Although the swoopy
Aptera electric went up for
pre-orders back in October of 2007, we haven't really seen much of the futuristic car outside of the odd
Star Trek cameo. Hopefully that's about to change, though -- the company just rolled out the first pre-production example its flagship model, the 2e. The three-wheeled car gets the equivalent of 200mpg, and the company claims the lithium-ion battery pack will last for 100 miles on a single charge. Aptera isn't giving out final pricing information apart from "between $25,000 and $45,000" but it says over 4,000 potential customers have already signed up for a planned California-only October release. We'll see how it goes -- and we'd bet the folks at the
Automotive X-Prize are keeping a sharp eye as well.
posted Jan 23rd 2009 5:50PM
"between $25,000 and $45,000" wow...... thats..... not really expensive really....
for a good car
that has a good amount of features
you can get upwards of 25K so yeah
its not THAAAT expensive
i wasnt using sarcasm...... i ACTUALLY think its a cheap car..... 200mpg?? thats fricken awesome
I was pretty psyched about this car. I put down a deposit. Then they removed the in-dash side viewing system and put on side mirrors. Then they pushed they release date way back. Then they hired the new CEO and main engineers from Chrysler and Ford (yeah, the same ones that were helping their companies to lose a bazillion dollars because no one wants to buy their cars). Then _those_ tools changed it to front wheel drive. Oh, and then they changed the price from around $27.5K to close to $40K. And then I was out.
I'm still pretty bummed about it. I was looking forward to this car.
Harkonian, what nonsense is that?
If "no one" wants to buy Ford and Chrysler vehicles, then how on earth do they rack up so much sales (to be the third and fourth largest companies in the US).
Are millions of people buying Fords at gunpoint? By force of law?
Will the flux capacitor come standard?
why not order it last week if you are worried about it.
no but MrFusion will
This reminds me of when Homer designed a car.
This reminds me of that wacky vehicle named SLOW (Super Luxurious Omnidirectional Whatchamajigger) in the Mike Myers version of "The Cat in the Hat".
I am #856 in line for one of these - anyone want to bet whether or not I'll see delivery before the end of 2009?
but can it fly?
maybe off of cliffs?
i want one:P
For a moment there, i thought it said aperture, for aperture science :/
The car is a lie.
Don't get it with onboard navigation. It will try to kill you.
One word Ugly!
Bet you most people wouldn't say that if it had an Apple symbol on it...
Post a picture of your ride, we'll judge.
How wide is this compared to other cars? As in, will it be a bit tight driving around in a city with narrow roads? Or squeezing into a parking spot?
I'm really liking the Aptera. To those that think it looks "too weird" do you feel the same of the Formula 1?
If they were allowed to have 4 wheels, and they gave up on aerodynamics, it would look sweet.
it looks about as cool as it's name. 2e . wow they must have spent hours brainstorming to come up with that.
not that i could do any better.
I'd like to know what happened to the originally promised 300 MPG equivalent and under $30k price tag.
The mpg measurement is really not appropriate for a hybrid electric-gas vehicle. If you plug it in and drive less than 50 miles each way then you get infinite mpg (read, only use the electric motor). I'm sure if you leave the battery unplugged and run only on gas then you'll get closer to 50-100 mpg (still nothing to shake a stick at). Sadly my wife won't let me buy one of these...
Post a link where they suggested 300mpg.
The 300 mpg figure applies to the Hybrid version that is supposedly due next year.
Um, do you guys see 5mph bumbers on this thing? How about door beems so it can pass federal side impact regulations?
How about rolling over? People made a HUGE deal about SUVs being "dangerious", this thing can't be that stable.
My bet? You will NEVER be able to buy one.
Their site answers your questions. Apparently it is very safe. Much safer than your run of the mill SUV. To me it looks like you ride in a helmet whereas the average SUV looks like you ride in a milk carton.
Also, there's no need for bumpers as three wheeled vehicles are classified as motorcycles under CA laws. It's already been shown that the Aptera excels in crash tests, too.
Most suv's are quite dangerious, but they aren't very dangerous.
highly unlikely that this car can rollover like the old ford explorers did.... look at how far the front wheels are apart and how low it is to the ground... no way this thing is ever gonna rollover!
On another note, is it just me or does this thing remind you of the T-rex?
Anr for those of you who don't know what I'm talkng about...... http://pimpledrides.blogsome.com/wp-admin/images/2007TRex.jpg
The fact that it doesn't have a wheel doesn't all of the sudden delete all laws of physic. Rolling tendency depends on two things: heigh of the center of gravity and the distance to the axis of rotation. Even without an extra wheel this thing will do much better than SUV's.
Although this thing has been shown to be relatively safe (safer than size suggests). Legally it doesn't need any of the safety equipment you listed, because technically it's a motorcycle (in case you didn't know, anything with less than 4 wheels is a motorcycle).
*raises his hands*
WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF TOMORROW!
It is still too expensive.
