digg

Join DiggAbout

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

See the original image at ecomodder.com

Two Canadian Friends Build $672 Electric Car

ecomodder.com — "What do you get when you cross a Geo Metro with an electric forklift, a golf cart, and a bunch of used batteries? You get a ridiculously inexpensive, home-built, street-legal electric car."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mwomorris, on 01/31/2008, -0/+124Where does one find a "donor forklift"?
    • borninda818, on 01/31/2008, -2/+12I got one in my shop. The battery doesn't hold charge very long, but other than that it's a perfectly good forklift. I'll give it to you for 400 ;)
      • mwomorris, on 01/31/2008, -2/+33$400 doesn't sound like a donation at all...
        • pcpimpster, on 01/31/2008, -0/+7that was funny
        • mercury187, on 01/31/2008, -2/+18the one in the article was a 500$ "donor" forklift, looks like your getting a better deal then them!!!
          • BarrettAnderson, on 01/31/2008, -4/+26"looks like your getting a better deal then them!!!"

            you're, than.

            I usually don't respond to stuff like this, but you spelled both of them wrong in the same sentence.

            -Just trying to help
          • Slizzo, on 01/31/2008, -16/+1I don't usually do this either, but I think you meant the following:

            "I usually don't respond to stuff like this, but you've spelled both of them wrong in the same sentence."

            If you're going to correct spelling, you may as well check to see if your own grammar is correct.
          • AlanLivingston, on 01/31/2008, -0/+8@Slizzo,

            I'm not sure present perfect is correct in this case. Present perfect is used only for actions that occurred in an unspecified time period in the past. Although his sentence doesn't specify the time, he's clearly referring to the comment left by mercury187. I think the reference to merc's comment implies a SPECIFIC time, that being the time he entered the comment.

            PP just doesn't feel right to me, here. I think we should appeal to a bigger grammar Nazi.
          • perral1, on 02/01/2008, -0/+3Both would be correct. In this case, I would tend to lean towards the past, rather than the present perfect, as AlanLivingston said. Either way, Slizzo's post was completely useless.
        • BarrettAnderson, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1well, unless... um....

          shoot
        • codemonkey314, on 01/31/2008, -2/+3donor as in it's being an organ donor, not as in it was donated
      • moliver000, on 02/01/2008, -0/+2I think "donor" was referring to the fact that the forklift donated it's engine
    • _skin_, on 01/31/2008, -0/+22Mine fell off of a truck. ;)
    • slvrbullet87, on 01/31/2008, -1/+17You kick the crap out of the guy driving it and take it. Better put him down for quite a while tho, most forklifts have a top speed of about 13 mph
    • sponeil, on 01/31/2008, -2/+3Or a "donor Geo Metro"? I don't think a new (or even a used) one would be less than $672 by itself.
      • ryan83189, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3They regularly sell for $600 in my paper, in working order, but they look like P-O-S.
        • linagee, on 02/01/2008, -0/+4$2 can of spray paint will raise it from POS to "that looks horrible" level.
          • Tenoq, on 02/01/2008, -0/+4Spend $10, get 5 different colours and you can upgrade further from "that looks horrible" to "***** hippy car".
      • japroach, on 02/01/2008, -1/+3They recovered a lot of the costs by selling parts that were no longer needed, although they don't exactly say how much. Other than that the forklift was basically a freebie.
        • MetroMPG, on 02/01/2008, -0/+0FYI, the *total* cash outlay for the project was somewhere around $1800.
          The article doesn't mention it, but we actually started with a *pair* of Metros for $250. We put all the "best" parts into the blue car to get it through inspection, then started selling the left over stuff - a good engine, gas tank, radiator, ECU, and pile of other stuff I don't remember at the moment.
          Who knew there was such an online demand for used Metro parts?
      • moliver000, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1RTFA
    • fahrvergnuugen, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3Scrap yard. It's amazing what get's thrown away...
    • JettaMan, on 01/31/2008, -5/+1If they truly have a cheap, economically viable product here they should begin selling it. The market place will love it. I tend to think they could not produce such a car for such a cheap price in quantity.
      • freakygeeky, on 02/01/2008, -0/+3You've obviously never heard of economies of scale...
      • linagee, on 02/01/2008, -0/+3They put a lot of sweat equity into this project. You have planning, hunting down parts, and construction to consider.
  • TomO1, on 01/31/2008, -0/+21Truly inspiring. I'm very tempted to make my own EV conversion now especially having access to many used golf cart parts.
    • davidrools, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1one golf cart motor per wheel would get you some serious power. and if you can program a controller you can get make a kickass EV.
      • TomO1, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Just one cart motor connected to the transmission would make the car reasonably fast with a higher top speed. And programming a controller isn't hard at all. Just takes money and time.
        • atarijedi, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1I dont think one cart motor would do it. I just recently took a motor out of an older cart (1998) and it was 2hp, I doubt that would be enough for a car like a Metro, you would need at least 15-20hp to get any decent acceleration and speed.
          • davidrools, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1that was my reasoning behind 1 motor per wheel. electric HP is significantly different from ICE HP-namely that you don't need as much to get going with electric (since full torque is delivered from the start). but yes, you'd have to gear up to get to decent speeds, or suffer massive efficiency losses from running an electric motor at a high rpm...kind of the downside of 1 motor per wheel...packaging a transmission, even a 2 speed, into each wheel would be tricky.
    • sporg, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1Doesnt the Geo get close to 50mpg anyway? A larger percentage of the population need to use smaller and more efficient transportation. A handful of electrics in a sea of Hummers makes no difference.

