Who needs to be "green" when you can go really, really fast? Well, Shelby Supercars figures it can have it both ways, with an all-electric version of the Ultimate Aero, the Ultimate Aero EV. Seeing how the Ultimate Aero is already the world's faster production car (at least officially, sorry Buggati), they don't see it as much of a leap of faith for this new version to carry that mantle into the electric space: "I think we can do it faster, leaner and cleaner than any other manufacturer," says the ever-modest SSC founder Jerod Shelby. The new car will be powered by a single 373kW electric motor, with a dual-motor "high performance" version being considered, which should give its gas guzzling sibling some serious competition around the track. Testing will begin in February next year, with full production supposed to commence in Q4 2009.
[Thanks, Yossi]
posted Jul 18th 2008 9:52AM
woooooooooooooooooooooooooow nice i'm so horny
Wow, another super expensive electric car. I am so happy for rich people, maybe I will get them a congratulations card. (cause you know they are the ones suffering) :)
Maybe if you'd stop buying rich people congratulations cards, you'd be rich too. :P
Yes because god knows the rich people are the ones suffering from these spiking gas prices....
i' mean look at the car man isnt it ....woooooooooow☺
I'm no engineer - but I've never fully understood why it has to cost so much to make a sleek car. Seems like someone could make a sleek car and sell tons of them cheap and make some serious money. What's the problem?
Can I call it ugly? Even if it's not?
@BigD: Can I low rank you?
Well, honestly, it doesn't; there have been sleek cars available comparatively affordably. But sleekness can also be one more tool in your price-discrimination scheme. After all, since even rich folk mostly don't drive at 150mph, looks are really a lot of what they gain from there mega-spendy car. As an automaker, you'd hate it if someone who could afford a racecar bought a runaround because it looks just as nice, and he's got fuzz-fear.
Sexy, but not helping if it's over 100 grand like Tesla.
Actually, I disagree with you. Yes, in the beginning, an expensive car will not be affordable to the masses. It won't be a viable mass-production vehicle. But these types of projects help generate interest and capital in order to further R&D. If no one starts the ball rolling, we are all left idling in combustion engines.
The expensive vehicles are experiments that allow fine-tuning of concepts that can be used later on. Ferrari, Lambo, Bugatti, they all do it. Some will argue "well, the Bugatti is being sold at a profit loss" which might be true, depending on which development costs you factor in. But it was not a profit driven model: it was a "look what we can do with technology" project. Some small part of the tech from that vehicle will end up in another Volkswagen/Porsche/Audi product, if it hasn't already.
Once they refine the technology and scale it down for affordability, we will have accessible "everyday" cars that are powered by alternative means.
Will it help if its over 200 grand?
@Rogue_Genius
In theory, that's what is supposed to happen, but in reality, automakers are in business to make a quick buck and not necessarily in it to evolve the automobile to it's most efficient form.
The fact is, there are higher profit margins in these types of cars, period. It is more cost-effective for small automakers to produce a high priced automobile, with sex appeal and low volumes, than to produce a more modest automobile with lower price tags and high volumes.
The push toward greater fuel economy (which includes electric vehicles) has more to do with how far/long can you go, and for how much, not how fast and sexy can I do so. The most successful automobiles are the ones that look and feel like those most of us are already driving (ie, Toyota Prius, Ford Escape).
@jaime that is where you and the automakers are wrong my friend.... Just because we want an EV it doesn't mean we want to drive an ugly one. Its that mentality that is leading to all these cars that are hideous to be created thinking "It doesnt matter if its sexy or not as long as it takes you from A to B".. well excuse me but I like to drive in style and im sure alot of us do. What is under the hood has nothing to do with making the exterior ugly. Those are 2 different things.
Does look like WM 6.1 tough
@rogue,
You're missing the point, this was an entirely self-centered post, where I cannot afford a $100,000 car, and therefore, this car is not helping me get into a nice EV. Looks like the Aptera for me.
My bad duff, please don't let me interrupt your pity party for one :D LOL In all seriousness, I did overlook your humor. Thanks for the heads up.
