300 MPG Car Is Not Allowed In America Because It’s Too Efficient

[Jimmy Higgins]

I was scoffing at the weight?

Yes. You seemed to doubt it was possible for a hybrid to weigh so little.

Actually more, according to google. This is a concept car that they decided to make a very limited production run. But it was designed with one goal in mind - the symbolic 1L/100km consumption rate. While the car itself is not terribly practical much of the technology is and I am sure it will find itself into much of their range.

We'll see. The problem with hyper mileage is the issues regarding utility. You can get a car to run on solar power, but good luck being able to put a family of 4 in it. Personally, I like seeing the 40 to 50 mpg fleets out there. That is double what cars were, and helps to dramatically lower our use of gasoline in the US.

 

[dockeen]

You can get a car to run on solar power, but good luck being able to put a family of 4 in it.

I am curious, does every car in a family of 43 have to carry 4? Am I atypical in that I drive the majority of the miles in my family, and most of those are with me in the car alone. So assuming that one can have more than one car per family, wouldn't it make sense to have one vehicle that doesn't have to carry 4?

 

[arkirk]

Just WHO has the power to "not allow" it? I must admit the claimed mileage seems quite extreme and we have had claims for things like this pointing to evil fuel and car companies, but upon further investigation, most of these claims end up being wishful thinking. I do feel we have had a long run of gas guzzling behemoths in the U.S. and indeed overseas as well.

In 1959 BMC produced a 1000cc engine and placed it in cars like the Morris Minor and Austin Healy Sprite and later in an MG mini model. It delivered about 40 mpg. I know because we had a Morris Minor 1000. It weighed in at about 1700 lbs and the body of the car had an almost cartoonish look, but handled extremely well and cost less than a dollar a pound.

I think we spend far too much time seeking neck snapping performance from our cars and treating them like they are status symbols rather than transportation. We tend to do this with everything except...when it comes to economy. Status symbols have to be expensive just because that is what they are all about. It will be interesting to see where this story ends up going. If such a car exists, it is only a matter of time when they will be refined and improve our carbon footprint. If this is just another will-o-the-wisp, we will hear no more about it.

Water injection was indeed used in the engines on the WWII vintage P-38. This technology obviously had some drawbacks because it was not transferred to other engines on a large scale. I believe the automobile industry has no reason to suppress reductions in fuel consumption because this would clearly allow it a wider market...including people who cannot afford a lot of high priced gasoline. There will always be people working to improve our technology and they will eventually find ways to overcome any form of crooked suppression of their technology. If this is happening in the case of this vehicle, the story definitely belongs in the political discussions...along with the Keystone dirty oil pipeline.

 

[Bronzeage]

I am not certain gas is yet expensive enough for MPG to be a driving force for the bulk of the driving folk. On my commute I see plenty of pointless lead footing going on in SUVs. In discussions with people about how they could change their driving habits just a bit and get more MPG, they indicate that driving that way is no fun.

Now, if gas were, say, 15 dollars per gallon, that might change.

I agree. It was long ago, America decided it did not care what gas cost, so long as gas is available. I filled up my car this morning with $3.39/gallon of Exxon's finest and didn't bat an eye. Thirty years ago, you would have needed a pistol to make me do that.

I love gas mileage stories. It reminds me of the Wonderjet Carburetor.

The Wonderjet has been around for a very long time. I first heard of it when I was about 14 years old. The basic version of the tale is this: A man buys a new car. You can choose any manufacturer. It doesn't matter. He is surprised to discover it gets very good gas mileage. You can pick any number between 20 and 75. At first, he thinks the gas gauge is broken, because it never moves. When the car is about 6 months old, he gets a phone call from his dealership. His car is in need of important adjustments. The dealership will lend him a car, while his is in the shop. The loaner car is enough to expose the whole thing as bogus. When his car is returned, the fuel mileage is the same as any other car on the lot.

What happened?

It's really simple. His car came equipped with a secret experimental carburetor which somehow escaped from the research lab and was installed on a production car. The lab tracked down the car and uses subterfuge to retrieve the Wonderjet. The bastards.