      Unfortunately people have demonstrated that they refuse to do so because they feel entitled to driving the largest SUV available.





  • MetroMPG, on 01/31/2008, -4/+30@ mwomorris ...

    There's a company that sells & services forklifts in our city. I just called them up and asked if they had any used ones for sale - they had several at the time. The technician who showed it to us said they actually scrapped half a dozen old but working forklifts a month before we bought ours. The one we got was about 25 years old and had leaky hydraulics, which is why they put it out to pasture.
    • mwomorris, on 01/31/2008, -1/+10Ah, I was hoping for something a little more sinister (late-night raid of a WalMart or something).
    • JackStowe, on 01/31/2008, -1/+3Cost less car saves more. The idea is good...
    • ninsei, on 01/31/2008, -1/+13there's a reply feature.
    • blackdude, on 01/31/2008, -7/+2I know you guys are cheap but please get a better host :/.
  • jamesstuart, on 01/31/2008, -20/+76Unfortunately, the politicians have put so many rules and regs into place that American cars have to be very expensive. This article
    http://www.scragged.com/articles/why-cant-we-have- ...
    points out that India will be selling a car for $2,500, about 1/8 the price of the cheapest car the US government lets us buy. This article
    http://www.scragged.com/articles/cynicism-and-teh- ...
    explains that government not only doesn't create value, there is no limit to the amount of money the bureaucracy can spend. As bureaucracy grows, it becomes more and more difficult to get anything done. When government gets too big, the society collapses. Government not only destroys value, it destroys society over time. THAT's why we aren't permitted to buy a cheap car.
    • raceit, on 01/31/2008, -0/+25That and a lack of airbags. Take all the safety equipment out of a car and it gets real cheap real quick.
      • sponeil, on 01/31/2008, -1/+2Yeah, I heard the air-powered car in India uses foam in the construction, and that you're dead if you get into a high-speed accident in it. Of course, it's probably still safer than riding a motorcycle, and people drive those in the US. ;-)
        • BoneheadFarker, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1It's air-powered...high-speed accidents don't happen. Mostly because high-speeds don't happen.
      • fsweep, on 01/31/2008, -2/+3You don't need safety equipment in India-- where the avg. speed is 5kph in traffic--- and families of four are all riding one motorcycle (or scooter).

        Many people use the auto-rickshaw--- which is death on three wheels. Yet somehow, BILLIONS of Indians manage to survive. I am waiting for mandatory helmet laws-- for regular motorists in the US. We will see that before we ever see serious drinking and driving laws.
        • cbreaker, on 01/31/2008, -1/+2What do you mean about serious drinking and driving laws? Drinking and driving is a pretty serious offense and WILL land you in a big heaping pile of *****.
          • 11oops, on 02/01/2008, -0/+2Just a $900 fine here and a ride to the station to wait for a sober ride. Certainly not a heaping pile, but rather a pinched turd.
          • sinrtb, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1It is relative Cbreaker, in some South American countries you not only use your license on your first offense but your children will be unable to obtain a license either.
        • fucknuggets, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1and by big heaping pile of ***** he means 3 months in jail
          • 11oops, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1Here, three months in jail is the maximum sentence for your second offense, however it is typically a five day detention or two weeks of house arrest. You'll only see actual three month sentences given to the occasional third DUI and most fourth-time offenders.
    • midbc, on 01/31/2008, -3/+14you see they don't want the US looking like India or Hong Kong or where ever with people driving around garbage cans with 3 wheels goin meep meep beep beep beep