@Rogue_Genius
I agree with you entirely. In fact, look at the VW Phaeton. That engine model is based off the one in the Bugatti, at least the best upgrade version is. And by the way, Engadget spelled Bugatti incorrectly; it's not "Buggati" it's Bugatti. But I'll fogive you, Engadget, because you guys are the best and you apologized for the horrid miscalculation that led to the incredibly awesome Bugatti's incorrect classification as second-fastest production car.
why isnt anyone making anything practical?
practical as opposed to the world's fastest electric car, the Buckeye Bullet =D
Because to be practical something has to be affordable, and current battery only technology isn't. Savings on fuel cannot yet offset the additional cost of the vehicles, so the technology is relegated to expensive toy status.
It's not as bad as it sounds, though. Technology is rapidly improving and coming down in price. Within the next 1-2 years we'll see some legitimate plug-in hybrids, which offer many of the advantages of electric vehicles without abandoning the strengths of the internal combustion engine.
I suspect it'll be 10 years before we see an affordable all electric car with mass market appeal, though, depending largely on fuel prices.
It's still hideous. And it's Bugatti, by the way.
Put me in for one, no make that two. Gotta have something to drive on the weekends!
Hmm nice,
i bet its weird driving at those speeds tho with no noise.
Oh, you'd have noise. But it would be mostly noise from the tires on the road, and the wind rushing by, and objects whipping past, and bugs getting rapidly flattened against the windshield, and other cars' horns blaring, and the multiple police sirens wailing behind you. But there would be noise.
hopefully it wouldnt be the uber-gay sounds of simulated combustion engine noise a la tesla and pimp my ride.
Sweet, just as long as these don't explode like laptops.
Or like iPods.
Too bad it looks like some high school kid's graphic interpretation of what the Lamborghini Diablo 5.0 should look like. Absolutely hideous.
LOL
So true.
It's so fugly I actually feel embarrassed for them. Was it designed by the owners teenage son?
Love the idea!
Hate the kit-car look.
I don't know what Ferrari's profit margin is, but I often think there's got to be plenty of room in a $300K car for a really sweet battery and loads of electric HP instead of some monkey-made engine.
Don't you have to build the car before you can claim worlds fastest electric car? Such as the Buckeye Bullet, which currently holds National and International electric land speed records
http://buckeyebullet.com/history.htm
Expect to see some sort of hybrid/electric Ferrari production car in the next 5 years or so. With Formula 1 moving to require Kinetic Energy Recovery systems on all of the cars, starting next year, you will now have the best and brightest minds in the automotive world trying to figure out how to squeeze the most energy out of the lightest weight batteries and motors possible.
Bugatti! Learn to spell damnit!
Sweet, now I just need two of these and I can build a full size slot car race track!
Wow, perfect for those 2-lap "endurance" races! Something tells me this beast will need more than a 12-second PIT to recharge.
Why? If they can change a tire in four seconds I'm sure they can swap out a battery pretty quickly as well. The Tesla does 0-60 in 4 seconds and still has a range of 200 miles, which should be good for a couple hundred laps.
Yeah, we get it. This car probably isn't the best choice for a drive from New York to Los Angeles, but if you can afford this car I'm going to go out on a limb and say you can probably afford alternate transportation.
@Michael -- I'd like to see the data from Tesla that says their car will run for 200 miles "flat out" -- exactly what you'd be doing in the Ultimate Aero EV. That range probably dwindles to somewhere in the 40-50 mile neighborhood, at best.
And to Volker's point (below), this car will be far from green. But then again, that's probably the last thing on the mind of anyone who would buy this vehicle anyway. Saying that the EV is a "green" car is equivalent to following Jeremy Clarkson's recent advice to buy an M3 over a Prius for fuel economy (watch their track run from earlier this season).
Kudos to SSC for their triumph with the Ultimate Aero. One final thought, though. For argument's sake, let's say that the EV is a "green supercar." Do you think that SSC will ever sell enough EVs to have a positive environmental impact on all the carbon-producing waste they will go through in engineering the car in the first place?
Ascari > Bugatti > Shelby
Aside from it being Bugatti... "world's faster production car." Yeah. Hate to be a jerk, but I think you're looking for "world's fastest."
Well, actually, even though I think fastest is what you meant, faster does indeed work. So I'll just go ahead and low rank myself since I can't delete it.
I wonder what the great JC will make of this..
Shelby? ... no...
♥
will anyone ever do the "Most usable electric car" ??
Its called a G-Wiz
http://www.g-wiz.org.uk/
Seems other people caught the errors, too!
1.) It's "Bugatti" and not "buggati"
2.) "world's faster" should read "world's fastest"
This is how all technology starts. First the really high end expensive stuff comes. Then with what they learn during development, the lower cost stuff comes.