Sure, for 40 K US$ you get to have the cool weird car, but for it to be a real people's car, it has to cost way less. It is less than a Tesla, but not really at the right price mark. On the other hand, the Aptera IS beautiful.
this looks like a reject from an 80's sci-fi film.
rejected in 1982 and rerejected in 2009.
*sigh*. Okay, so someone backs into your expensive composite non-bumpered front end. Ever get anything composit fixed?
Or they rear end your 1 wheel inverse ramped rear end. How far do you think it's going to flip over and how many times?
Yeah, 3 wheel cars never flip over..
Extreme videos
OK I will get rear ended in this and you get rear ended in a 2 wheel motorcycle (THIS IS A MOTORCYCLE class vehicle remember!)
Which would you prefer to be in? I already made my selection.
alas I have no interest in this car till it can hold 3 people go 100 miles on pure battery power and contain NO ENGINE besides the electric motor and cost under $15,000
Then give me a ring.
Soooo this is a $40k motorcycle? I'm confused...
Seriously, Only in California could they come up with a more single purpose vehicle that only the rich can afford. This vehicle won't move in the winter, that back wheel will get stuck in the ruttless snow down the center of the 2 ruts everyone makes.
Plus, how long do you suppose you can last inside this EZ-BAKE oven in a southern california traffic jam when the sun is out at 12 noon? 20 minutes? 10 minutes?
Guess you could park it next to your Segway... Oh wait, didn't we re-design our cities for the Segway? Maybe California has started that and I missed it on the news?
I'm pretty sure there's a reason ZERO, NO, big car companies in the world have ever made a car like this. Maybe because it's overpriced and after you buy it you STILL need another complete gas run car if you want to actually drive in poor weather or on a sunny day?
Climate control:
The Aptera has AC and climate control, just like most cars. Unlike most cars, the Aptera's runs off of the roof solar panels when you are not driving, so on that hot sunny day, the Aptera is cool when you first get into it, whereas your car will be in the 100s.
Do at least a little research, for the love of god. AT LEAST visit the aptera website and read about the AC system.
Great mileage and very green, but very ugly.
If ugly cars equal saving gas money, I'm all for it. But I really don't think this car is all that ugly. I think it's a definite eye catcher, but not tacky.
100 miles on a charge
$27,500 was the basic price listed for the electric only model. They will have a ton of add-ons, and the hybrid starts around $30,000.
The Hybrid has been quoted at around 300mpg. That is if you calculate a 100 mile trip. The first 40 to 45 miles are electric only, then the motor goes on/off to charge up the pack. For a 1000 mile trip, with no recharges/plugins along the way, expect over 100 mpg.
They did 3 wheels to avoid 500 lbs of bumpers and to keep the weight down.
It is rated as a motorcycle so they don't need bumpers.
It has airbags and can be turned upside down without crushing.
They expect you to be able to buy one at $40K with every option they can dream up.
It will come standard with one rear-view camera.
California requires motorcycles to have at least one rear-view mirror. So they took off the two side cameras and put in two rear-view mirrors, improving visibility - there was a huge blind spot.
It is now front-wheel drive.
It delivers in California for the first year. The model as seen is not a snow-bird.
They expect to release a 4-door model in 2011-2012. It will weigh a lot more, carry 4 people and have all the safety and crash test requirements. That has to cost $millions to do.
Lower weight and low air resistance and 3 wheels means smaller battery pack. For electric cars, that helps with cost.
The battery pack, delivering 100 miles electric, is 10KWh. Very small by EV standards for 100 mile range.
Top speed is 90mph. 0-60 in less than 10 secs.
Your iPod can plug into the (optional) sound system.
There will be built-in navigation options. Can you say 'higher price'?
You can't unplug the batteries on the hybrid - it is a series hybrid with electric motors only.
The 300 mpg gallon was calculated on a prototype with a small diesel. California will not smog-certify this diesel, so they have to go gas and catalytic converter to get the mileage for the hybrid.
More than 95% of Americans use their non-commercial cars less than 100 miles per day, average.
This electric car is not intended to get you and the kids soccer team across the state for games. It is designed to carry 1 or 2 people to work and back, less than 50 miles on an average day.
50 miles of charge can be had in 4 hours off a 110V 15-amp house circuit. 8-9 hours for a full charge.
It will cost less than $2.00 most everywhere in North America to recharge the batteries 80%.
The carbon footprint of driving the electric is much lower than the best mileage production gas cars. Even coal-fired electric plants produce way less carbon to charge this car.
I don't know why the writer above says they moved the price to $40K. It is clear that $40K is a maxed-out hybrid, not a base model electric.
This vehicle is not for everybody. You don't buy a Miata if you need an Expedition. But for a great number of fair-weather commuters, it meets the need and gets you there and back on electricity.
Am I the only one that notices that the side mirrors are painted on? Look at the first car in the picture and noticed that both mirrors are just photoshop'd flipped images. The refraction and shading don't line up with the lighting, and the car behind it doesn't even have the mirrors.
