digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at inhabitat.com

Volkswagen 1L Prototype

inhabitat.com — This car is capable of traveling for 235mpg using 1 gallon of gasoline, or 100km on 1L of gas

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • BCCStu, on 05/27/2008, -10/+3It sort of looks like the Mach 5...
    • dheaddy, on 05/27/2008, -0/+5Go Speed Racer!
      • longlukey, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2"[Speed Racer] is like watching fireworks being set off inside a dryer" -Stephen T. Colbert
    • MxM111, on 05/27/2008, -2/+3It only looks like it. What is the actual 0-to-60 time? Does it even get to 60mph?
    • robbh66, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4The only thing this has in common with speed racer is the terrible english used here. "Will go 235mpg on 1 gallon of gasoline."

      Sigh...
  • thestrongrope, on 05/27/2008, -2/+110235mpg? That is ridiculous! I am glad they are trying to get it into production by 2010, lets just hope that it makes its way to the U.S.
    • presidentjapan, on 05/27/2008, -5/+12Makes it to the US? There are so many autos that are like this that haven't made it to the US already, what makes you think this one will?
      • thestrongrope, on 05/27/2008, -0/+15One can dream can't he?
        • huntermaclean, on 05/27/2008, -0/+3And thats what life would have been like if I had invented the finglonger...
      • fahrvergnuugen, on 05/27/2008, -1/+11As the price of gasoline continues to go up, so does the likely hood that vehicles like this will become available in the US.
      • 298th_Scat, on 05/27/2008, -5/+5I think the main issue with these is if they are classified as a car they do not meet US safety regulations.

        If it was classified as a motorcycle then they could make it in.
        • cyberwiz01, on 05/27/2008, -0/+5And then you would need a special license to drive it.
        • DemDude, on 05/27/2008, -2/+9German safety regulations pretty much kick US safety regulations' ass twice and back. So don't worry about that.
        • mrigns, on 05/27/2008, -1/+8I second that. German regulations are way more stricter than their American counterparts. Many American car's don't get approved here.
    • SpectralSounds, on 05/27/2008, -0/+15Did you read what materials are used to make that car? They don't have a price there, but my guesstimate is the price is not going to be very alluring to the people who are really hurting over gas prices nowadays.
      • feliks2, on 05/27/2008, -0/+18But in america carbon fiber is as cheap as cheap plastic. You just paint something with a pattern of intersecting lines of various shades of gray.
    • cJw314, on 05/27/2008, -9/+5Please. Never happen; big oil won't make money off of it.
      • PopcornDave, on 05/27/2008, -3/+1Besides that, until any auto manufacturer builds a car with similar specs that actually holds more than one person it won't fly in the US.

        Great concept but they need to make something larger space wise.
      • KMartSheriff, on 05/27/2008, -0/+3Why is the glass is half empty to so many of you? Here's to hoping this becomes more mainstream (the mpg).
        • Ne007, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4Why? Because we've seen the same ***** over and over again.

          Good technology buried.
        • PopcornDave, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1Practicality. Try going to the lumberyard and picking up a few sheets of plywood on that vehicle. It's not practical, but it's a good start.
    • adamlloyd, on 05/27/2008, -0/+7Erm, I think the VW Lupo would like a word - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Lupo
      "The Lupo 3L was a special-edition made with the intent of being the world's first car in series production consuming as little as 3 litres of fuel per 100 kilometres (78 miles per US gallon or 94 miles per Imperial gallon)"

      I seem to remember having a diesel one of these and getting intergalactic mileage while driving it like I stole it, everywhere, and it came with air-conditioning.
    • Rexxy, on 05/27/2008, -11/+5Oh yeah? And where are you gonna drive it in the US? The SUVs will run you over and never notice you! This is as big as a golf cart.
      • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -7/+2And a whole lot slower than a golf cart.
    • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -12/+6Ya, but can it do a burn out?

      I am glad I make enough money so I can afford to drive a car with more HP than some ***** chain saws have.
      • Attol, on 05/27/2008, -2/+1This car will probably be worth more than your 1989 V6 Camaro that you still think is badass.
      • PopovIsovSerov, on 05/27/2008, -2/+0yay 0 to 60 in 2 minutes...lol
    • Ne007, on 05/27/2008, -6/+2And I hope it will rain money in my front yard but it will never happen.

      never EVER ever!
    • gquaglia, on 05/27/2008, -1/+16Are you kidding, auto makers in this country think 31MPG is great millage.
      • feliks2, on 05/27/2008, -0/+10Your being optimistic, they are proud that their Escalade (I think) hybrid gets something in the vicinity of 25 mpg.
        • MacEnvy, on 05/28/2008, -1/+2Chevy Tahoe Hybrid, and it actually only gets 21. That was enough for it to be named "Green Car of the Year".