      • CedEx, on 01/31/2008, -3/+5Have you even been to Hong Kong? That city is well ahead of the most sophisticated city in the US in terms of technology use.
        • betacmag4u, on 01/31/2008, -0/+4they have faster broadband too :)
    • madskjaer, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3You should come live in Denmark, where you can't get a decent car for under 55.000 bucks, and that's at the lowest.
    • signal15, on 01/31/2008, -2/+9Do you remember those gory accident photos posted a couple of weeks ago? This is why we aren't "permitted" to buy cheap cars.
      • intangible, on 01/31/2008, -6/+11Yep, God forbid we make our own decisions about our health. We need Mommy and Daddy government to make sure we don't hurt ourselves. The caring politicians bring a tear of joy to my eye.
        • xtc46, on 01/31/2008, -1/+6Personally, I am not an expert in structural integrity of an automobile, so I am very happy that there are government agency's who employee experts to make sure any car I buy will meet minimum requirements. I'm also glad there are laws against murder...or are you against that too becasue "god forbid we have to make our own decisions about killing others"
        • ubuwalker31, on 01/31/2008, -1/+4What people who cry "Nanny State" fail to realize is that individual health and safety is intricately tied up in our national economy. Hundreds of thousands of sick workers who don't have health insurance so they can't afford to go to the doctor equals millions of dollars of lost productivity. Hundreds of thousands of traffic accidents results in millions of dollars lost to the economy and thousands of lawsuits filed by insurance companies to recoup losses. Thousands of premature deaths caused by smoking weaken our nations strength.
          • intangible, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1You've opened my eyes. Let's mandate national gym workouts and fitness testing. Next thing you know, we won't even be allowed to put salt on our food because "Anything that's bad for you is outlawed" (Thanks Demolition Man, why am I the only one that likes that movie).
          • Blandyman, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1intangible:

            imagine you're using your $2500 foam car, and a guy comes out of nowhere with his $60000 hummer and rails you into *****.

            maybe if you driving a car with minimum safety requirements, you wouldve survived.
          • Nerys, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1but that should be MY CHOICE. I practice Aggressive Defensive Driving. IE I AVOID the $60k Hummer. AND that still does not answer the Motorcycle or Bicycle issue. WHY are they not outlawed?
        • cbreaker, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2Decisions about health are one thing, but if they made a car legal where any accident over 35MPH was fatal but it sold for $2000, SO MANY people would buy them. They don't care. Of course, they will care when they get killed, but who thinks ahead that far?

          In the end, our society is better for having better safety laws. I'll admit, there's some I hate - like seat-belt laws and no-smoking in privately owned businesses. But requiring a certain level of safety from the manufacturer? I'm okay with it.
          • Nerys, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2I disagree. EDUCATION is more important. If you want safety EDUCATION. ie warn people you do realize this is dangerous right? and a population educated enough to be able to make those decisions. BUT thats less profitable. An educated populace is dangerous so.....
        • xexx, on 06/09/2008, -0/+1@Nerys

          It doesn't matter how educated people are on the subject, everyone takes risks, even the smartest people in the world have taken stupid risks before, especially young and poor people who can't afford really expensive cars to start off with (those who likely don't have health insurance) I don't want your damn decisions driving down the road beside me at 70MPH waiting for the crap to snap in half.
      • garrettnb, on 01/31/2008, -0/+7that car in the gory accident photos was a volkswagen tourag. It was crash tested to be one of the safest cars vehicles in its market.
    • starkruzr, on 01/31/2008, -5/+19Yes, we should all be able to buy cars that would impale us in a 30 mph collision.

      Pull your head out of your libertarian ass for a moment and consider that not *everything* is solvable by the market.
      • asdfuiop, on 01/31/2008, -6/+6I disagree, the market DOES solve everything
        http://www.darwinawards.com/
      • ThndrShk2k, on 01/31/2008, -2/+5Well, the only problem most libertarians should have with the govt intervention in the automotive industry is the incredible bureaucracy that the whole govt introduces in the process.
        An safety organization that the automotive makers all sign with and agree to abide by the rules would be a lot better, less bureaucracy. Then have the states impose rules about people who make automotives about having a membership to this organization. This would basically be the same, but would be less federal mandates about it and rely on business. If a business refuses it, sells cheap cars, and they break down and kill people, then the seller will soon be out of business, and because of the short business span, it will not be a viable market.
        The electronics world has A LOT of things that are similar. Standards and everything that is not mandated by govts, but by what people make and people want. No one wants a worthless computer that can not communicate with the Internet, or other computers unless you buy some proprietary thing. People would rather have flexibility. Cars and computers are both machines, alot of the parts are interchangeable depending on the model.

        The bureaucracy may induce price hikes, and so does the safety equipment, but the market would make safety equipment mandatory on its own. An acceptable increase of price for that part.
        • starkruzr, on 01/31/2008, -3/+10Holy Jesus. Will you listen to yourself? "If a business refuses it, sells cheap cars, and they break down and kill people, then the seller will soon be out of business"

          Yeah. And in the meantime, PEOPLE ARE DEAD.