When I first heard this story, around 1970, it was a Ford pickup. In 1980, it was a Chevrolet. The last time someone told me this story, was 1989 and it involved a 1978 Oldsmobile 88. This time there was a twist. The car owner had heard the story of the Wonderjet and was wary when the dealer called and wanted him to bring it back in for service. He never took it back. According to my informant, somewhere in Baton Rouge, there is an 88 Oldsmobile, still chugging along, getting 50 mpg.

 

[dockeen]

One of the benefits of getting older is you get to see multiple revisions of this stuff pop up like the Proctor and Gamble story.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

In 1959 BMC produced a 1000cc engine and placed it in cars like the Morris Minor and Austin Healy Sprite and later in an MG mini model. It delivered about 40 mpg. I know because we had a Morris Minor 1000. It weighed in at about 1700 lbs and the body of the car had an almost cartoonish look, but handled extremely well and cost less than a dollar a pound.

In view of Derec 'shuddering to think what else I've owned' in response to my statement of satisfaction with the efficiency and durability of my large van, I am perhaps one of the few other Americans in this thread that has had extensive experience with the BMC 948-1275 series of engines, as a former owner of '59 & '61 'Bug Eye' Sprites as well as a 1974 MG Midget as my daily driver commuter vehicles for years.
(the point being, I am actually very familiar with such very small and economical vehicles -and their inherent limitations, as that is what I by personal choice lived with for years)
I really enjoyed driving my BMC toys, but on a dollar-per-mile basis, comparing all the costs of ownership, over the long haul, I'd guess one of my big old vans would prove to be at least 6x more durable, trouble free, and less expensive, as well as being far and away more practical in everyday use. How many MG's do you think ever exceeded 500k miles? None of mine made it to 100.

ETA. And speaking of shuddering ....one has to personally experience the 'thrill' of driving a 43hp 30" high 'automobile' on a up-grade _peddle to the metal, with a semi traveling 70+ closing the gap by the second. Thrilling hardly describes it.
Been there done that (way too many times), no more.

 

[steve_bnk]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...XL1-does-300-MILES-gallon-looks-cool-too.html


...The car's fuel efficiency of 313miles per gallon compares favourably with Toyota's Prius, whichtypically does 44mpg in city driving conditions and Ford's Fiesta,which does 31mpg on average...'



Water injection has been around sinceat least the 70s. You might still be able to buy kits and plans for >100mpgcarburation/fuel injection.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I am curious, does every car in a family of 43 have to carry 4? Am I atypical in that I drive the majority of the miles in my family, and most of those are with me in the car alone. So assuming that one can have more than one car per family, wouldn't it make sense to have one vehicle that doesn't have to carry 4?

Yeah, it would help if our system were geared to make extra cars cheaper. Thoughts?:

1) If you have more cars on your policy than drivers then you pay the insurance costs (other than comprehensive--a parked car can still be stolen etc.) only for the most expensive ones.

2) I'm not sure on the DMV side but something similar would make sense.

The current system makes it cheaper to have one car that does anything you need with any frequency than to have one big and one small.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

The current system makes it cheaper to have one car that does anything you need with any frequency than to have one big and one small.

The reason the Savana is our family 'all purpose vehicle'. It can carry one _or a dozen passengers (have additional removable seating for when needed)
When the costs of purchase + upkeep + depreciation + insurance for an additional vehicle are added up, no amount of gas savings could ever justify all these additional expenses, even if it used no gas at all. (already have three HD vans, and three trailers on our insurance)

 

[Derec]

Yes. You seemed to doubt it was possible for a hybrid to weigh so little.

Nay. The author thought the exotic, lightweight materials were just window dressing because the car weighed so much. The reason the car weighs what it does is the ~300 lbs (estimated) of batteries that partially offset the savings from carbon fiber etc. Btw, the nice thing about having a light-weight structure and batteries is that you can position them low in the car to lower the center of gravity and improve stability.

We'll see. The problem with hyper mileage is the issues regarding utility.