          Ugh.
    • bwdd, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2I'm more concerned about '235 mpg using 1 gallon of gasoline'

      no *****.
    • RomeyRome, on 05/27/2008, -3/+4I wouldn't drive that dildo.
    • Attol, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2It won't make it here in America. The oil companies will never let a car with that good of gas mileage into this country.
  • rawg, on 05/27/2008, -3/+70235MPG is insane. I hope they use some of this technology in a more traditional 4 seater. A tandem 2 seater is about as practical as a motorcycle.
    • thestrongrope, on 05/27/2008, -0/+21I definitely hope that they use the technology across a broader spectrum of cars, but if you think about it, most people drive alone anyways. Whenever I walk to work I take note of how many people drive by themselves. It's a lot!
      • Mononuclear, on 05/27/2008, -1/+8True but you don't want a separate car to go out with the family.
        • PopcornDave, on 05/27/2008, -1/+8Depends on your family.
        • KMartSheriff, on 05/27/2008, -0/+19Not for me. When I'm bringing illegal immigrants into the country, things can get rough sometimes. A button-detachable side car would be perfect for when I'm being chased by boarder patrol.
    • fahrvergnuugen, on 05/27/2008, -1/+17The technology you speak of is an 8HP diesel motor and a super aerodynamic, lightweight chassis. In order to achieve this MPG, compromises have to be made (like 2 seats instead of 4, 8HP instead of 200, and so on).

      So far, Americans have been unwilling to live with these compromises. Maybe $5 per gallon gas will change our minds.
      • pabloD, on 05/27/2008, -1/+12don't you mean $4 a gall—oh, wait. Nevermind.
      • Densetsu, on 05/27/2008, -1/+13So far, Americans have been unwilling to live with these compromises. Maybe $5 per gallon gas will change our minds.

        So far, Americans have been unwilling to live with these compromises. Maybe $6 per gallon gas will change our minds.

        So far, Americans have been unwilling to live with these compromises. Maybe $7 per gallon gas will change our minds.

        ...

        So far, Americans have been unwilling to live with these compromises. Maybe $n per gallon gas will change our minds.
    • commenter01, on 05/27/2008, -3/+31according to the submitter: "This car is capable of traveling for 235mpg using 1 gallon of gasoline".
      Ok, 235 mpg per gallon? Miles per gallon per gallon... The car gets 235 MPG. That's it.
      • KMartSheriff, on 05/27/2008, -2/+2That's still awesome.
      • cowsgonemadd3, on 05/27/2008, -2/+4I dont get it thats a great number!
      • Densetsu, on 05/27/2008, -0/+11Perhaps the weight of *two* gallons of gasoline is too much for the car to handle! So as it goes through gas, the mileage is:

        Gallons two through one: 10mpg
        Gallons one through zero: 235mpg
    • rentmitchum, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1Practically AWESOME!
    • griffeycom, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1At 235MPG it's still better than a motorcycle! And enclosed!
    • diggingaround, on 05/28/2008, -0/+2Can I get 117MPG 4 seater, please!?
  • greentime, on 05/27/2008, -4/+31Wow, 235mpg is pretty incredible!
    • Satanael, on 05/27/2008, -15/+7But is it worth looking like the jackass driving a massive suppository on wheels?
      • Envark, on 05/27/2008, -1/+11Self-actualization. You don't have it.
    • tas08, on 05/27/2008, -3/+3And using 1 gallon of gasoline!
    • trispear, on 05/27/2008, -0/+0Expect this number to go way down once the air conditioning is on (if available at all). Also, I wounder if that is real world or just test numbers.

