Although you can definitely
pre-order an Aptera if you're okay with space-aged design, Volkswagen is hoping to provide another option for those looking for ridiculous MPG and a little bit of normalcy in construction. Okay, so maybe the 1-Liter isn't exactly standard fare -- with its plastic / magnesium shell and all-glass roof -- but at least it packs four whole wheels and an iconic VW badge, right? According to
Motor Authority, the automaker will be producing said vehicle and pushing it to market as early as 2010, and while the minuscule engine will only take you to 75MPH, it will still seat two people -- one in front of the other, though -- and get around 235MPG. No word on a price or any of that good stuff, but we're hearing that they'll only be produced in "limited numbers" whenever they're launched.
[Via
EcoGeek, thanks Yossi]
posted May 9th 2008 9:18AM
Das.... Auto?
And you spell litre how?
It looks a lot like a Messerschmidt;
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Anl%3Aofficial&q=messerschmidt+car&btnG=Search+Images
@mymaclife:
Silly Americans, can't even spell the word "colour"
Come on Engadget.... Read the article.... and get it right!
"..its power source will be a one-cylinder engine displacing just 0.3L. Top speed will be 120km/h and consumption will fall around the 1L/100km mark (235mpg), reports AFX."
So much for 1 litre...
...and i bet it goes from 0-60 in 60 seconds!
Now that I will buy.
I totally agree. Very reminiscent of an early Porsche, but w/o a back seat (& a wonky passenger one) I can't do more than look.
@Anthony:
You do realise that a third of Porsche is owned by Volkswagen?
It's like staring at the 1950s and what they thought the 90s would look like.
Seriously, and who would have thought it was going to be fuel economy that would give us such strange looking cars.
Why do companies like VW even waste their time on this kind of concept? Isn't it well proven that with a aerodynamic design, tiny engine and light weight materials you can get 200+ MPG? We need usable cars that can get to 100, 200, 300 MPG, not underpowered sportster styled cars.
If, however, this is a stepping stone for bigger and better and more fuel efficient designs from VW, I'm all for it. But why try to productize it when it's clearly not ready?
Don't be a debby downer.
Please tell me how this car is unusable?
Your reply better not be "it's not an SUV."
What regularly mass produed car gets 200 MPG?
Now granted, a concept is nice, but I will get excited when it is available for a reasonable purchase.
M
1 liter isn't underpowered. There are loads of 1, 1.1 and 1.2 liter cars in the UK. They're nice and nippy and cheap to run/insure with lower road tax. I think they're great.
umm this isnt a concept car, they say its going to be available in limited numbers. which i have to say is disappointing but still you will be able to buy one. (maybe if your lucky)
My VW right now is 1.8 litres...
It's not skimpy whatsoever...
The Smart fortwo is only 1 litre too...
235 mpg is quite a claim though...
@Bakari
at least it's not an SUV.
Hah, it's all fine sticking a small engine into a ugly small car, but what happens when you wish to accelerate out of a crash-to-be for example? There wouldn't enough torque or acceleration, unless it has some crazy gearing numbers and/or really low weight.
When does accelerating -ever- get you out of a crash?
When you can overtake the idiots that are about to have an accident
Really? Accelerate out of a crash? I saw that in a James Bond movie a few times - featuring lots of cutaways and really cool music in the background, but in real life, you go "yikes" and BAM you're in it.
That's odd....I have avoided at least 3 accidents (none would have been my fault) because I was able to accelerate away from the other cars.
Of course, I do pay attention when I drive and I do not text while driving.
I personally accelerated out of crash just two weeks ago.
I was in the left lane passing two semi-tractor trailers. Something fell off of a car in front of the first semi and he locked up his brakes. I braked as well because it was unclear if the debris might also come into my lane. The second semi swerved into the lane behind me to avoid the first one and was bearing down on me fast. I got off the brakes and nailed the accelerator to pull away from the second semi (which obviously could not brake as hard as I had been just moments before).
Brian,
I'm texting and driving right now, you dont see me getting into an accide
I've accelerated out of a crash before. But usually the people pissing and moaning about small cars like this having no power or safety are the same people who buy a huge SUV because they think it keeps them safe from their own crappy driving.
Nevermind that most SUVs probably couldn't out-accelerate this thing, and they're CERTAINLY more lethargic. Nothing like missing a light because a line of clumsy, lumbering dinosaurs in front of you could barely get rolling before the light turned.
"Although you can definitely pre-order an Aptera if you're okay with space-aged design"
Space-aged design? We've been in the space age for 50 years. I think you're referring to the 50's (and prior) designs that speculated as to what space-age design would look like. A Hummer or a Prius may not look like a Flash Gordon Rocketship, but they're still space-aged design.