You don't have to apply technology as rigorously as you do in a concept vehicle. Engineering trade-offs will always be made. But you can still significantly improve overall fleet mileage.

You can get a car to run on solar power, but good luck being able to put a family of 4 in it.

Pure solar is not feasible for a two seater neither because of low energy density and vagaries of weather, shade and sun angle. The experimental solar race cars were single seaters with huge canopies and very thin tires for a reason.

What makes more sense with decreasing solar panel prices is to integrate solar as auxiliary power source in cars like Leaf and Volt. Leaving it in the sun overa workday should supply a couple of extra miles of range for "free".

Personally, I like seeing the 40 to 50 mpg fleets out there. That is double what cars were, and helps to dramatically lower our use of gasoline in the US.

40-50 mpg is pretty good for production cars right now.

 

[travc]

Yeah, it would help if our system were geared to make extra cars cheaper. Thoughts?:

1) If you have more cars on your policy than drivers then you pay the insurance costs (other than comprehensive--a parked car can still be stolen etc.) only for the most expensive ones.

2) I'm not sure on the DMV side but something similar would make sense.

The current system makes it cheaper to have one car that does anything you need with any frequency than to have one big and one small.

I totally agree. It would be great if everyone could have easy and affordable access to a big vehicle when they need it and an small one when appropriate.

We're currently shopping for a new car, and are probably going to buy a small SUV (Subaru Forester looks pretty good, according to Consumer Reports it gets 26MPG overall, 18/35 city/highway). We'd really like a 7 passenger vehicle for when familiy visits and such, but they are just too expensive and inefficient.
Eventually we'll probably buy a second car, and get something small and efficient (still 4 seater though)... maybe even an all electric.

Annoyingly, I've been putting off getting a new car for several years now, because I know that there is better technology coming along. The pace has picked up, but it is still annoyingly slow. If I wait another year or two...

PS: On the 50 MPG thing. If you remember that the distance driven is relatively inelasitc (in the economic sense), then gallons-per-mile (or gallons per 100 miles) is a more appropriate measure than MPG. Going from 10 to 20 MPG is a much bigger reduction in fuel use than going from 40 to 50 MPG. Getting bigger vehicles up to the 30 MPG range and sedans to the 40 or 50 MPG range would be pretty great, and we're very close to being there.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

I must concede here fellows that I live on a farm in a rural area and most of my mileage is accumulated on long expressway trips hauling large loads, or occasionally with that 12' load space holding a king size bed that combined with a rest area or truck stop eliminates $$$ motel bills.

But every person and family has their driving environment and personal circumstances and needs.
There have been times when not wanting to drive or locate parking for my huge van in a congested city, I have borrowed my niece's Subaru Forester, or rented a Ford Escape for a weekend jaunt.
(actually renting the Escape was economical enough that we ended up keeping it for 2 weeks)

Thought to add, if you are considering purchase of a new vehicle, locating and renting that model for a few weeks is great way to find out if it pleases you, before committing to signing a sales contract on a new car that you may not be entirely familiar with the quirks and deficiencies of.


.

 

[RavenSky]

Hmmm. if I had the choice in a matchup between my 5,567 lbs. GMC Savana 2500 LWB, and a 1700 lb tin can, I know which one I'd rather be behind the wheel of.

Strawman response. Large gas-guzzler or small energy-efficient vehicle, it depends on how the vehicles are built.

 

[Derec]

I am curious, does every car in a family of 43 have to carry 4?

Yes, but that's a big family.

Am I atypical in that I drive the majority of the miles in my family, and most of those are with me in the car alone. So assuming that one can have more than one car per family, wouldn't it make sense to have one vehicle that doesn't have to carry 4?

Well I would say that most people looking for a two seater would opt for a roadster, even if it is a relatively inexpensive one like a Miata or something.

- - - Updated - - -

I must concede here fellows that I live on a farm in a rural area and most of my mileage is accumulated on long expressway trips hauling large loads, or occasionally with that 12' load space holding a king size bed that combined with a rest area or truck stop eliminates $$$ motel bills.

Unless you go up and down hills a lot the weight is secondary anyway because on expressway the speed is pretty constant and the car mostly works to overcome drag and rolling resistance.