      If they can push it out to market at under 25k, with a real driver and still get over 100 mpg, I'll be impressed.
    • leffunov, on 05/27/2008, -3/+2Ha, drive electric the Tesla motors car gets the price equivalent of 200mpg without using gas or having any emissions
      !!!! And 0 - 60 in 3.9 secs!!! ***** Oil
  • Designliving, on 05/27/2008, -3/+11This is a pretty cute looking prototype - a bit Buggy - i like it!
  • MikeChino, on 05/27/2008, -3/+45It looks like a jet on wheels. I want one.
    • TheUngod, on 05/27/2008, -0/+12Looks like a German Batmobile
      • KMartSheriff, on 05/27/2008, -1/+5***** awesome. Now I really want one.
    • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -4/+8It might look like a jet, but when the kid on the huffy blows past you it wont feel like one.
    • Arkz, on 05/27/2008, -6/+3Am i the only one that thinks it looks absolutely hideous?
      • Arkz, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1Guess so, i stand by my opinion, that thing is like an 80s "future" reject... euuugh
    • antonio97b, on 05/27/2008, -3/+2a 1L jet. You're a ricer at heart. Looks fast. Aint fast.
    • TheRealToma, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1Or a bobsled!
  • dangerousLEH, on 05/27/2008, -1/+12Any idea what the price will be for one?
    • bwa236, on 05/27/2008, -0/+8The specs, specifically the materials that the car is made from like Magnesium, carbon fiber, ceramics, alumninum structure, sound like they are going to make this very expensive. I hope I'm proven wrong.
    • KMartSheriff, on 05/27/2008, -3/+10OVER 9000!!
    • vacax, on 05/27/2008, -2/+3It is a concept car. Of course there is no pricing for a concept car.
  • SVOboy, on 05/27/2008, -11/+9This thing has been on the digg front page several times in the last few weeks already...
    • serif69, on 05/27/2008, -1/+5This thing has been in newspaper, magazines, tv shows, and assorted internet sites for the last few years already...
    • ArtificialAnus, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2That's because people want the damn thing.
    • dood, on 05/28/2008, -0/+3I've read digg every day for a couple years now and I've never seen this. Strange.
  • protodon, on 05/27/2008, -0/+12Wow, this totally screams "the future" which is why we will never see it in use because that is where it will always be.
    • bbqsalad, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2its real tho.. Now.
    • Ne007, on 05/27/2008, -0/+5I'm still waiting for the stuff that was to be finished in "10 years" from when I was a kid. AND THAT WAS 25 YEARS AGO!

      It sucks when something is 5 or 10 years away because you always know that estimate is complete *****.

      They should just keep ***** to themselves until the ***** is ready to be sold.
    • EatChex89, on 05/27/2008, -2/+3Can't they conform and make it look like normal cars?

      Do they really have to "futuristify" it in that 1980s future car prototype look?
      • feliks2, on 05/27/2008, -0/+3The concept of aerodynamics is strange to you, isn't it?
      • gundamx92000, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0It is made that way for a reason, not as a gimmick. its shape gives it much of its fuel efficiency. notice that most "fuel efficient cars" look different? that's because the shape of "normal" cars creates a lot of drag comparatively.
  • mikesbaker, on 05/27/2008, -4/+33I doubt we will ever see this in America.
    • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2Because there is no market for it.

      The only people who could afford it dont really care how many MPG their Veyrons get.
      • sweetholymosiah, on 05/28/2008, -2/+1Why does every male over 35 think it necessary to buy a truck in the ***** city?? London Ontario is going to be a garbage heap of massive trucks owned by old almost-dead guys who sit around their houses.
    • imacbook, on 05/27/2008, -7/+9No one cares about America. When you guys have used up all your oil you will be totally *****.
      • feliks2, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2About damn time for me to move out of here already.
      • leerayIG88, on 05/27/2008, -2/+3just you wait....some day nobody will use macs.
        Linux will run your life.

        STFU.
      • SwedishNinja, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1No, we'll just invade you and take it :)
  • Lephtovermeet, on 05/27/2008, -14/+20Light weight and aerodynamic. It's not ***** magic. I'm sure they could make a 3-4 seater that gets 50-100 mph if they weren't in bed with the oil industry.
    • legoalert33, on 05/27/2008, -6/+1Bow chicka wow wow.
    • Jus2Gud, on 05/27/2008, -1/+4They already do, theres quite a few cars that can easily hit that mark. Volkswagon Polo 1.4 litre hatchback gets 75mpg on the motorway or just over 50mpg in towns, isn't new isn't a concept car its been out for a while, quite a few other examples out there the Polo came first to mind though...
    • Infidelcastr0, on 05/27/2008, -2/+3Don't know why you got dugg down, you're absolutely right. Cars have been getting heavier and heavier, and thanks to absurd "pedestrian safety" standards, more and more brick-like. Nobody needs a frakkin hummer, and after having to drive my parents' expedition for a year, I can't see why anyone would want one.
      • kieranmaine, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1I don't get why pedestrian safety standards will make them more brick like. Surely it must be possible to position the engine and bonnet in such a way as to have a reasonable crumple area between engine and bonnet and still make them streamlined.
  • MCA2142, on 05/27/2008, -4/+17Add one more seat.

