7,000 MPG car wins eco-marathon

[geronimotwo]

http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/361/7-000-mpg-car-wins-eco-marathon.html

EcoGeek
By Hank Green Posted Sun Mar 16, 2008 10:28pm PDT



Every year, Shell (yes, the giant evil oil company) puts on a little PR banquet in the name of vehicle efficiency called the Eco-Marathon. It's part of the long-standing tradition of oil companies blaming car companies for the excesses of the fossil fuel economy while car companies just as joyfully blame oil companies.

Nonetheless, it's a fun little event where teams get together and figure out how efficient vehicles really can be. And they can indeed be very efficient. By bringing the weight of the vehicles way down, putting them on high-pressure bike tires, and making the vehicles as obscenely aerodynamic as possible, these cars easily get thousands of miles per gallon.

The team from the French technical school St. Joseph La Joliverie went 7,148 miles on a single gallon of fuel. The Shell website is quick to point out that that's "almost ten miles per teaspoon." Maybe the body isn't the most efficient vehicle after all.

In any case... it gives you a sense for just how much power is contained in a gallon of gasoline. It's too bad we've been pretty much pouring it down the drain for the last few decades.

Via EcoModder

holy lack of trunk space, batman.

still ..... absolutely amazing. thats from ny to san fran and back on a one gallon tank.

[Declaration Day]

Wow! All of that with virtually no compromise in function, handling dynamics or aesthetics!

[AmbulanceDriver]

Wow! All of that with virtually no compromise in function, handling dynamics or aesthetics!

Not to mention safety!

[MechAg94]

Why don't they have a class where all teams are required to use a Chevy Suburban chassis. 

[HankB]

Two questions . . .

1. Does the car meet all Federal regs - DOT, NHTSA, EPA, etc?

2. How many passengers does it carry, besides the driver?

If the answers are "No" and "Zero" then it's NOT a car, but a curiosity.

[Mabs2]

I don't care how many MPG.  That thing is ugly.  I wouldn't drive it if it pooped gold.

[K Frame]

It's still better looking than either an Aztec or Subaru Baja...

[mtnbkr]

Yeah, because we shouldn't try to find more efficient designs because they aren't useful TODAY.

It's called research.  Now they know what it takes to get 7k miles per gallon.  The next stage is using the lessons learned to develop better cars.  Or we can sit on our collective rear ends because it's not an SUV capable of towing 8000lbs.

Chris

[K Frame]

Come now, Chris.

You and I both know that this is nothing but an evil plot by the Lefty Government to crush the indominable American spirit and turn us into a society that only George Orwell could love.

ANY sort of effort to conserve anything at all is nothing more than anti-American communism.

[Declaration Day]

We need cars like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Nano

...in the US.  I'd buy one in a heartbeat and drive it anywhere I don't need my truck or minivan.

[mtnbkr]

Same here DD.  For "town use", I'd drive something like that as long as I had a minivan or SUV for the family hauler.

Chris

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

Nobody's gonna travel 7000 miles without a lot of luggage... well, maybe the astronaut with the diaper.
I'm sure that thing's missing an AC, too. And power steering.

How fast did it go?

[Brad Johnson]

Jeez, what did they do, crawl around a perfectly level course at a snail's pace to minimize drag?  That kind of efficiency at any reasonable speed is a little tough to believe.

Brad

[230RN]

So how come the pic properties say 4000mpg.jpg?

[LadySmith]

Yeah, because we shouldn't try to find more efficient designs because they aren't useful TODAY.

I like the way these folk are going about it...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080320/ap_on_bi_ge/auto_show_x_prize

The X Prize Foundation, best known for its competitions promoting space flights, is offering $10 million to the teams that can produce the most production-ready vehicles that get 100 miles per gallon or more.
More than 60 teams from nine countries have signed up for the competition so far, including California electric carmakers Aptera Motors and Tesla Motors, German diesel carmaker Loremo and a team from Cornell University.

Teams will be able to sign up through mid-2008, when applicants will be narrowed to those who can prove they would build production-ready, consumer-friendly cars. Those that qualify will race their vehicles in cross-country races in 2009 and 2010 that will combine speed, distance, urban driving and overall performance.

The purse will be split between two categories: mainstream and alternative cars. Mainstream cars must carry four or more passengers and have climate control, an audio system and 10 cubic feet of cargo space. They also must have four or more wheels, hit 60 miles per hour in less than 12 seconds and have a minimum top speed of 100 miles per hour and a range of 200 miles.

Alternative vehicles will be required to carry two or more passengers and five cubic feet of cargo, have a top speed of at least 80 miles per hour and have a range of at least 100 miles.

[MicroBalrog]

Wow! All of that with virtually no compromise in function, handling dynamics or aesthetics!

That's not the point. These are prototype cars. The idea is for people to come up with ways to make a 7000 MPG car, so that they can later be applied in making, say, a 60 MPG car.

[erictank]

We need cars like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Nano

...in the US.  I'd buy one in a heartbeat and drive it anywhere I don't need my truck or minivan.

