Google.org invests $2.75M in Aptera Motors
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted Jul 24th 2008 11:04AM
posted Jul 24th 2008 11:04AM
[Via SMASHgods; Thanks, Jason]
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
Cool, the future is getting here even sooner.
The future is kinda fugly.
I'd say the future is still approaching at the same rate.
I'd say the future doesn't require number plates.
Where we're going, we don't need roads.
i agree it looks ugly!
if they cant make it sexy, please please dont make it ugly.
Nice Back to the Future reference....
I don't think it looks that ugly, it looks futuristic and a little like eve from Wall-e.
"Baby girl im tellin you, I got spinnin rims underneath these wheel covers, dont trip..."
the power...is yours!
Low ranked? I just meant the car looked like it's from the future.
HOOPER, you must have missed the anti-idiom regulation passed here on Engadget a bit back.
AHAHAHAHA RIGGS
I guess that takes the term 'concept car' to a whole new level.
That car design makes me want to play Stunt Race FX for SNES
That car design makes me wonder how the hell they're going to get Euro NCAP certification. The prongy bit at the back would be perfect for spearing pedestrians whilst reversing...or spearing the face of idiots who drive right up your bumper.
easy mr puff, they could just make it a blinking light thats so friggin bright that it blinds the people
oh wait that wouldn't help either lol
quote: "Stunt Race FX...the graphics utilizing the super FX chip are outsatnding!" lol.
Are my eyes wrong or does this thing looks pretty wide? How will you park it?
@ OGHowie
VERY CAREFULLY.
All 3 wheeled vehicles in the US are classified as motorcycles.
YOU ONLY NEED A REAR LICENSE PLATE FOR MOTORCYCLES.
YOU ONLY NEED A REAR LICENSE PLATE FOR MOTORCYCLES.
YOU ONLY NEED A REAR LICENSE PLATE FOR MOTORCYCLES.
That pic above does not really give a good view of the rear, Here is a rear view pic:
http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/apterabackwingslights.jpg
and an interior view pic
http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/apterainterior.jpg
Also the aptera comes with front airbags and has been front-end crash tested. If you're in Cali go to the aptera website and reserve one! They go on sale around November this year!!
@j_g_puff -
For now, only on sale in California. So, perhaps they aren't worried about it.
Why does the car look like that? Have they learned NOTHING from Tesla?
No, because Aptera Motors' car is chock full of awesome! Breath it all in! The future is nigh!
Its shaped like that to give it the smallest possible coefficient of drag. Smaller COD means less wind resistance giving you better fuel economy (hence it scoring over 230mpg)
Shape does have its downfalls though, gives next to no aerodynamic downforce so it will be next to impossible to build a performance car shaped like that
Seriously, get over yourself. Function over form. I don't care if it's shaped like some sort of phallic symbol, I care that it gets 230+ mpg.
And I kinda think that it looks a whole lot like the Jetsons. Kinda ironic that the "future" gadgets from the 60's and 70's would look so close to the final product.
actually the future is relative. if you rush towards the future, then the future rushes towards you.
mike10010100: "I care that it gets 230+ mpg."
Actually it doesn't. A gallon of gas will "only" get it 130 miles. They get the higher figure by factoring in a fully charged battery--by their calculations the vehicle would get nearly infinite gas mileage on a two mile trip. While this might be technically true as it would use little to no gas, obviously this is deceptive because it completely ignores the energy and expense used to charge the battery.
It's still an extremely efficient vehicle. I'm not sure why they feel the need to exaggerate their claims.
are you saying the Tesla Roadster is ugly? blaspheme!
"I don't care if it's shaped like some sort of phallic symbol..."
Okay, well, that's where I kinda draw a line.
@Michael
The energy and expense to charge the battery is negligible. Electricity here on the west coast is much cleaner than on the east coast and middle america.