    I'll take 117.5mpg for an additional seat.
    • staxofmax, on 05/27/2008, -5/+8Or just get a VW Jetta TDI with 60 mpg highway and 5 seats.
    • geogeer, on 05/27/2008, -0/+5That would be the limousine version... 3 inline seats.
  • Ockniel, on 05/27/2008, -14/+7But if you get into a wreck, it makes like a tin can and kills you.
    • fahrvergnuugen, on 05/27/2008, -0/+33Except it has air bags, seat belts and a frontal crash zone, making it 100x safer than a motorcycle.
    • staxofmax, on 05/27/2008, -1/+12Plus, if gas remains at 4 dollars per gallon for an extended period of time, and most indications suggests that it will, the size of an average car is going to be a helluva lot smaller in 2010 than it is now.
    • pizpot, on 05/27/2008, -1/+22It launches a Stinger missile at the incoming truck before impact.
      • Homerr, on 05/27/2008, -0/+5Hellfires would be more effective for ground targets.
    • revjustin2, on 05/27/2008, -4/+15Man - this argument has been used to support large cars waaaaay to long. Get over it already.
      • vtron, on 05/27/2008, -8/+6So sorry that you're getting bored by the truth. If something this lightweight gets into a wreck, it will be destroyed along with anything in it.
      • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -8/+5Not being killed on impact is a pretty ***** good argument. And yes, larger cars are safer.
        • DreKor, on 05/27/2008, -1/+5except for anyone riding in something smaller
      • revjustin2, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2Then we should all be driving tanks of equal size.
    • bedake, on 05/27/2008, -2/+8Thats just how the SUV loving oil companies want you to think.
    • ZincSaucier, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2dude I don't know where yer from but around here tin cans don't kill you
  • wrenchone, on 05/27/2008, -20/+29So it has two seats, no room for passengers, no room for transporting anything, it's made from some of the most expensive materials you can get, and it's very slow.

    Crazy MPG figures be damed, call me when I can get it in a car that isn't hopelessly impractical, and that doesn't cost a small fortune.
    • Densetsu, on 05/27/2008, -0/+18>> So it has two seats, no room for passengers...

      You take up two seats?
    • cambob76, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1I think the idea is to use it for commuting. If you need to move people or things, rent or buy a truck. There will be plenty of cheep trucks soon enough.
    • jamezracer, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1I'm afraid steel isn't going to get any lighter, and magnesium isn't going to get much cheaper, an efficient car is always going to be more expensive than a toyota camry. true, it's very slow, but that doesn't matter when you are commuting to work during rush hour while car pooling with a colleague. If you want to be fuel efficient, fast and cheap, check out the ariel atom http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaWoo82zNUA
    • gundamx92000, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0Price figures really aren't looking so bad, and there is 2 seats plus a trunk space. its plenty practical as a commuting vehicle, and beyond that 1 passenger is plenty
  • RandoTheKing, on 05/27/2008, -2/+32Atleast the Germans are thinking ahead.
    • kittynipples, on 05/27/2008, -10/+5Don't worry, I'm sure it will be over-engineered and prone to more mechanical failures, just like all German cars.
      • irgeorge, on 05/27/2008, -3/+12What are you talking about? German cars are great. American cars on the other hand...
        • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -7/+7Wanna bet on that? German Cars (VW, Porsche, Audi, ect) are not doing so well in holding up anymore. While GMs cars have seen massive improvements over the past years in how long they last.

          If you think most german cars are going to be trouble free, its a safe bet you have never owned one.
        • damndj, on 05/27/2008, -7/+7Sorry. Ask any Jetta owner about their car and you'll hear similar complaints:

          Transmission weirdness
          Electrical Problems
          Power Windows breaking

          This is why you rarely see old VWs on the road (Except for bugs) but tons of Honda's and Toyota's.



        • makkaveli19, on 05/27/2008, -3/+3My family has owned mercs, audi, bmws, and porsches for over 30 years. american cars are a joke in quality compared to most european companies. have you looked at the number of gm plants closing? Japanese cars on the other hand..
        • ngmcs8203, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4Former Jetta owner and I concur with damndj's statements. Driver side window decided to fall through the door, emergency light went on twice a year (at least), transmission and oil pan had to be replaced before the cars 3rd birthday. This is with regular maintenance!

          On the other hand, our Mercedes' have been great so far.
        • LoveAndSeagulls, on 05/27/2008, -2/+1who the ***** cares
          235 MPG!
      • Stettenbauer, on 05/27/2008, -2/+10Over-engineered?What in comparison to our ***** American auto makers(In Mexico and everywhere else there is cheap labor)?German cars are not prone to mechanical failures anymore than any other car...The whole reason I bothered to reply is I have an old Benz that is bullet proof and for it's age 1977 still runs great.
        • ngmcs8203, on 05/27/2008, -2/+3Benz does not equal VW.
        • bowe, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1ahem, most VWs you get in America are produced in Mexico. An example of over-engineering by VW:air powered door locks.
      • DemDude, on 05/27/2008, -3/+6You've got to be kidding.
        German cars offer some of the best engineering you will ever find, and are very much less prone to failures than any other country's manufacturers.