"A Hummer or a Prius may not look like a Flash Gordon Rocketship, but they're still space-aged design."
And they're both almost as ugly as this thing.
Seriously, if they want people to buy these things quit making them so ugly. Of course I agree that they may do this on purpose like one of the others have said just to be able to say that they tried to make a more fuel efficient vehicle but no one bought it.
At $6/gallon this would save me $400/month in gas, so as long as the payment is under that it’s a free car.
"1-Liter car" in this case has the meaning that it needs 1 liter of gasoline for 100 km. So saying a 1-Liter car should get around 235 MPG is not really additional information. Non-metric units :P
Doesn't 1 litre means it's a 1L engine?
In any case, I don't understand why it's so hard to take (for example in VW's case) something like Golf and just optimize it for better fuel consumption, whether it's by putting 1L engine, or by making it hybrid, or whatever else - why is every hybrid/electric/low-mileage car has to have some quirky and weird design? I'm all for interesting innovative designs (I actually think that in general cars look too similar) but when you're trying to bring new technology to the people you gotta put it in a familiar package - otherwise it's too much, too new, too fast. Use what works and what people like and you'll have easier time selling it, speaking of which...
What's with the limited production? If car companies are not willing to commit to fuel-saving cars then the people will never adopt them. Again, just stick this 1L engine in a golf and start producing them just like you do the golf - you might loose a few million on low sales for the first couple of batches but eventually it'll catch on.
This whole transition to hybrids and electrics and the like is way too slow, much slower than what the tech allows it. And why is that, 'cos the CEOs of these car companies are afraid that taking some risk might cost them their private jets. Idiots!
1 Liter = 0.2641721 (US) Gallons. 100 km = 62.13 miles. 100 km/L = ~235 mi/ga. So yes it is informative since they (and I) did the conversion for you.
Actually believe it or not, customer surveys have shown that the majority of green car buyers WANT strange looking cars that stand out. That's part of the reason why honda's accord hybrids have been discontinued. People like you and I just want efficient cars on the road, but aren't necessarily in the market to buy them, and may not be able to afford the premium placed on them. Those that can afford it, often want to make a statement.
No one likes it when a Bloody German is right, but in this case they are... Here, 1 Liter refers to the the concept of attempting to achieve 100Km per 1L of fuel. The engine itself will have a displacement of 0.3L.
no one likes it when a German is right?
You f*cking racist, please leave. The war was ages ago and germany has a green-incorporated government and generally a really nice populous.
@Leo: You're the racist by implying that Germans are a race. That's what Hitler did too. Aryan race, remember?
@ bloody german.
"1 litre car" means the cars valves have a 1 litre capacity .
yeah I'm clearly racist for DEFENDING germany and getting my terminology mixed up. Kill the messenger why don't you.
Do Want.
I prefer my Camel. No......Thank you, VW.
"First up Winterkorn stressed that the 1-Liter “would not be a best seller” and thus will only be produced in limited numbers."
Meaning: "We will produce only very few of them, for a ridiculous high price."
So that they can later say: "We tried! But the customer does not like our highly innovative environment-friendly cars."
And if you are ever in an actual collision with any other vehicle, the seats fold down to turn it into a ready-made coffin.
LOL!
LOL -- I really laughed out loud on that one...
Heheh +
Well, maybe if auto manufactures stopped producing friggin' tanks, or better yet if soccer moms and douche bags stopped buying them, you wouldn't have to worry about a bumper coming at you at face level. The potential for serious injury goes down if an accident involves two lighter cars as opposed to a light car and an Abrams.
So, if we get rid of all other cars on the road, this will be safe?
If you do some research you'll find that the magnesium shell and compact size of the car make it extremely safe.
"Despite the lightweight construction of all components, safety has been a major element in all phases of the development of the 1-litre car. For example, the concept vehicle's safety equipment includes anti-lock brakes, ESP electronic stability program and a driver's airbag. Deformation elements at the front end and the spaceframe construction provide impact and roll-over protection comparable to that of a GT racing car."
http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/top-vw-1-liter-car.htm
I think I'll stick with a Hayabusa powered smart for two. It may not get 235mpg, but it gets better mileage then my current car and can beat a Ferrari in a drag race.
In the event of an accident, yours turns into a meat grinder...
Handy!
j/k - great bike, but doesn't work for me...
what do you do when it's raining? snowing?
hey brian, he said hayabusa engine, the smart itself is pretty safe because it has a steel rollcage-like stucture around it
Well, let's just hope that it does not come with typical VW reliability, or lack thereof.
no electronics=reliable vw , i doubt this is going to be rolling supercomputer because of its emphasis on low wieght; btw volkswagen beetle still reliable after being a lifetime old
The beetle was never reliable, it was easily repaired. There's a huge difference.