          Cars and computers are both machines. One of them, however, is quite prone to killing people. This is why regulation is needed in cars and not in computers.
          • GiggleStick, on 01/31/2008, -2/+3So if a car is cheaper, you are essentially forced to buy it? Life is full of risks my friend.
        • rroeserr, on 01/31/2008, -1/+0You act like government intervention comes BEFORE the problem. Have you ever noticed that it comes AFTER the problem?
          Basically something happens - Enron, 9/11, etc, and then people like you flip out and, go holy ***** the government needs to take care of us....we need Sarbnes-Oxley, we need the Patriot Act.

          Companies are more then capable of taking care of themselves. Ever heard of a class action lawsuit? Ever heard of Punitive damages? If people die from there product they will go out of business. I have no idea why this is so hard to understand.

          BTW- Because of STUPID US government safety regulations you can't a Porsche GT3 with a Carbon fiber seat, or a roll cage. Forget the fact the carbon fiber seat was designed to keep you safer then the regular seat. US regulations prevented it's sale.

          Oh, and computer parts are regulated too. Which adds more cost.
          • GeneralFault, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3Computer parts are mostly regulated for environmental reasons. In that light, it does not matter how much lead, mercury and heavy metals Intel puts into it's mother-boards, the market isn't going to do a thing about it. That requires a responsible CEO, and in lieu of that, strong government regulation. Since it only takes a couple of bad apple companies to make a huge mess, we cannot rely on the Jimmany Crickets in the CEO world. We must protect ourselves and our environment.

            The strongest most efficient systems in the world are all highly monitored and regulated. The economy is no different.
            A non regulated market is like an engine without a computer (built by thousands of non-educated engineers). Sure it might run but not nearly as efficiently and powerfully as it could, and it may stall or backfire on occasion.
    • chili555, on 01/31/2008, -1/+2And how much of the price of the car is liability insurance? Do you support tort reform?
    • AndrewJC, on 01/31/2008, -0/+13Do you really think that the cheapest new car sold in the US is $20,000? Jeez, I got a brand new Hyundai Elantra in 2003 for just over half that.
    • Rorsach, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3Unfortunately, the politicians have put so many rules and regs into place that American cars have to be very expensive.


      Excuse while i die from laughter. Come over to Europe and see some really expensive cars, and by that i don't mean Lambo's.
      • GeneralFault, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1When the cost of steel and aluminum is well over 2$ a pound, a 3000 lb car is going to cost 6k just in materials.
    • rollem, on 01/31/2008, -1/+2Canadian cars have to have more features than American in order to pass inspection due to the winterization requirements.
    • altgeeky1, on 01/31/2008, -0/+7Please do not invoke "free market" rhetoric if you do not know what it means.
      This argument is usually coached in terms of "property rights" - you have the right to drive what you want.

      Wrong - at least in a free society, you do not have the right to infringe on OTHER people's rights.

      When you are on a public road, these "pesky regulations" like pollution and stability standards serve to protect OTHER people's property -- not yours. So you can forget the crybaby "government nanny laws" argument, because it doesn't wash.

      Statistically, these "MY right to drive an unsafe vehicle" rhetoric speakers are the LEAST LIKELY to actually drive one of these vehicles...



      • GeneralFault, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Precisely. I feel like the seatbelt laws are a good example of a "nanny state law" since it only really protects me. The smog and car safety laws are clearly an example of regulation stepping in where free market would never tread. There can be a clear difference.
      • reedatschool, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1People drive unsafe vehicles everyday in the form of motorcycles. Show me the safety equipment on a crotch rocket and I may believe you argument for half a second.

        The reality is these laws protect a culture of inferiorly designed cars that are wasteful and destructive to our environment.

        If we all switched over to lightweight and cheap electric cars and drove a little slower there would be no problems in my honest opinion.
        • GeneralFault, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Perhaps you misunderstand me. I support car safety laws that make your car less likely to harm me. Clearly a motorcycle is no more if not less dangerous to other drivers than any car on the road. The safety laws that I speak of are the regulations that specify that a car has break lights, can stop in a certain distance etc. Other car safety regulations that I support are those that require the manufacture to be honest about the safety level of their vehicle. I don't mind a car company being able to sell a death trap on wheels (I own something like that), but I don't want to be swindled into thinking that it is the safest thing on the road either. Very few consumers have the engineering skills let alone the time and ability to verify safety claims themselves before purchasing a car. Even if they did, many car companies are trying to lock down and hide their technology making such consumer driven verification completely impossible. Regulation is clearly required.
  • ecobites, on 01/31/2008, -23/+2thanks for the shout, dugg
  • kp998, on 01/31/2008, -30/+8Ron Paul wouldn't stand in the way of innovation.
    • DreKor, on 01/31/2008, -6/+15Ron Paul won't be president. So I guess we're even.
    • edd17, on 01/31/2008, -3/+3Its over now okay, just let it go.
  • leftcoastfunk, on 01/31/2008, -2/+202"...top speed of 65 km/h (40 mph)". Cool, it's electric AND faster than a stock Geo Metro. Dugg.
    • MetroMPG, on 01/31/2008, -4/+13Haha!! :D Thanks for the laugh! And the Digg. - Darin.
    • SpectralSounds, on 01/31/2008, -0/+13I actually just bought a 92' Geo Metro 5 speed for $500 because I commute 80 miles to work each way. I figure it will save me a couple grand a year in gas over my other car. First day I got the Geo Metro I pegged it at 90mph without much trouble at all. It takes a little while to get up there though.