        I guess by over-engineered you mean actual suspension instead of leaf-springs as seen in US cars. Or six to seven gear transmissoins with high-speed shifting in few milliseconds instead of four gear transmissions with shift times where you can go to the bathroom between gears - as seen in US cars.

        Oh and by the way: Any stock Porsche 911 GT3 beats any US Racecar on a real racetrack (you know, the ones that don't just go in circles).
    • sweetholymosiah, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1barely!
    • theredbanana, on 05/28/2008, -0/+2Vee dub in da hauss
    • CarStan, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1we are thinking way more ahead than you could imagine, mein freund

      MUAHAHAHAHAHAA
  • fahrvergnuugen, on 05/27/2008, -1/+27While this concept car is quite old, I'm glad it's getting so much attention lately because they've done some really cool things with it...

    The 1L prototype has a 0.3 liter single cylinder 8HP naturally aspirated diesel engine. The engine shuts off when coasting and then "pop starts" itself when the driver touches the throttle again. This is possible because there is so little rotating mass due to the engine's super lightweight internals.
    • antonio97b, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1or you can just "pop start" when you release the clutch.
  • eltrev, on 05/27/2008, -2/+22Once the true shift happens - that is, enough vehicles like this that can meet demand - selling your older car that gets 25 mpg is going to be impossible without to taking a huge loss.
    • fahrvergnuugen, on 05/27/2008, -0/+10It's already happening. Go look at how much used SUVs are selling for right now...
      • KMartSheriff, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2SmartCars, while they're not the end all beat all, are already sold out in the US. It's pretty clear the movement has already begun, and is only gaining more traction.
    • revjustin2, on 05/27/2008, -6/+6Another reason I am happy I'm leasing my car.
      • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -2/+6Thats like pissing money away.
        • revjustin2, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2It would be if I intended to keep the car for the rest of my life. Rather, I tend to keep cars for about three years and then get a new one. Leasing is a LOT cheaper in this respect.

          If I bought the same car, my monthly payments would be something like $760. Over three years, that's $27360 out-of-pocket (not including gas, etc). Then, if I want a new car, I could possibly sell it for about $10,000 less than I bought it for (if it is in excellent condition, the market is good, etc).
          My monthly payments for leasing the same car over three years is $239. That's $8604 out-of-pocket, plus when I want a new car, I just return the old one and lease a new one.

          Now, I kept the car for longer (let's say 15 years), I could save money if my maintanece costs are low and gas doesn't skyrocket and the car maintains some value, etc, but I know that ain't gonna happen. So, with this all being said, I'm not pissing money away.
    • digger70chall, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2if enough people buy these to drop the demand for gas down then gas prices will have to drop, which means I'll be sitting pretty with my 25mpg hog while everyone is driving their 8HP cars so please buy this.
      • jblack15, on 05/28/2008, -1/+1The oil companies will get their money no matter how to look at it. Why do you think gas is going up right now? The oil companies aren't playing dumb to the inevitability of them going out of business. If more cars like the L1 become popular, then gasoline will costs $40 bucks a gallon instead of $4.
  • DeskFlyer, on 05/27/2008, -13/+11Yo mike you wann us to unpimp this thing lemme hear you say vat?
  • Chalks777, on 05/27/2008, -4/+2It's a cyclops!
  • legoalert33, on 05/27/2008, -15/+4It looks like a penis.
  • wannapiece, on 05/27/2008, -4/+11I'd drive it
    • cnot3, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2I wouldn't. It weighs 290 kg. If you get hit by a normal car, you're dead.
    • gundamx92000, on 07/16/2008, -0/+0Its designed with the same safety principles as a Formula 1 race car. those Formula cars can take much more abuse than your average car, and have the driver come out fine. So I'd say you're fine
  • laserblazer, on 05/27/2008, -13/+11We could have had cars like this decades ago if Big Oil hadn't bought and round-filed patents on efficient engines, carburetors, etc.

    America could also have a good rail system like Europe if the automotive industry hadn't systematically bought and run into the ground America's commuter rail system.