Give me a Toyota or a Honda any day of the year.
I've got a Saturn SL1 that gets 40+ mpg's, why can't they just make that car again? Try to find a car that gets that kind of mileage now!!! We've gone backwards, we should be able to get 50+ mpg's no problem, why can't they do that??? They did 40+ mpg's 10 years ago!!
"Okay, so maybe the 1-Liter isn't exactly standard fare -- with its plastic / magnesium shell and all-glass roof -- but at least it packs four whole wheels and an iconic VW badge, right?"
Um, wrong, at least from what that picture shows. It seems to have only three wheels. Or were you including the spare? :-)
Why are people so scared of accidents? How many have you been in? Why not drive smart to limit your risk, and stop being such a scared little girl? Also of important note, big cars are statistically MORE dangerous for both their own occupants (very slightly), and much more so for occupants of other vehicles. So by purchasing your escalade, you've slightly lowered your own safety, and risked causing serious injury to others in the process. You're all idiots.
"big cars are statistically MORE dangerous for both their own occupants"
Reference please?
No, you're the idiot. I buy safe vehicles not because I'm a bad driver, but because of the huge numbers of OTHER people who're bad drivers.
Where does it say I have to put my life on the line to please you and make you feel better?
It looks like this car has three wheels to me, not four.
Well, that is interesting. But it has 4.
steering wheel?
Scooters can barely get 100 mpg with a 50cc engine, how is a 1 litre engine going to get 235 mpg? Plenty of 2 litre motorcycles don't get 235 mpg.
that 1 Liter means that it nips only 1 Liter per 100 km. That is the normal notation over here in "old Europe"
Germans don´t ask how far that thing goes with a given amount of Gasoline.
Gallons, Miles... funny american units system....
Slow and weird maybe but it just might work depending upon what kind of storage space it has. If you can get a family's week's shopping in the boot it will be a success. If it has enough storage space for a packet of biscuits and a can of coke then their are many far sexier alternatives that will do 0-60 mph in less than 5 seconds and still not use appreciatively high amounts of petrol.
Seriously. Have any of you ever been to England? Over here 'Gas' costs £1.10 -£1.20 per litre ($10.4 per gallon for all you guys across the pond). My car is like 12 years old and it is 1 1litre - loads of cars over here are. Am I missing something here or what?
Americans have very unrealistic expectations about what an automobile should be.
LOL your COUNTRY is like 100 miles wide! You could go from one end to the other and then back on a single tank. What would you need cheap fuel for? You go to the midwest US and see what alternatives there are for transportation. Everything is miles apart with nothing in between.
Americans aren't unrealistic, therpham, we just have to drive a lot more to get places than Europeans. We don't have neat things like widespread public transportation provided by our governments.
Before I moved to Seattle where the bus and monorail systems are actually pretty great, I lived in inland California where I'd have to drive a half-hour or farther to get anywhere - the grocery store, what have you - chances are if I was doing a jaunt like that, I'd want room for somebody to come with me and a trunk that would house enough food for the next couple weeks.
So, no, we just want something normally sized, fuel-efficient - not an SUV - just an average car.
I love America but America broke itself. Oil and car companies spent a lot of money lobbying congress during the last century to tear up railroad track and dismantle public tolleys and transportation because there were a waste of infrastructure space since gas was cheap and they wanted every American to have their own car. Now we are f-cked. gas is $4/gallon, our country is huge bigger than all of europe combined, and we have no public transportation to get from place to place really unless you want to hop on a greyhound or amtrak which are inefficient and expensive. Even then that dosn't work for commutes to work if you live in the burbs. it cost the oil and car companies plenty for all those years of lobbying and now they (well the oil companies at least) are receiving the benefits. They have america in their trap and there no way out and no alternatives.
America needs to use gas tax money to build a mass transportation infrastructure back, thats how you will fix gas prices. People then would not have to drive decreasing demand and decreasing price and also giving them an alternative to buying gas, like NYC with a 24/7 subway and buses there is no need to drive in the city per se. simple solution.But don't look at me I am a simple law student, I don't live in washington. Sure it will cost billions but so does fighting a war, giving aid to random countries who then use their resources against us, defending germany and japan so they dont need a defense budget and they can be the 2nd and 3rd largest economies in the world, etc Maybe we need to spend some money in this country on improving and updating infrastructure in addition of thinking up crazy car designs that will continue dependancy but not provide long term solutions.
That will never happen because big oil and politicians have too much riding on it not happening. The lack of restrictions on greed ( god bless capitalism, its the worse economic system except all the rest)have made to many of them rich and people keep voting for them for racial gender political affiliation or whatever and not demanding results and good governance. Now Americas chickens have come home to roost...
ohhhhhhhhh.. yo don't protest me bro
Looks like a 3 wheeler to me.... anyone?