Thought to add, if you are considering purchase of a new vehicle, locating and renting that model for a few weeks is great way to find out if it pleases you, before committing to signing a sales contract on a new car that you may not be entirely familiar with the quirks and deficiencies of.

Of course, the makes and models in major rental fleets are limited so it helps if you are shopping for one of those, but in general good idea I think.

 

[+or-1]

I buy gas for my Chevrolet Volt on average once every three to five months. Of course, my electric bill has gone up very nearly $11 a month.

VW does make a production car that has has been available in Europe since the mid-2000s that gets 65+ mpg (of diesel). They don't believe there's a market in the US and they're probably right. IIRC it's only available with a stick.

 

[Derec]

I totally agree. It would be great if everyone could have easy and affordable access to a big vehicle when they need it and an small one when appropriate.

Well if your need for a bog vehicle was rare renting would be most economical, not?

We're currently shopping for a new car, and are probably going to buy a small SUV (Subaru Forester looks pretty good, according to Consumer Reports it gets 26MPG overall, 18/35 city/highway). We'd really like a 7 passenger vehicle for when familiy visits and such, but they are just too expensive and inefficient.

Subarus seem pretty good. Have you considered a hybrid SUV though?

Eventually we'll probably buy a second car, and get something small and efficient (still 4 seater though)... maybe even an all electric.

Yes, range anxiety is greatly diminished when it's the second car in the family.

Annoyingly, I've been putting off getting a new car for several years now, because I know that there is better technology coming along. The pace has picked up, but it is still annoyingly slow. If I wait another year or two...

Well development cycles in cars are much longer than say electronics. I would think that would diminish this kind of angst.

PS: On the 50 MPG thing. If you remember that the distance driven is relatively inelasitc (in the economic sense), then gallons-per-mile (or gallons per 100 miles) is a more appropriate measure than MPG.

Europeans use something like that (L/100km). The thing is that because the two have a 1/x-like relationship as one goes toward 0 the other goes toward infinity. Instantaneous mpg of an idling, stationary car is 0, instantaneous L/100km is infinity. So I guess both have advantages and disadvantages.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I am curious, does every car in a family of 43 have to carry 4? Am I atypical in that I drive the majority of the miles in my family, and most of those are with me in the car alone.

Well, a car that can carry 4 is a rather nebulous thing. You can go anywhere from a Ford Fiesta to a Dodge Intrepid. I love the Fit. Fits four rather comfortably, good deal of utility (has a bunch more room than you'd expect), really good mileage (now it is warmer again, getting the 40+ easily again in local driving), and gets the job done for a really reasonable price.

Strawman response. Large gas-guzzler or small energy-efficient vehicle, it depends on how the vehicles are built.

It also indicates a bit of apathy about people in smaller cars.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The reason the Savana is our family 'all purpose vehicle'. It can carry one _or a dozen passengers (have additional removable seating for when needed)
When the costs of purchase + upkeep + depreciation + insurance for an additional vehicle are added up, no amount of gas savings could ever justify all these additional expenses, even if it used no gas at all. (already have three HD vans, and three trailers on our insurance)

Upkeep and depreciation are more a matter of how far it's driven. Having extra cars won't mean any more total miles.

 

[Bronzeage]

Hmmm. if I had the choice in a matchup between my 5,567 lbs. GMC Savana 2500 LWB, and a 1700 lb tin can, I know which one I'd rather be behind the wheel of.

This is a common misconception. The injury rates for people in an SUV and a compact car are not very different. The feeling of safety which one gets from riding higher in a larger vehicle is an illusion., It is the kind of illusion which is quickly dispelled when the thing turns sideways and the high center of gravity allows it to roll three or four times before coming to a stop.

 

[Jarhyn]

Or the game theoretic truth that if less people drove such monsters, they would be much safer in the tiny little cars. Why expose others to a 2 ton vehicle when a .85 ton vehhicle means less kinetic energy all around. By lowering the mean vehicle mass, you lower the perceived risk of the presence of high vehicle masses.