    They're guilty as sin.
    • hijinks, on 05/27/2008, -2/+9take the tin hat off your head.. If i came up with a way to make cars run 200 miles per gallon there is no amount of money big oil could buy me out since I will bet I could make at least 10x of what their offer price would be at.

      plus if Ford made one their stock and sales would go through the roof.. they aren't tied up to big oil

      do you also think GE owns the patent on light bulbs that never die?
      • laserblazer, on 05/27/2008, -6/+4You're too naive for this discussion. Big Oil threatens patent-holders or worse - they don't make you a friendly offer. The payment comes after you decide that your life is worth more than the money you might make trying to compete with them. None of this is speculation - you can find all this information with just a little research.

        Did you also think gas prices were based on supply and demand? Or how about mufflers that rust out right after the warranty expires? These people get rich with scams like Planned Obsolescence and patent-poaching. Accept it.
      • laserblazer, on 05/27/2008, -6/+1You made a good point on my behalf. It's easy to make light-bulbs that last decades, but they don't. They're scammers, and with apologists on the scene, they get away with it.
        • LeRenard, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4I'm sure you are an expert on high efficiency vehicles and light bulbs in your own mind, but in the real world bulbs designed to "last forever" cost far more than you spend over your life time of using the disposable ones. Their light output also sucks. Just because something "lasts forever" does not make it the cheapest option. What would be cheaper, the million dollar "last forever" car I could make you, or the 5 or 6 Toyota's you could buy that would equal the same amount of use?

          You also don't seem to realize that "round filed" patents for "efficient engines, caruburettors, etc" would still be available and known to the public. You can write to the patent office and get information on any one of them. Don't you think if they worked other countries that didn't have our patent system would simply ask for the documents then make these miraculous devices for their own markets? Or are you so far into tin-foil hat land that you can explain away even that? If you honestly think the multi-billion dollar aftermarket research industry couldn't come up with or duplicate these wonder devices, your not worth talking to.
      • aclements, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1Actually, the longest burning bulb was not made by GE. It has been burning for about 107 years now, save a couple interruptions.
        http://www.centennialbulb.org/photos.htm
      • sinrtb, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1Big oil is known for patent poaching mate there is no conspiracy it is just the way their business model works. How else can you explain the end of the EV or why no one is mass producing cheap plug-in electric/hybrid cars now.
  • napalmx, on 05/27/2008, -2/+114235mpg isn't a distance.
    • Scrappy1850, on 05/27/2008, -0/+17it gets 20,000 leagues under the sea
    • paulb0t, on 05/27/2008, -0/+54My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!
    • tas08, on 05/27/2008, -0/+5I think it was meant as a time. When I drive somewhere in my car, I'm usually traveling for 28mpg.
    • TTURabble, on 05/27/2008, -1/+9235mpg X 1gal = 235 miles
      • DrunkMcGee, on 05/27/2008, -6/+0actually 234mpg x 1gal = 235mpg^2

        235mpg / 1gal = 235 miles
        • chrisbosh123, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4well, clearly someone doesn't know how to do math

          235 mpg = 235 MILES PER GALLON = 235 MILES DIVIDED BY 1 GALLON

          how the ***** does 1 mp/g * 1 gal = 1 mpg^2?
        • DrunkMcGee, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4my bad i'm wasted
    • electricdragon, on 05/28/2008, -0/+112 parsecs?
  • BaudiIROCZ, on 05/27/2008, -0/+5kind of reminds me of the old batmobile mixed with a motorcycle
  • snagra, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1They should just make the top come off completely as an option instead of just being a door...probably would get less gas mileage though.
  • franklymister, on 05/27/2008, -1/+4Reminds me of my favorite German microcar, the Messerschmitt: http://www.microcarmuseum.com/tour/messerschmitt-k ...
    • fr3ddie, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2awh, its cute.
    • jamezracer, on 05/28/2008, -0/+2can't forget the peel p50, now that was cute
    • jamezracer, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1can't forget the peel p50, now that was cute
  • eleece722, on 05/27/2008, -1/+5Site's down for me, here's a similar article? http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/top-vw-1-liter-c ...
  • jward12345, on 05/27/2008, -5/+5I wish prototypes and hybrid cars didn't look like deformed wieners.
    • mike17032, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2They have to. In order to make up for a lack of power and get the best MPG possible (since thats what people suffering the suck of these things are after) they need to be ***** shaped. ***** just happened to be the first aerodynamic shape ever, unless air changes the shape of these things isnt going to either.
  • ninjasenses, on 05/27/2008, -1/+39"This car is capable of traveling for 235mpg using 1 gallon of gasoline"

    Is stating "using one gallon of gasoline" necessary?
    • TheDuckHat, on 05/27/2008, -2/+2Meaning it has a one gallon tank I believe

