I think this is a great idea, of course you have to pick the right tool for the job. I drive a motorcycle to work everyday, so I'm not so sure that I would be opposed to having a car like this. Of course, I don't drive my Sportster on the highway either, even though some idiot may pull out on me one day and kill me on my 5 mile commute through town. Of course the speeds are slower in town, but it is still dangerous. I would actually feel safer in this car than on my motorcycle. I have had many cars, most of them smaller. SUVs have their place, and I have owned one of them too, I used it to tow my boat. This car would not be good for towing a boat, but that is not why they designed it. In China, they promote smaller cars, and the small cars are very popular. The way we promote bigger cars and speed (bigger is better) is why that mentality dominates here in the US. We need to change our way of thinking, and realize that there is an application for vehicles of every size, and choose our choice of transportation to fit the application. For commuting to work, an SUV is, < over engineering > the problem to detriment.
I disagree. The price seems reasonable for this stage of development. Smaller cars are just starting to see a resurgence in popularity. Batteries are improving-albeit slowly.
As a San Franciscan, I say driving skills surpass any size issues. Not having an accident is best. Driving oversized cars with the "at least I'm safe" attitude is dangerous for everyone.
I'm sure the electric taxi in China had real issues that had nothing to do with size.
Newer driving skills are needed for quieter cars and smaller cars. We don't realize how dependent our driving skills are on the loud motor or large presence. I'd like to see new driver's tests for anyone buying a smaller car-similar to motorcycle license testing.
It looks intersting, but all of the small cars follow the same design base. It would be good to see something really new. I'm just not Wowed.
I liked the video. The car spinning in place reminded me of a helicopter. The crash worthiness is really going to be the key. The concern stems from two area. One is the size, the second is the battery.
There was an article in an English language paper in China with an article about an electric taxi, made in China, that burst into flames right after being hit by a car. The driver and the two passengers were burned within seconds. In the US there is much more extensive crash testing (remember the Cehvy Volt that had a problem weeks after a crash test?).
The other fact is that smaller cars do not do well in crashes. Some friends of ours described how their daughter had an accident in a smaller (but not tiny) car vs. a medium size SUV. The smaller car was totaled. So, it is important to see those crash tests before buying such a vehicle.
In addition, the price seems high for what you get.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.