      After a few tanks of gas, I added up the gas mileage and I'm getting an average of 46 mpg with the car. So, I'm happy. If I didnt have to go over mountains, Im sure the gas mileage would be even better.
      • orlyfactor, on 01/31/2008, -2/+15Why on earth do you travel that far to work? Some people do that here and I know that housing prices are expensive, but come on...that's like 3-4 hours of your day spent just sitting in your car. I commuted about an hour/hour and a half each way for about 2 years, then gave up and moved 5 miles away from work. I absolutely love it.
        • starkruzr, on 01/31/2008, -1/+8Probably because he gets paid a lot.
          • wellyuk, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1When does he get time to spend his loot? You can't spend it while sat in your car for 160 miles a day.
        • 11b1p, on 01/31/2008, -1/+6or needs to be away from wifey
        • frishack, on 01/31/2008, -0/+5I bought a house 2 blocks away from my work, then a year later, they moved to a new building across the city. It doesn't always pay to do that.
      • cawpin, on 01/31/2008, -0/+7I drove a 1996 Geo Metro (55hp 3 cylinder) for about 3 years. It's top speed was 97 mph with, literally, a tail wind and going slightly downhill.
        • marx2k, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2That's a hell of a tailwind
        • tradwolley, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2I had an '86 Chevy Sprint with the same motor, but in similar conditions I was only able to hit 96 mph. Now I feel cheated.
      • cawpin, on 01/31/2008, -1/+6I drove a 1996 Geo Metro (55hp 3 cylinder) for about 3 years. It's top speed was 97 mph with, literally, a tail wind and going slightly downhill.

        On the upside, it did get great mileage. I regularly got 40+mpg in mixed city and highway driving. And, it is one of the best handling cars I've driven. The weight distribution is almost perfect 50/50. The flight characteristics weren't bad either.
      • oldhick, on 01/31/2008, -1/+3This guy gets over 75 mpg with his 89 Geo Metro: http://1989geometro.com/
        I can't say I digg the aesthetics, but you can't beat the mileage. Unfortunately at 6'6", I can't actually fit in one...
      • blacktriangle, on 01/31/2008, -0/+146 MPG? That sounds wrong to me. My 92' Swift, a 1.3 DOHC ($600 worth) gets a reliable 46 MPG. I know a guy who gets 55 MPG on his 90 Metro.
        • rkzda, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2He said mixed not just highway, and he probably drives spirited, so that makes a difference.
    • Manhigh, on 01/31/2008, -0/+35Rod: Go faster Dad!
      Ned: I CAN'T, IT'S A GEO!
      • juliandunbar11, on 01/31/2008, -0/+7sorry to nit-pick, but I do believe Rod says: "Faster Daddy, he's gaining on us!"
        • Dasmitch, on 02/01/2008, -0/+0I believe that is Mod who says "Faster neddy, he's gaining on us!"

          *searches simpsons dvd's for that episode*
    • UtopiaInTheSky, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3My 1997 Metro goes 90 mph.
    • bryceman111, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1My Geo Metro went way faster than that until it fell apart when I stopped at a stop light. :( The frame literally ripped on me and ripped out the drive train...