      Edit: Site was down so this is just a guess
    • zzz@tkz, on 05/27/2008, -1/+3No, but stating "using 1 gallon of gasoline" is.
    • trollick, on 05/27/2008, -0/+12hmm... I'd actually add "... per 235 miles":

      "This car is capable of traveling for 235mpg using 1 gallon of gasoline per 235 miles"
      • cambob76, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1Sure, if you want to be redundant.
      • cubbiesx, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1How about: "This car is an automobile capable of traveling and going for 235mpg using 1 gallon of gasoline per 235 miles of travel just burning a single gallon of gasoline during the 235 miles of traveling in the car while driving it."
    • geogeer, on 05/27/2008, -1/+4The only problem is that this car won't go anywhere on gas, its a diesel.
    • formergthing, on 05/27/2008, -1/+5The thing to removes from that sentence is "mpg." It should be replaced with "miles." The sentence as written doesn't make sense and if it did, it would be redundant as "mpg" is already talking about a single gallon of gas.

      A car's gas mileage is a measurement of efficiency, and has nothing to do with how much gas is actually in the tank.
    • LeRenard, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2In the original article this one stole from, the quote was "100km using 1 liter of gasoline", and its worth noting that gasoline means diesel in many parts of the world. The car is known as the 1L car not because of its displacement, but because of that 100km to the liter figure.
  • cl2yp71c, on 05/27/2008, -7/+14Why does any 'gas efficient' vehicle(motorcycles aside) always have to look so damn ugly?
    • Bebel, on 05/27/2008, -5/+12aerodynamics for one...
      • DMCer, on 05/28/2008, -0/+2aerodynamics? that probably has little to do with it. exotic sports cars are aerodynamic and they're not ugly.
    • LeRenard, on 05/27/2008, -2/+5Because air doesn't have much of a concern for styling. The most aerodynamic shape will look the same no matter who makes it.
      • cl2yp71c, on 05/27/2008, -1/+3So by what you're saying, you're implying that the aerodynamic design is what gives that ugly POS car +200mpg?
        • fflis, on 05/28/2008, -1/+1No I think A giant square moving at 80 mph would be much better. Youre an idiot
      • Bazillions, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4THAT'S why sports cars are so damn ugly.
        • cl2yp71c, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1Touché.
        • elTito, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1Sports cars are designed to create down force for stability at high speeds. Downforce = drag = inefficiency. That is not the point with super-efficient vehicles such as the 1L, Aptera, etc.
    • JayTee44, on 05/28/2008, -0/+3Because every time we do that, we know it gets to you.
  • DarthTatr, on 05/27/2008, -7/+2Like the car, hate the name. See: http://www.amazon.com/One-Turbulent-Story-Harvard- ...
  • AynRandwasright, on 05/27/2008, -0/+15Didn't they use this car in the movie 'Cool Runnings'?
  • Commodore69, on 05/27/2008, -9/+9What if you get hit by an SUV that runs a red light cause the driver was speeding to get to the gas station offering free gas till 6pm? You're pretty much dead. Part of the SUVs allure in the US is the arms race aspect. People deny this. but it's true.
    • fugularity, on 05/27/2008, -4/+2Yeah, except that this feeling of security in an SUV is actually an illusion. Whatever safety you gain by being a big stupid lug of metal you lose by driving recklessly because of the feeling of invincibility driving in one of these disgusting things gives you.
    • CC440, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2Yeah but mass always wins. You are less safe in a car on object collision, but you will win against anything short of another truck or box truck. Thats why people buy SUVs, because they will survive any impact with a normal car.
      • LeRenard, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4Your only taking that half way, there is also inertia to be taken into consideration. A Smart bounces off things like a pinball because of its lower inertia, whereas your goliath will absorb humongous amounts of energy as sturctural deformation before finally converting the impact to motion.
    • lburgguy, on 05/27/2008, -0/+7That's how I feel driving my Miata.
    • cthrall, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2That's why I started looking at green lights. I randomly paused at a green one morning...somebody late for work in a small car went through the red at 70 and accelerating.
  • protogenxl, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4It's the Jetsons
    -Capitan Slow

    (Seriously it looks like the Sports version of the Peel P50)
  • ctrlfreak13, on 05/27/2008, -2/+11Has no one seen the Aptera hybrid car? It gets 300mpg and is for sale now (though you have to go to California to get it)

    http://www.aptera.com/
    • channelx, on 05/27/2008, -14/+5That car looks as gay as AIDS.
    • at165db, on 05/27/2008, -1/+3Their own web site mentions that the cars (both electric and plugin hybrid) are pre-production?
  • l800LEMMINGS, on 05/27/2008, -0/+3i was going to post this last week but had enough tact not to being that its been previously posted
    • DMCer, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1seeing that its been previously posted
  • RungeKutta, on 05/27/2008, -3/+3Awesome car and great gas milage but I have a few issues with this car.