Interestingly enough, the front end has also been designed to force energy(and the twisted metal) under the vehicle in a head-on collision. "The seats and flooring are made from recycled materials and organic dyes, and no heavy metals or plasticizers are used in the dashboard or door panels."
http://stanford.wellsphere.com/healing---recovery-article/aptera-typ-1---300-mpg?/23495
Now if only I could afford one.
"I don't care if it's shaped like some sort of phallic symbol,"
Hey guys, check it out! I just bought a new 2011 Aptera Dick!
Admit it, you care.
"Hey guys, check it out! I just bought a new 2011 Aptera Dick! Admit it, you care."
I do, but only because the shrinkage in cold weather would be a bummer.
"I don't care if it's shaped like some sort of phallic symbol"
I've heard this car gets good gas mileage...
http://clipswtf.com/ssimages/1613.JPG
Too bad it's only in California. Of course, I have to wonder how well these would perform in the northeast during the winter.
ditto. i was bummed when i emailed them and they said they wouldnt even ship it if i offered because they have no way of servicing in the east. this vehicle is so kick arse its not even funny. id gladly trade in my gas guzzling ml for that.
I think if you replaced the wheels with sleds and the motor with some Huskies, you'd have a very enjoyable commute. Until the dogs started gnawing on each other.
I'm reminded of the countless times people said "Don't buy into the hype about this 'Google'. They're just a search engine". Then they start working on cell phones. Then THIS odd-looking fellow.
Just to be clear, it's a Google.org donation, probably to further their eco-friendly image and help stimulate public interest in this type of innovation.They also sponsor a competition to see who can build a rocket to the moon and transmit a gig of data back, etc...
No one at the Googleplex is "working on this car."
Google = Buy n Large
So true, so true...except that it's completely not.
Walmart is more like Buy N Large
Funny... I thought Sam's was BuyNLarge... *shrug*
Walmart == Sam's Club
WHERE THE HELL should we put our license plate?
New York State Law says you have to have a plate mounted on the FRONT AND REAR of the vehicle.
Not for motorcycles. This car gets lumped into the motorcycle category.
it's classified as a motorcycle type vehicle, so no need for a front plate i believe. i admit, it's ugly as fugg, but hey for 230mpg...
There goes the COD...
Also its only being released in california so I dont think their worrying about new york...
California has the same law, so I'm sure they're working on that.
@ Harley
So that's how they got around the safety requirements for front side and rear crashes, claim it's a motocycle
Whoah whoah... hang on a second...
THIS is what you feel the need to compain about? where the license plates are going to go?!?
The law will be changed once Google acquires California and New York State.
They don't "claim" it's anything other than what it is (An electric vehicle).
Almost every state classifys 3 wheeled trike vehicles as motorcycles. The T-Rex and all kinds of other vehicles already fall into that bracket.
If you visit the Aptera site they spend a LOT of time talking about how much rigor went into meeting or exceeding CAR crash test standards.
If you're like me and spend $500 a month on gas (even in a car that gets 30mpg) I don't care if they spraypaint this thing poo brown - I'll take one in a heartbeat.
i think everyone would know who you were.
The same place you put it on your Ferrari.
I still cant believe they expect you to drill holes in your brand new $1/4M car to put on the license plate
+1 karma point for google
I'd hate to be the first do die when someone runs a red light and smushes me... but then again, I'd be dead, so would I really hate it?
you would hate it just before dying.
$2.75m deserves press coverage and publicity? Really? With all the money Google has, and makes every year, $2.75m is a crumb. That's like me saying, "oh yeah Mr Reporter, I'm going to give five cents to the American Red Cross this year. That should help them reach their financial goals."
Also, what is it with companies always coming out with ridiculous looking concept cars? No wonder the world never takes them seriously. I got, that's because most of those "concept cars" never see the light of day in the real world.
it probably looks ridiculous 'cuase it's ridiculously aerodynamic, which would play a big part in fuel savings. Not to mention its weight.
Well when you give $2 mil then you can get your own story too.
They don't "claim" it's anything other than what it is (An electric
vehicle).