      /true story (sadly) :( ...now I have a Delta '88...compare the MPG's...it sucks.
    • Abatrour, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1I drive a 5speed for work and I have to say its pretty damn quick when you are in one by yourself.
  • odiedog, on 01/31/2008, -11/+1forklift?? what would you need that for??
  • UltramegaOK, on 01/31/2008, -15/+5ewww..... GEO...........
    • Speed, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Don diss the Geos. How many other cars do you know that are actually light enough that they could fit in an elevator without exceeding the maximum capacity?
      • zheisey, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3Who cares if it can fit in an elevator?
  • MightWakeUp, on 01/31/2008, -20/+3Too bad this thing will take about 10,000 miles to recoup the cost. At $0.10 a mile with my honda civic, maybe $50 of maintenance every 3000 miles, you're looking at a savings of about 6.7 cents a mile. Hard to say if that kind of experimental implementation will last about a year or more of driving...
    • DreKor, on 01/31/2008, -1/+7At what point did you build in the cost of the car and depreciation?
    • greenlight2001, on 01/31/2008, -1/+18It was a fun project *****. It has a range of 15 miles... they weren't expecting mircles.
    • PleaseJustDie, on 01/31/2008, -0/+910,000 miles isn't that much...
    • ajstewar, on 01/31/2008, -2/+2***** off the port bow!
    • Fordi, on 01/31/2008, -0/+7So, a 67% decrease in costs isn't worth it, eh?
  • poontangpirate, on 01/31/2008, -13/+1this car is better: http://www.geekstir.com/pictures/star-wars-xwing-f ...
  • SuspicionVandit, on 01/31/2008, -34/+2when is doom 3 coming out for the PS3?
  • petebot, on 01/31/2008, -2/+56Unfortunately, the two canadian friends and their car has disappeared. Police are investigating a puddle of oil found at the scene...
  • e36wheelman, on 01/31/2008, -15/+9Mirror: http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:dkrkgjXgCF4J: ...
    • e36wheelman, on 01/31/2008, -0/+5nm, Google was wrong. Not a mirror of the site.
      • teh_techie, on 01/31/2008, -0/+4But, the guy in that video is from REGINA, SK. The city that rhymes with fun!
        • Stoutlimb, on 01/31/2008, -2/+1He's also a flamer. The joke would be lost on him.
  • DiscoLando, on 01/31/2008, -0/+63Come on, Ned. Move this thing!

    I CAN'T! IT'S A GEO!
    • orlyfactor, on 01/31/2008, -6/+3Dugg for the Simpsons reference.
      • sladek, on 01/31/2008, -1/+10well what else are you going to digg that comment for!?
  • dhughes, on 01/31/2008, -3/+8 Link is down.

    I wonder how it works in -25C ?
    • Speed, on 01/31/2008, -3/+4-25C? Try Edmonton where it's -34C (-46C with wind chill)
      • Chakz, on 01/31/2008, -0/+4It was -50C with wind chill in Brandon Manitoba yesterday, I stayed in bed.
      • Timbertron3000, on 01/31/2008, -0/+4Wind chill doesn't affect cars. Well, not terribly much anyway. For example if it's -34C before windchill, -46 after, and if the car normally runs between 500 and 1000C, the only difference the windchill will make is the speed at which the 80 drops to -34. the wind chill could be -1000 C, but the car won't drop below -34.
        • D4r7h3v1l, on 02/01/2008, -0/+3Physically speaking, no, the wind chill could not be -1000 C.
        • Speed, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1Still makes going to your car in the first place a bitch. I want to shoot whoever decided Alberta would be a good place to settle. "Hmm, cold as ***** here, should we keep going? Nah, this is a good place to live"
        • dhughes, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1 I've read that and it makes sense until you realize you have to get that car warm so YOU won't freeze to death, if it's -20C or -50C it still requires energy to heat the interior of the car so you can be warm, that energy also, for a gas engine, has to warm the engine up to operating temperature which require more energy to get it up to and to maintain that operating temperature.
          Some of you down south may not realize but when it gets so cold people here actually block off the radiator ventilation on the front of the vehicles they drive with a "winter front" or even, in desperation, a piece of cardboard directly on the radiator.
    • MasterPain, on 01/31/2008, -2/+0It dosen't
    • Stoutlimb, on 01/31/2008, -1/+2Considering that removing the engine also removes the heater core... My guess is that this is a summer car.
  • Motocompo, on 01/31/2008, -0/+11GEO METRO FTW!
  • lilbill413, on 01/31/2008, -3/+2I want to buy one!!!
  • slvrbullet87, on 01/31/2008, -2/+4As long as they were using a fork lift for parts why didnt they make it a twisted metal machine?
  • gametavern, on 01/31/2008, -6/+1Do electric cars always have to have 20 lead-acid batteries in the trunk. What if you leave your headlights on overnight?
    • VViley, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3recharge the batteries?
    • Fordi, on 01/31/2008, -0/+9A few things:
      1) No; you can use lithium-ion packs to pretty good effect; PbH+ batteries are much too low energy density.
      2) Ideally, you'd have a smart circuit on your car; headlights minus running engine = 30 second delayed shutoff.
      3) Also ideally, you'd replace any light-producing part in your car with LEDs, and not have such an efficiency issue as draining your batteries through a tiny lamp
      4) At night, you'd likely be charging your batteries anyway.
    • apeweek, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Believe it or not, EVs have accessory batteries, just like your car. The headlights can only discharge the accessory battery. When the car turns on, the traction battery pack begins to recharge the accessory battery. So your headlights will still work, and the car still drives.
  • Tantrum, on 01/31/2008, -0/+4NICE good work guys !
  • noahw, on 01/31/2008, -0/+12Mirror of the car images:
    http://echopic.com/dad/full
    http://echopic.com/dae/full
    http://echopic.com/daf/full
  • mckirkus, on 01/31/2008, -0/+10Had a geo in high school. They're actually pretty quick off the line because they're so light. Even with 3 cylinders and 50 hp. It could do 90MPH like the other guy says. I think I hit 100 once down a big hill.
    The problem is that they drift around like a sail boat because of their weight and skinny tires. Over 85MPH it would shudder so hard that it felt like it was about to disintegrate.
    • absolutzombie, on 01/31/2008, -0/+8That's because it *was* about to disintegrate.
      • scottykempf, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3So add better tires, and looks like adding all those batteries would solve the weight problem.
    • blacktriangle, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2Sounds like a rotational issue. Repair the axles and replace the bearing and 85 wont be a problem.
    • ncc74656m, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2Had a Tercel that was the same way. Trust me, skinny tires is the entire problem at speed.