    1) How well can I change my driving habits to use the in-case LCD screen since there are no side mirrors.
    2) How much is this thing going to cost. If I have to spend $30K on this thing, it wont make sense from an economics pov only environmental.
    3) How safe is this?

    I like VW a lot, but I paid cash for my (used) 1.8T Passat that gets about 22MPG city and 28-33MPG highway (using cruise control). Anything new is going to need some serious increase in fuel economy to get me to dump my car. Hell, during the semester I rarely drive it because my univ has a cheap bus pass that works 24/7 and I can ride for free minus the small initial cost per semester.
  • channelx, on 05/27/2008, -9/+2That's all good and well...but will it blend??
  • showpup, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1Freaky Wild! I love it.
  • tp123, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4Has anyone Seen the Aptera? it's going to be released later this year, and gets over 300 Miles Per Gallon. Check it: http://apteraforum.com
    • AnarkeIncarnate, on 05/27/2008, -2/+1it looks like a sperm
    • BeatPunchbeef, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1The Aptera rocks. There is a good video from Popular Mechanics on youTube about every aspect of the vehicle. Its very informative once you get past the stupid intro test drive.
  • eric4ok, on 05/27/2008, -6/+0A 50cc scooter can barely get 125mpg. HIGHLY UNLIKELY this thing will get 200+.
  • trollick, on 05/27/2008, -1/+6What about making a car that normal people will actually buy? Even if it takes reducing mileage to still respectable 100mpg?
    • MScrip, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4Hell... I'd take 50mpg in a nice looking car with 4 seats.
      • cha5e, on 05/27/2008, -0/+4Then get a TDI Jetta. I recently slowed down from averaging about 80mph to about 72mph, and my mileage went up from 43ish to 47. That's pretty close to the 50 you're seeking.
  • spunkmyer, on 05/27/2008, -3/+4I'd have to kick my own ass if I owned one .. ;>
  • jks139, on 05/27/2008, -3/+2Great idea. Too bad about the top speed.
    I'd also like to know how well it goes over bumps/pot holes etc.
    • nicc, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1I have never understood comments like these...if you are in the US, then the top speed is equal to the fastest road!
    • Claw787, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1The same way a motorcycle goes over bumps.
  • bombastica, on 05/27/2008, -2/+4Diesel Engineering - what am I telling you guys!?!!
  • CC440, on 05/27/2008, -3/+4What nobody seems to mention is that this car is made alomst entirley from carbon composites. Wheels, Body panels, the Tub chassis. Its closer to a racing prototype than a normal car. If this thing was put into production it would cost $100-160k easily. You cannot mass produce a carbon composite car as the pieces must be individually cut and molded, just look at how much carbon fiber parts increase the price of cars like the Corvette ZR-1. Just think of the Chevy Volt. It will ocst $40k and it uses none of these fancy composites in its major structures. Just think of the Chevy Volt. It will ocst $40k and it uses none of these fancy composites in its major structures.Now make an entire car out of that very expensive material and you understand how costly the vehicel would be. Without these advanced materials the car would weigh 50% more and lose 25-50% of its fuel efficiency. It still would get 100mpg+ but it is too impractical for that to sell.
    • zebraz, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1It's a prototype.
      It will not be for sale.
  • karbonfyber, on 05/27/2008, -1/+11I'm sorry but this car is 4 years old. VW has already said it will never go into production because of its high cost.
    • drgreenberg, on 05/27/2008, -1/+2VW announced in Oct. that they *are* going to build a version by 2010.

      One concern they'll have to address is that American roads are not as well maintained as the German Autobahn. Low-resistance tires and narrow ground clearance may be an issue here.
      • feliks2, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1You honestly expect it in America? I'm very skeptical about this, although I am starting to see Smart Four-Two s driving around, and a lot more of them than I would've ever excpected. They're a lot nicer to drive than one would think too.
        • JayTee44, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1The Smart Four-Two is dumb. VW diesel jettas blow it away.
        • feliks2, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1I agree, but Smarts are more suprising to see in America than Jettas. And I've never driven a Jetta.
  • mjones77, on 05/27/2008, -4/+1I love the idea. but that thing has fallen out of the ugly tree.
  • GraceHead, on 05/27/2008, -2/+8... Here's George Jetson ...
  • Wadajoobadude, on 05/27/2008, -0/+0Anyone else think of the movie Brazil when they saw this car?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 100 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.