that car back now and throw a set of highway friendly gears in it to see what would happen with the fuel economy.
$6800 ?? You can’t buy a decent motorcycle for $6800…What is the top speed of this vehicle? Three-wheeled micro-cars have been around since the early 1950’s…Messerschmidt, the German aircraft maker sold a few in the U.S. They are museum dust collectors today…
@Caddyman$6800 ?? You can’t buy a decent motorcycle for $6800…
The motorcycles that get 84 mpg or better (if the rider cooperates) can be had for less than $6800, most of them 250cc or smaller and single cylinder engines and when driven at speeds that are in a 250 cc engine’s comfort zone, one lane country road speeds in other words.
@B.L.E, government regulations are responsible for better fuel mileage. CAFE forced manufacturers to improve fuel mileage or pay a fee for not meeting the fleet minimum. But regulations did not force manufacturers to build cars that handle better, accelerate faster, or last longer.
I bought my first motorcycle new for about $6,800. It was a 750 v-twin cruiser.
@jtsanders @B.L.E, government regulations are responsible for better fuel mileage. CAFE forced manufacturers to improve fuel mileage or pay a fee for not meeting the fleet minimum. But regulations did not force manufacturers to build cars that handle better, accelerate faster, or last longer.
Those same CAFE standards also gave rise to light trucks being used as cars because “trucks” were exempt from those standards. Luxury pickup trucks and panel trucks were virtually unknown before the CAFE rules. During the 1950’s and 60’s, pickup trucks were mostly utilitarian farmer’s vehicles usually equipped with sixes and three-on-the-tree manual transmissions, vinyl bench seats, and rubber floor mats.
The modern SUV is an unintended consequence of CAFE standards.
Fuel economy might have gone up anyway because of consumer demand. If competition for customers gave us cars that handle better, accelerate faster, and last longer, it could also give us cars that get better gas mileage not to mention being safer. In case no one has noticed, a lot of cars are actually safer than government standards force them to be. Subaru and Volvo sell safety in their ads. The government never mandated hybrid cars either. The number of manufacturers who are jumping on the hybrid bandwagon might have a lot to do with customers having to get on a waiting list to buy a Prius in 2008.
Give competition and private enterprise some credit for the advances in auto technology.
In 1953, the KR-200 Messerschmidt’s , 10 cu. in. engine, got 65MPG and could do 50 MPH…They sold like hot-cakes for a few years…
government regulations are responsible for better fuel mileage. CAFE forced manufacturers to improve fuel mileage or pay a fee for not meeting the fleet minimum. But regulations did not force manufacturers to build cars that handle better, accelerate faster, or last longer.
Well…government regulations DO require emissions compliance for a set amount of miles (are we up to 120k now?) That more-or-less mandates a certain minimum engine durability.
I don’t doubt that–on net–gov’t regs have increased economy. It’s just that regulators tend to “want good things” without thinking about physical constraints and how some goals are contradictory–like high MPG and high crash integrity (with the associated weight).
Granted, cars are probably better “well-rounded,” being pretty good across a range of goals…but if ALL you wanted is high MPG, well, the easiest way to get it is to be able to not have to meet ANY emissions/safety/whatever benchmarks, which is probably why the Elio is three-wheeled (and thus a motorcycle).
@BLE, hybrids weren’t directly mandated, but they could be seen as another unintended consequence of higher fuel economy (CAFE) standards.
Also, direct injection, turbocharging small engines, diesels, and electric cars are also unrequested results of higher CAFE standards. I say unrequested instead of unintended because the government never intended to tell the auto manufacturers how to get to the ever increasing CAFE limits, just that they have to get there.
I m not sure if the car in question is the answer, but we definitely need a modern version of the folks wagon. over regulation may have made that impossible.
I too would consider this car for my errand mobile, my better half could use something similar for her short commute too.
we also fish and camp so we need our new 1990 jeep, but would rather use something more efficient for errands.
Not something that would or would have interested me even when I was driving 120 miles a day. Who wants one? I’d sure like to see their business plan. Can’t be very thick. Might be a good dating car for the over 50 crowd or the under 20 crowd. Its one you’d like to see your daughter picked up in. I dunno, maybe its the orange color or the weird wing wheels or the weird rear end or something. Or maybe the guy should be wearing a straw hat to get the attention of the intended market. I think my go cart did as well for mileage and was a lot cheaper and looked a lot better. Might be interesting to drive in an ice storm though. Kind of like being in a tilt-a-whirl. Anyone seen those go carts in Illinois that they use to put pilons down? Now put a roof on those and they’d have something.