"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
it seems that the future Porsche was just posted here
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum...eo-thread.html
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
i suppose so, I just expounded on it.
i don't see the aptera as a real answer to this question. it is a lot like the T-Rex and Ecomobile, and even the can-am spyder. they are niche products that appeal to a very small market.Whereas the Aptera is genuinely futuristic. We'll see if it reaches mass production, though. No comments on it's design?
re. the tesla vs honda thing. i have actually seen teslas out in the wild. a bunch of them actually. i have never seen an FCX Clarity, car show or otherwise. so yeah there is the honda funding, but they haven't exactly done much to extend the technology. and that is why tesla will be successful, everyone has electricity.
i think the DS3 and DS4 look very good, and i think are good examples for the futuristic thing.
Honor. Courage. Commitment. Etcetera.
Well the FCX Clarity was a proof of concept, it's not a real production car. Honda even said that they're only leasing a few (less than 500 I think) out for a limited time and taking them back after the lease is over. It's great that the technology exists and does not rely on our electricity production. I believe for those who have ordered the FCX, there is a natural gas refueling station that goes in your garage so you can produce your hydrogen. Natural gas is a fossil fuel, but at least it's not variable in cleanliness as electricity production is- it can vary from nuclear produced to coal produced.
My major issue with electric cars is that you have no idea how your electricity is produced. Most probably though with coal. So how clean exactly is your car now? Not very.
I have seen about two Tesla roadsters. It's a good proof of concept too, but way too expensive. Unless the Model S is relatively cheap and efficient, I don't see Tesla doing well.
I would say the 458 merits a mention. It looks ahead of it's time to me I think - maybe only a little ahead of it's time, but still in the future.
They have electricity, but not enough (especially in CA, rolling brownouts are fun.) To power our cars with electricity instead of gas would require as big a revampage of our power system as switching to hydrogen.
70%+ is actually from oil burning plants. They're very effecient and clean compared to cars because you can incorporate tech into them that you can't into cars, but still. And nuclear will never really catch on here because we don't (can't actually due to some laws which were designed to stamp out nuclear power here) use any modern techniques in our plants, such as they do in europe and china.
The Tesla Roadster was a niche vehicle. They still haven't proven they can build anything useful.
Technology wise, too, it has some cool stuff. But it is small market.
I think part of the problem is that when we were obsessed with a futuristic look we just car about looks, not function. Since that look rarely is functional, we've been moving away from it.
Big cities suck
"Not putting miles on your Ferrari is like not having sex with your girlfriend so she'll be more desirable to her next boyfriend." -Napolis
Your three examples are all motorcycle variants that meet none of the "futuristic" criteria. Other than 2 of them being trikes there's no comparison. It may not appeal to you but the Aptera is a 3-wheeled car: totally enclosed cockpit, relatively normal controls, meets crash requirements, etc. It's potential is hampered by that most important development issue, funding. We'll see.
Citroen's DS series may well be an impressive platform but otherwise is just another rounded box with wheels. It isn't futuristic, even in the way the original DS was (and is).
The Tesla Sedan is supposedly targeted at $40,000 so would be accessible, we'll have to wait and see if Toyota's piggy bank makes it a production reality. As to electricity, there's more at stake for producers: an important issue will be standardized packs, readily available at fuel stations that fit any electric/hybrid. Remember: energy companies only exist as the controls of distribution. Yes, to some degree it simply moves the carbon emissions to another source. That's not entirely a bad thing, though.
Honda's effort looks futuristic, uses some neat technology, and could easily be built in quantity. It's failure is it's 3500lb weight.
Do you mean the Ferrari? Not futuristic in any way, just the most recent means of seperating the wealthy from $$$.
Sorry, too small to have any impact.
Our power grid will require serious commitment to meet our needs. The recent nuclear summit was in part to secure materials that will be utilized by reactors; expect a small boom in building them during the next decade. Likewise wind farms. Natural gas fuels our local utility, and I'm quite pleased to have just installed a whole-house 10kW solar array on my home. Fed and state rebates covered 85% of the cost, our investment will pay for itself in as little as 4 years. Starting last week we sell electricity back to the grid. Germany is way ahead of us on composite power grids, we better get busy. Imagine the impact of every home in the country producing 2kW. Coal provides nearly 49% of our electricity but that number continues to drop; a decade ago it was about 58%. Slow progress that can be accelerated if there is political will. The BP disaster/fiasco is doing pretty well at changing people's minds about our energy use and sources.
Tesla's roadster is a niche vehicle... the sedan is more. But again, we'll see. And you're right about our notion of futurism often being something visual, rather than technological. Even when functional progress is provided the public can reject it, as they have so many things. Humans are reluctant to embrace newness but ultimately we'll have to, just as we always have. It has happened with every technological advance of the past 150 years and will continue.
Never own more cars than you can keep charged batteries in...
Out of curiosity where did you get the coal numbers? When I get a chance I'm going to go dig up the article I read that put oil burning plants as the vast majority and I was wondering if it's a terminology issue, what you consider "power useage" sort of thing, that explains the discrepancy.
Big cities suck
"Not putting miles on your Ferrari is like not having sex with your girlfriend so she'll be more desirable to her next boyfriend." -Napolis
honda
Buddy: 1998-2009
Mah boi, UCP is what all true warriors strive for!
PINGAS!!!!
Yes the Ferrari.
You don't think that from purely a design perspective that it's futuristic? As I said, not exceptionally futuristic, but ahead of the curve by at least a bit.
I didn't think that we were discussing the impact of the design here. I thought we were just assessing the design itself - sure, as you and I both realize, the Ferrari is a niche car, and maybe it is "too small to have an impact," but that wasn't the question raised by pokey.
I'm not even too sure it's actually too small to have an impact. Yeah, the car itself isn't going to reach many people, but it's been seen time and time again that the more exclusive cars influence styling on more accessible cars.
Big cities suck
"Not putting miles on your Ferrari is like not having sex with your girlfriend so she'll be more desirable to her next boyfriend." -Napolis
That's another thing I was thinking - trickle down. I mean, high highfalutin cars in the past surely had impact on lesser cars in the following years, no?
What about the young artist that grows up idolizing it and one day it influences his/her design of a new car when he/she becomes a designer?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)