Almost every state classifys 3 wheeled trike vehicles as motorcycles.
The T-Rex and all kinds of other vehicles already fall into that
bracket.
If you visit the Aptera site they spend a LOT of time talking about
how much rigor went into meeting or exceeding CAR crash test
standards.
If you're like me and spend $500 a month on gas (even in a car that
gets 30mpg) I don't care if they spraypaint this thing poo brown -
I'll take one in a heartbeat.
PS if you're concerned about the shape then deal with the reality of aerodynamics. My college professor built a car that got 100mpg in the '80's on a standard VW rabbit diesel engine - all of that gain came from low weight, low resistance tires and an aerodynamic shape.
They don't "claim" it's anything other than what it is (An electric
vehicle).
Almost every state classifys 3 wheeled trike vehicles as motorcycles.
The T-Rex and all kinds of other vehicles already fall into that
bracket.
If you visit the Aptera site they spend a LOT of time talking about
how much rigor went into meeting or exceeding CAR crash test
standards.
If you're like me and spend $500 a month on gas (even in a car that
gets 30mpg) I don't care if they spraypaint this thing poo brown -
I'll take one in a heartbeat.
PS if you're concerned about the shape then deal with the reality of
aerodynamics. My college professor built a car that got 100mpg in the
'80's on a standard VW rabbit diesel engine - all of that gain came
from low weight, low resistance tires and an aerodynamic shape.
won't be buying it...mostly because it reminds me of Casper.
I actually like the way it looks 30,000 is a bit high if it were 25 or less i would buy it for sure!
woohoo, I know one of the designers there!
Does it have an ipod/iphone hookup? If so, I'll be first in line. Actually, Apple should just make the iCar so I can wait in that line.
i hate you
Just wait until one rolls up to the Oscars and then we'll see how fugley it really looks
Seen it before, but it reminds me of the sperm that Stewie flew around in on Family Guy, so I'm all for it!
Clearly for city use only. I just can't see this car jockying for lane space on the turnpike surrounded by big SUVs and tractor-trailers riding your bumper at 75+ MPH.
People said the same thing about the smart car - unsafe because of it's size, city use only, etc. I see more and more of them everyday on the LIE.
Small != unsafe. Youtube smart car crash tests to see how well they hold up in a serious collision.
Getting hit by a truck is bad news regardless of what vehicle you're in.
Well, if anything good comes out of high gas prices it will be vehicles in mysterious future that get fantastic mileage (and not necessarily GAS mileage).
I think they should use a sphere for a back tire so that it can work sort of like a Dyson thus giving it more free movement. instant 180 degree turns any1?
The car could look a million times better and maintain a decent coefficient of drag. Fiat did it all the way back in '54 with their Turbina concept. They reached a Cd of 0.14 compared to the 0.11 of the Aptera.
Volkswagen's 1L concept also looked much nicer and achieved 235 mpg in their testing. Cd on the 1L is 0.159. So it goes to show that a car does not have to be absolutely ridiculous in design to achieve a decent coefficient of drag and maintain incredible mpg ratings.
Back to the drawing board I say.
Yes, it's ridiculous looking, but I think it's not so much to achieve the low CD, but rather, create exactly what everyone feels a futuristic vehicle should look like. As a fellow poster said, this looks like it came right out of the Jetsons. I guess it helps bring them attention and underlines how revolutionary this vehicle is, or give themselves an image of being revolutionary and futuristic.
I recall from an introductory aerodynamics class that many of those hand-drawn streamlined shapes of yore were actually not as efficient as they seem. In fact, some shapes that seem intuitively un-aerodynamic are in fact, aerodynamic, such as the knobs on some sort of whales fins as they help counter turbulent flows on the leading edge (I forget what exact term they used). So I would be more inclined to say that this vehicle is probably an exercise of function follows form.
I actually have a preorder for one. They're supposed to go into production by the end of the year, being available either this year or next. Also, the less the distance, the better your mileage. At about 50 miles between charges, the car runs almost exclusively on battery power. At 100 miles, you get about 300 miles to the gallon. At 300+ miles, you get about 150 miles to the gallon.