Wow there is some FUD flying in here.
@DavidB "Um, do you guys see 5mph bumbers on this thing? How about door beems so it can pass federal side impact regulations? How about rolling over? People made a HUGE deal about SUVs being "dangerious", this thing can't be that stable. My bet? You will NEVER be able to buy one."
1 Bumpers: Motorcycles do not need bumpers. The company plans on meeting or exceeding current car crash test specs, but they do NOT need to match the exact specs like bumpers to do so.
2 Rollover: The MOST stable configuration is 2 wheels in the front and one in the back, if it has a low center of gravity. so this will be MUCH more stable than your SUV.
3 Impact: This vehicle HAS been impact tested, it will be the third highest rated vehicle on the road. Only two cars by honda have recieved higher ratings.
4 Safety: SUVs have much higher death rates per vehicle than most smaller cars. Bigger only feels safer. In a recent study, all things being equal, consumers consistantly voted the car with the most cup holders safest. Perception of safty and true saty are not the same thing.
Ernest Dambach
1. Not every state will see this as a motorcycle. So I guess they don't plan on selling it anywhere it can't be sold as one? Hmm, don't think ANY other car manufacturer doesn't sell every car they make in all 50 states of the US.
2. LOL funny. with the front wheels being driven and the seating being forward, almost all the weight will be in the front. Ever see one of those crazy 3 wheeled toys where the back third wheel slides around like crazy because it has no weight? BTW, Try going in reverse on a slick street with this configuration. Or hit a bump where the front heavy tires stay on the ground and the rear wheel completely leaves the pavement with no weight behind it. Ever drive a mini-pickup with no weight in the back? This thing will be 2 times worse.
3. "it will be the thrid highest rated vehicle" LOL, they hardly have a working model and you talk like it's been completely crash tested. Have you ever watched the crast test video between the Smart and some small other compact? The Smart didn't decelerate, it just plain came to a halt. The compact had plenty of crumple zone to slow the occupants heart before it gets ripped from your chest, as it would in the Smart crash.
4. I'm glad somehow in your world the laws of physics have changed. Here you go, how about 4 or 5 manufacturers and government safety people saying the opposite? http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-08-19-small-cars_N.htm
"The vehicles with the highest fatality rates were 2-door, 2-wheel-drive versions of the Chevrolet Blazer small SUV, the Acura RSX small car, the Nissan 350Z sports car, the Kia Spectra compact car, the Pontiac Sunfire compact car and the Kia Rio subcompact car. Death rates for those cars ranged from 232 per million for the Blazer to 175 for the Rio."
"Overall, midsize and large luxury cars have the lowest death rates, according to the Institute, while small 4-door cars have the highest death rates. Of the 15 vehicles with the lowest death rates, none were small cars."
"SUVs, which are taller than cars, are more prone to dangerous single-vehicle crashes, especially rollovers. For that reason, ESC could be particularly important in reducing fatalities in those types of vehicles.
Of the 15 vehicles with the lowest death rates, six were SUVs. All but one of those SUVs have ESC as standard equipment."
"And differing designs mean some small cars are safer than average. But even the safest are governed by the laws of physics, which rule in favor of bigger, heavier vehicles, even in single-vehicle crashes."
I'd like to know which "Laws of Physics" the author of the article listed above is talking about. The most applicable law I can think of is Force=Mass * Velocity. If your mass is higher (like in an SUV), your force is higher. It really is as simple as it sounds. Heavier cars hit harder.
""People are looking for ways to save fuel, and they need to know that if they decide to buy a much smaller vehicle, they are putting themselves and their families at risk," says Adrian Lund, president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety."
Does this sound like fear-mongering to anyone else? Who sponsored this study? Big Oil?
I think that what we're seeing in the study's statistics are that small car designs often skimp on safety features, probably to save weight and cost. That makes small cars, on the /average/, less safe.
"Studies show that extra weight does little or no good after about 4,500 pounds, roughly the weight of a minivan or midsize SUV. And the heaviest vehicles, full-size pickups, have driver death rates about the same as small cars."
Heavier is not safer.
@Byron - Force = Mass * Acceleration(not Velocity) In an impact, equal forces are applied to the objects involved (in opposite directions). This means that when there is a crash with a large vehicle and a small vehicle, the smaller vehicle will have a greater acceleration. The smaller vehicle will stop more abruptly than a larger one, causing more injuries to the passengers. You might want to read up on the "Laws of Physics", specifically Newton's Second Law.
That said, small cars can still be safe if properly equipped. Also, there is a difference between accident prevention and safety in an accident. A large car will fare better in an accident because of Newton's Second Law. A small car may avoid accidents easier because of a low center of gravity or other factors.
So all said and done, where can we go to place an Order? $25,000 is allot and in these times of everyone feeding the "PIG", if they have any extra Money would be a great item for local citys or even States leg. to maybe offer that SUV Cost savings if you buy one for a tax writeoff?