Saw something like that out on the road just the other day - Wednesday, I think it was - right here in NoVA.  Wheels were a little bigger, but the shape was pretty close.  Was NOT a Mini, I've seen plenty of those.  Are they selling those "SmartCar" jobs here in the US yet?  Searchfu says... 4 dealerships in the greater DC area alone.  It could easily have been one of these.

Of course, the SmartCar is considerably more expensive than the Tata Nano - but the SC comes with all the bells and whistles Americans have come to expect from their automobiles, as well.  A few items on the SC's specs stood out for me:

"5 speed automated manual transmission" ?!?  How's that work?
"Storage - Lockable glove compartment "  Well, it IS a tiny car... 
"Top Tether for child restraint system "  I have this mental image of a small child swinging from a short line attached to the headliner.

Ooops - base model does NOT have a radio or other audio player, though provisions are made for installation of such - the car comes with the antenna, 2 speakers, and an MP3 jack, so you could buy the base model and plug in your Ipod.  No A/C in the base model either, looks like.

Hmm, and it requires 91 octane and only delivers 33/41 mpg by 2008 standards (40/45 by 2007 standards).  Okay, at this point, I'm now saying, "Why?"  What's the point of a (relatively) pricy minibox-for-2 that doesn't look all that cool and STILL doesn't get phenomenal mileage?

[wooderson]

"5 speed automated manual transmission" ?!?  How's that work?

BMW and Audi/VW have true automatic sequential manuals utilizing dual computer-controlled clutches. You can bang through the gears if you like or let the computer handle it. The VW implementation is supposed to be much nicer to drive in auto than the BMW.

I guess Mercedes Benz has come up with something similar here.

[K Frame]

It will be the sign of the end times when the true manual transmission disappears from automotive America.

[erictank]

"5 speed automated manual transmission" ?!?  How's that work?

BMW and Audi/VW have true automatic sequential manuals utilizing dual computer-controlled clutches. You can bang through the gears if you like or let the computer handle it. The VW implementation is supposed to be much nicer to drive in auto than the BMW.

I guess Mercedes Benz has come up with something similar here.

Ah, thanks. 

It will be the sign of the end times when the true manual transmission disappears from automotive America.

Sad to say I had to contribute to that - my fiancee never learned to drive stick, and there may be times she would have to drive my car, so when I needed to get a new vehicle last year, I broke down and bought one with an automatic. 

Guess I really DO love her.    Although, that automatic-manual transmission gives me a little hope for the future.  I kind of hope that's a trend which catches on in the US, it'd be nice to have a car that Lori can drive which is a little less boring for me (I STILL keep reaching for the shifter now and then).

Y'know, come to think of it, I'd be surprised if the true manual transmission really ever disappears - there are going to be "car guys", especially muscle-car guys, pretty much forever, so there's ALWAYS going to be a market for it, at least in the aftermarket.  There's no substitute for rowing through the gears with the loud pedal to the floor... 

[Paddy]

It will be the sign of the end times when the true manual transmission disappears from automotive America.

And they're getting harder to find all the time.  I only had 2 manual transmission Rangers to choose from back in 2003 when I bought mine.  And I had to go to San Juan Capistrano to find my 'yota Echo 5speed.  It  was the only one in the state AFAIK.

The CVT seems to be the upcoming thing.  I know SWMBO's Prius has one, and it is smooth.

[Declaration Day]

I'm a car guy and have noticed them disappearing from many models due to low demand.  As long as there are new sports cars, muscle cars, cheap econo-cars and Jeep Wranglers, there'll always be manual transmissions. 

[Brad Johnson]

As fuel ecomy standards go up you will see the rise of the "manu-matic" in mainstream autodom.  A true clutch with direct gear engagements, but computer controlled and totally hands-off unless the driver wants manual control.  They are also inherently stronger than current CVT transmissions.

All the size and efficiency benefits of a manual with the ease and convenience of an automatic.  They can be had on some high-end stuff now.

Brad

[Firethorn]

As fuel ecomy standards go up you will see the rise of the "manu-matic" in mainstream autodom.  A true clutch with direct gear engagements, but computer controlled and totally hands-off unless the driver wants manual control.  They are also inherently stronger than current CVT transmissions.

And, if you want to go with manual control, all it takes is a couple of buttons on the steering wheel, top fuel car style.

We're already seeing the spread of six speed transmissions, I've even seen a few six-speed automatics that advertise better gas mileage than their 5 speed manual version.

[Iain]

As fuel ecomy standards go up you will see the rise of the "manu-matic" in mainstream autodom.  A true clutch with direct gear engagements, but computer controlled and totally hands-off unless the driver wants manual control.  They are also inherently stronger than current CVT transmissions.

All the size and efficiency benefits of a manual with the ease and convenience of an automatic.  They can be had on some high-end stuff now.

Brad

Not necessarily high end stuff. Citroen, Volkswagen/Audi and others have "semi-automatic" gearboxes on the market now. Volkswagen call it DSG (Direct Shift Gearbox). Tiptronic paddles and all.

They were an option on a friends company car list recently, but they did have an impact on fuel economy (and thus company car tax).