      I replaced it with some wider wheels and it all went away. Became as stable as a rock and super sticky on the corners, even with two blown front shocks.
    • Timbertron3000, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1My roommate in university had one. The only way we could even hit 55 mph, was if we were going down hill with the car in neutral and our life insurance paid up.
  • lukeduke, on 01/31/2008, -2/+18And its a chick magnet to boot!!!
    • seeyounorth, on 01/31/2008, -3/+8What are you talking a boot, eh?
  • tman84, on 01/31/2008, -3/+4What ever happened to that whole Hydrogen Fuel Cell idea?
    • BoneheadFarker, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2It's been pushed to the sidelines until they can figure out the generation/distribution parts. Though they are making great strides in those areas. But they've also been making great strides in building better capacitors too...
      • Kamikazee89, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1I also think the oil companies bought the idea and buried it, somewhat like this reply will be. :-)
        • tman84, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1Yes my comment received a bury, I'm wondering who is against the idea of truly clean fuel. The left doesn't like it because it would be cheap, and the whole point of going green is not saving the earth but finding new ways to tax, and the right doesn't like it because it messes up all their oil money.
        • Kythas, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2I disagree, tman. As a Conservative myself, I'd like nothing more than to eliminate - not reduce, but eliminate - our dependence on oil. If that means hydrogen fuel cells, cars that run on water, mini nuclear reactors, or dilithium crystals, that's all fine with me.

          Let's get away from petroleum based energy. There's no reason our country can't do this within the next decade. I don't say this for any environmental reasons, either - though it would be good for the environment....yes, even we Conservatives love clean air and water. I'd just love to stop sending our money to the Middle East.
    • joebaloney, on 01/31/2008, -1/+2http://world.honda.com/FuelCell/
    • Kreigster, on 01/31/2008, -0/+4its a red herring
    • apeweek, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2Hydrogen is a farce - Fuel cell cars are still electric cars (including batteries, needed for acceleration), with a big, heavy fuel cell and H2 tank added on. So FCVs will always be more expensive than EVs.

      As battery technology improves, hydrogen (which is less energy efficient than batteries) looks less and less sensible. EVs on the way like this one:

      http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/01/zap-says-its-al ...

      Have fast-charge batteries that can charge in a few minutes. Why bother putting a hydrogen tank on an EV?
    • stoanhart, on 02/01/2008, -0/+2Its a stupid idea. With all of the cost in developing the storage and distribution systems, not to mention figuring out how to make hydrogen without burning lots of fossil fuels, you may as well just figure out how to build some decent batteries. Cut out the middle man (hydrogen) and just store the electricity directly.
  • lhbaker, on 01/31/2008, -9/+3Do they have to stop continually and buy extension cords?
  • scottykempf, on 01/31/2008, -3/+7Why not just buy the electric motor and transmission instead of the whole forklift? Would be much easier. Then you wouldn't have a motor-less forklift sitting in your driveway.
    • mhaisley, on 01/31/2008, -1/+3They made back most of the cost of the fork lift by scraping it, also there are several useful motors in the forklift, and a controller.
    • funkyjunk3, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2I guess you could try a forklift scrapyard if you could find one. Most people getting rid of a forklift won't sell it unless you buy the whole thing. And selling the rest as scrap metal gives you a good return anyways.
  • rufusdog, on 01/31/2008, -2/+8I bet it hs great traction in the snow with all of those batteries in the backseat.
    • MacEnvy, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3It's a front wheel drive car, so it's probably not as much help as you'd think.
    • astrosmash, on 02/04/2008, -0/+1Those skinny Geo Metro tires are great in the winter, regardless. They cut through the snow like a skate blade.
  • EvilBadger, on 01/31/2008, -7/+5Nothing says safe like lead acid batteries right behind your flammable passenger seat....and passengers.
    • nem0, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Yeah, they should'a moved the gas tank firewall to behind the front seat.
  • martinherrera, on 01/31/2008, -3/+10note to self: don't use canadianwebhosting.com
  • frostbyt, on 01/31/2008, -2/+17In other news Two Canadian Friends found dead with notes from oil company stapled to their heads.
  • mlerner, on 01/31/2008, -3/+4Too bad our Government will step in and stop them from launching it.
    • wbeavis, on 01/31/2008, -2/+1The US Government is pretty flexible about what you launch from a catapult.
    • atarijedi, on 02/01/2008, -0/+0Long live the ZENN empire!
  • Superfreak77, on 01/31/2008, -6/+1I WANT
  • orangefly, on 01/31/2008, -5/+11dick cheney is going to invite them to go hunting....
  • UtopiaInTheSky, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3Geo Metro! I love my little Geo.
    :P
  • corners, on 01/31/2008, -1/+26canadianwebhosting.com killed the electric car!!!
    • mwomorris, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Seriously, I just cancelled the account.
  • Ju1c3, on 01/31/2008, -11/+2"What do you get when you cross a Geo Metro with an electric forklift, a golf cart, and a bunch of used batteries? You get a ridiculously inexpensive, home-built, street-legal electric car."