This is a good thing, we'll be seeing lower cost EVs in no time.
Sweet, now instead of spening $60 to fill up your car, your going to spend $60 on electricity for one charge, that's probably going to get you about 30 miles. Looks okay but shouldn't we be focusing on getting affordable electrics cars to the masses not just the rich?
Electrical cars is just stupid.
A more then great idea in theory. But in reality, it doesn't work so well. Sorry but alternative fuels are the future. The electrical car will always stay a dream.
wow, that's some insightful shit there karl
Ya, electric cars are a waste of money. We should really be spending the money on education. If you had passed 4th grade you'd know that it's "electric cars ARE stupid" not "electric cars is stupid"
somebody get this guy a nobel prize... what a break through in our way of thinking. I'll never live my life the same way again!
Don't be a Luddite.
Karl is stupid and angry. That makes me happy.
Well, is an 373kW electric motor really green? It just does not burn fossil fuel itself, but the fossil fuel will be burnt in a power plant. :/
You guys missed the part where they make the ridiculous claim that the car can drive for years without having to be recharged.
I noticed that too; "While final specifications are yet to be fully disclosed, the company claims the drive train under development employs a revolutionary new technology that will allow the car to travel for extended periods - years, in some cases - without needing to be recharged."
What kind of crazy snake oil is that? I mean, lets try to remain in reality here.
so is this company in no way affiliated with the REAL Shelby Cars, ala Carroll Shelby?
If not, this Jerod guy is as annoying as Subway's Jared.
That's the equivilent of 500hp but with the torque maxing at zero RPM (a property of electric motors versus ICE engines). The acceleration is going to be amazing. Wonder what Shelby and Co. are going to do to get that power to the ground in a predictable way. I can imagine the engineers going 'round back of the office just to smoke some more tires...
Ummm.... not really. The torque is constant (or quite near it) up to a certain RPM; above that, the power is nearly constant.
Looking at a theoretical diagram, it's perfectly flat, and saying it peaks at zero is as valid as any other point in the flat range, but it's no peak. In practice, difficulties controlling about zero RPM gives most motors a very broad, rounded low-speed torque peak between zero and rated speed, and then falls off into the constant-power region.
SSC's only product is a $600k chro-molly kit car (complete with Ford Focus headlights) with a giant, gasoline 1000 hp engine that probably needs its own Iranian oil tanker to fuel it. Its state of the art for 1980. Why should we believe that they can achieve what they claim?
This is getting ridiculous. A company puts out a press release claiming that its going to do something fantastically green, and the media jumps. How many companies have claimed to do (insert ridiculously unrealistic accomplishment), thrown in some pretty computer renderings (though in this case, they haven't even done that; the picture provided in this story is the gas-powered Aero - one of the ugliest, Diablo-ripoffs to hit the road), then sat back, waiting for the VCs to call and give them some first-round funding love? Until they've at least built a test mule, why make an announcement, much less report it?
{does a Google image search for "ultimate aero interior"}
Bwa-ha-ha--ha-ha--ha-ha--ha-ha--ha!!!!!
Hey, I can just see David Hasselhof driving one of these... in the eighties:
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh97/aleq_mbstek/Tumbler-SSCUltimateAero.jpg
Shelby (not Carol Shelby) is the owner of SSC, SSC is building this car
Yep, saw that. The headline could have been more clear Engadget :-)
The Bugatti Veyron will always be superior to the Ultimate Aero. Not only is the Aero's body design unnatractive, the Aero's interior is one of the worst car interiors I have EVER SEEN. It doesn't deserve the title of "world's fastest production car". It is most definitely the world's ugliest supercar.
so im assuming they mean the "world's fastest electric car you can buy"
because unless it plans on having a top speed of 321mph, which is the buckeye bullet's (the current landspeed record holder for the fastest electric car) this shelby isn't gonna be the world's fastest electric car
To put it into perspective, you can be very comfortable using a 5 - 8kW solar array to power your house. But then houses can't slam you into your seat and cause the world around you to red-shift as you accelerate into traffic. Better have good brakes...
give me my electric vehicle already, i don't care about the horse power it can produce. my everyday route on the island is less than 10 miles, give me my electric vehicle already. Automobile industry are you listening? Do something about it!!
Yes, but will it make fake engine noises?
another example of a hideous american car.