Also, it looks really, really cool. Like an iCar.
Impressive mileage (230+ MPG), Insulting price tag.
The design is certainly ahead of its time but not very pratfall for today’s roads.
Sorry to say we simply won’t see this one the road in the near future any time after that.
simply keeping it real.
Haha, this "motor vehicle" brings new meaning to the word "fugly"
I'd heard the 250+ mpg figure was achieved with a small and not certified for general automotive use diesel engine, and not for the gas burning one. That's a damned impressive number if true.
But I don't think it's at all accurate or honest to say "300 mpg....IF your average trip is less than x miles". When a mileage number is contingent on something like that, it's practically useless. As more plug-ins hit the market, the manufacturers or some regulatory body is going to have to standardize a system that tells people what kind of mileage to expect based on the average length of drive. Really, a graph would be best, but so many Americans are so stone dumb at math that wouldn't really catch on. Maybe just the pure electric range and then expected mileage with a depleted battery would suffice.
I am NOT hating on this car though, it's a phenomenal piece of work achieved entirely without esoteric or expensive and unobtainable technology. This car represents what American automotive ingenuity should look like. The designers sat down with the goal of building the most efficient car they could and they nailed it. Impractical if you need to carry more than one passenger, but the purity of vision it represents gets my respect. Too bad the average consumer will just go "this doesn't make me feel like my penis is bigger, do not want."
Why in the world does "Google.org" in the article NOT link to Google.org? Are you serious, Engadget?
Usually in-article links reference other Engadget articles, not external websites. External links are usually in the bottom of the article.
You know what this means? More people asking me to help them move, that's what.
Did anyone happen to notice where the spare tire gets stored? I wonder how hard it is to change one? I also wonder how well this car does on bumpy dirt road or on ice? Of course none of these questions prevents me from lusting after one of these just for the MPG.
Even if I could afford it, what would I do if it breaks?
I don't wnat to bring it to a mechanic. I'd be laughed at, and they'd be clueless.
I'd be scared of achieving lift on the highway.
230 mpg sounds great and would lower the gasoline bill, but I'm more worried about the $2000 a month electricity bill to recharge the thing everyday. Oh, and the blackouts from energy shortages as folks plug these things into the grid.
THAT is the general issue with Electric cars, especially for Californians.
But hey it's "green" so it must be good, right?
im going to laugh at those when i see them on street.
@ Crooked Style, you'll be walking in the street since you don't have the gas for your Gas Guzzler 5000.
wow
Hey, these babies are made right here in Carlsbad, CA! I work a few miles from them. Cool! I am going to be driving one of these some day, or something like it.
Why does "more MPG" always have to mean the same as "more ridiculous looking?"
How 'bout half the MPGs and half as ugly for a compromise?
I agree that the Aptera is definitely a love it or hate it design... I for one love it and have a reservation in (www.aptera.com). With that caveat... I think we should applaud google for their investment/donation (or whatever it was) rather than berate the amount.
Based on the cutting edge technology and designs coming from the current batch of automakers (with the possible exception of the GM Volt), if nothing else these alternative vehicle manufacturers will advance what is possible faster than any of the big boys. As an example take a look at the "plug in" 100mpg kits now available for the Prius which Toyota said were not technically or financially feasible. We'd still be waiting (and in fact still are waiting) for Toyota to release their own plug in Prius. For more possibilities check out the X Prize Competition contenders: http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/auto/prize-details/loi-contenders (of which Aptera is just one).
And as for the effects on the power grid of plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles... there is a huge surplus of power already in the grid available for overnight charging and for daytime charging capacity can be ramped up as more ev's come on the market. Electricity is a potentially "free" resource... no oil spills or oil wars required. Energy independence should be the "moon race" of our generation... it's just the right thing to do, whether you consider it from a national security, economic, or environmental point of view.