Woops, you beat me to that question by a hair.
The writeup above says that it has four wheels, but the photos seem to show only three - can't tell for sure - and the story doesn't say. Anybody know for sure?
Actually the photo only shows two. I'm betting they save fuel by having the car balance on the passenger side tires.
Awesome, but why the "limited numbers"?
This planet needs many millions of inefficient cars replaced ASAP.
"ASAP"? Are the cars free? Or do you just expect everyone to run out and take on a 4-7 year debt on a depreciating asset just so you feel better?
0 to 60 in 4.6 sec...er...minutes. Woohoo!
If you can get a car seat in the back of it, I'm sold.
agreed, why must interesting vehicles have bad designs? This car is like a modern day geo metro, if thats the case, i hope to God that they change the design, i mean the delorean look is out already...
the desighner was a big fan of whacky races
Oh god....please make this and don't let me down like the bus concept.
This one packs 4 whole wheel? One's as a spare in the trunk? This one looks like a 3 wheeler to me!
If you look in the mirror behind this car as the ass of a motorcycle.... Pretty slim for 2 back wheels...
its definately 4 wheels. if you look at the back wheel arch , thats where the wheel is, there will be another whell arch on the other side.
@ Ken
"When measured directly north-south [the U.K] is a little over 1,100 kilometres (700 mi) in length and is a fraction under 500 kilometres (300 mi) at its widest"
So, you're a little off.
What midwest are you talking about, it takes me 1000 miles to drive home to NY from school in StL. Forget all the huge states like kansas and wyoming further west. I think you are off.
Is it possible to get an enviro-friendly vehicle that won't get me beat up for looking like a sissy? This look might go over in Europe or Japan, but no way on the US East Coast. Can't you just put a hybrid/green engine in a nice, normal looking Jetta? I might actually consider buying one then.
Ah yes, the east coast, where every SUV, no matter how girly (like a RAV4 or CR-V) has a brush guard on the front...
I have accelerated away from to-be crashes most definitely, and I personally think this is pretty cool!
Faslane
The world would obviously be much better off we were all driving small, light cars like this. Less weight means less impact in accidents as well.
The problem is who wants to drive this with all the big heavy steel cars on the road? I don't just mean Hummers and such, I mean what we all take for granted in basic automotive design today. I'm not passing moral judgement because cars were developed in a different time. But it unfortunately makes no sense from a big picture that in a world of rapidly increasing energy costs, we're all still pushing around thousands of pounds of unnecessary steel.
If it's any consolation...
1. The story is nine months old
2. Piech is no longer running VW--new boss, new plans
The story might be 9 months old, but this car is even older than that! This thing was originally presented years ago... SIX years ago, back in 2002. Piech supposedly drove this thing all the way from the factory to the annual shareholder's meeting.
I guess at some point somebody at VW decided they could use it to cash in on the green thing 6 years later.
It was really produced back in 1999, introduced in 2002 and being reshown now. I would gladly put around in this little car, but keep my V8 BMW for when I want to drive.
I wouldn't like my legs to be part of the front crumple zone.
The REAL problem is that most pollution is generated not by cars whizzing along, but sitting in traffic in cities or crawling along overladen highways. At those speeds, aerodynamics have very little effect on overall fuel consumption. The long-term answer is to find ways to consume little or no energy when the car is stationary, and for us as a race to find new ways of organising our societies.
Many of us who today commute will in the future be able to do our work without the need for daily travel. The internet is the great enable of telecommuting, and the future is in finding ways for people to travel less. Eliminating wasted travel time will enable us all to regain the leisure time that the pressures of modern life has eroded.
"Looks like a 3 wheeler to me"
I think the put the back wheels real close together
I'll believe 200+mpg when I see it. Ventureone is already about to roll out production of it's similiar vehicle, and it's only going to get 80mpg with 3 wheels.
Nobody's mentioned the Loremo? That seems like the best option of all of these. It's got four seats (granted, two are very small and rear-facing, but I used to love sitting in the rear-facing seats when I was young, watching the world in reverse), looks slightly less odd, gets 150 mpg, and has already been priced at $22,000. Damn reasonable if you ask me.
VW also has a Golf TDI/Hybrid in the wings for 2010, and that car can achieve 70mpg.
And unlike a Prius, Golf (rabbit) is actually fun to drive. People get all goo-goo for Hybrid Camrys/Priuses when there have been TDI Jetta. Golf, and Passats out for years that all achieve 40-50mpg. Go on craigs list and price out a 2004-2005 Passat TDI. Their residual value is HIGHER than the MSRP off the lot when they were new. That says something.