    wrong, you dont get any of that, you get a toyota prius
    • somethingrudy, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1wrong, prius uses a "hybrid synergy drive".

      it's not electric, it's a hybrid!!
      • reedatschool, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1I love the Prius, but the complexity the synergy drives adds is NOT needed for future cars. We need simplistic designs that last like the design we seen in all modern locomotives. An electric motor driven by an engine. It is so simplistic and last for literally millions of miles with little or no maintenance. All you need to do is add a battery and you can charge at home and switch over to the engine for electricity for long drives.
    • tradwolley, on 01/31/2008, -0/+5The prius doesn't fit "ridiculously inexpensive."
  • stephenjames716, on 01/31/2008, -4/+3pretty cool ey!
  • ampersand2001, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3...and then they disappeared without a trace...
    • mwomorris, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1Hosting company not only suspended our account but they deleted everything.
  • dawheelo, on 01/31/2008, -2/+12Pussy magnet optional
  • thecha, on 01/31/2008, -0/+7Dugg because it's the best thing to ever come out of Brockville...
    (Native Kingstonian)
  • petrikigor, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2mirror...?
  • elpiegrande, on 01/31/2008, -8/+0testing
  • RonnieW, on 01/31/2008, -4/+1...(For comparison, Limburg figures his gasoline powered compact pickup truck costs 12 cents per km to drive.)...

    What is a compact pickup truck? I mean isn't that kind of a contradiction?
  • RATM4EVER, on 01/31/2008, -1/+7What do you get when you cross a Geo Metro with an electric forklift, a golf cart, and a bunch of used batteries?

    A suspended account.
  • SVOboy, on 01/31/2008, -1/+6Sorry to everyone trying to see this. After a bit of a slow down on the server (which digg has not created previously), the web host deleted our account. We're trying to fix it ASAP, but it's safe so say this will be gone before we can do anything about it.

    Perhaps there will be a story soon about how much canadian web hosting sucks. :(
    • TomO1, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1Stupid hosting company. You'd think they would enjoy the traffic.
  • henry8, on 01/31/2008, -3/+7ELECTRIC cars and low speed vehicles are ILLEGAL in the province of ONTARIO. (though bicycles are OK on the road. Go figure...) This is how much your govt cares for the environment. Lots of lip service, no action.
    • BoneheadFarker, on 01/31/2008, -0/+3Low speed vehicles are not permitted on roads because they cause disruptions in traffic. Electric vehicles are legal as long as they pass the safety test and can do normal road speeds. This car would be legal. Stop spouting *****...
      • henry8, on 02/01/2008, -0/+0> Low speed vehicles are not permitted on roads because they cause disruptions in traffic.

        If that had any basis in common sense bicycles would be banned from roads as well.

        > Electric vehicles are legal as long as they pass the safety test and can do normal road speeds

        Not true! Electric vehicles are not allowed on public roads, period! I can prove my assertion. Can you? Such an appropriate name you have!
    • linagee, on 02/01/2008, -0/+1Move.
  • Intercon, on 01/31/2008, -1/+1mirror please???
  • ncc74656m, on 01/31/2008, -0/+1I bet because it's got the fork lift motors it's torquey as hell.

    I wish to god I had the money and time for this (when you have an existing car payment plus all sorts of other bills...).

    That being said, if they were willing to do some heavy modifications on the car and strip a lot of dead weight, I bet anything you could increase top speed and mileage.

    Of course, the best options as stated would be to get new batteries and a new motor, but then, that defeats the entire purpose.
    • prometheanspark, on 01/31/2008, -0/+2Or put two of those forklift motors in parallel. It's not worth doing if it can't do at least 55...

      Can't wait for prius motors to be available at pick-n-pull for $100 a pop.
  • djk1076, on 01/31/2008, -1/+10mirror:
    http://www.2solitudes.com/headlines-actualites/85/ ...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 72 of 72 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.