8 ms·
The most fuel efficient car ever built: 2072 miles with 1 liter of fuel
- papa_bear 12y agoVery cool car, very poor quality article. It reads like it was written by a syndication algorithm that throws in weirdly subjective statements at the end of every paragraph. Here's a slightly better one with a video: http://wonderfulengineering.com/new-car-designed-by-french-students-can-do-2072-miles-on-a-single-litre-of-fuel/ http://wonderfulengineering.com/new-car-designed-by-french-s...
- prawn 12y agoI assumed it was written by someone not using their first language and found it endearing as a result. Have to admit that wondering if it's written by an algorithm gives me an opposite reaction.
- crussmann 12y agoDefinitely a translation, or written by a non-native English speaker. Things like using a comma as a decimal (0,03 liters) are a pretty big giveaway. I think what threw me the most was how SI and US units were mixed right in the title (liters and miles). Flipping through the rest of the site, it does unfortunately read like they're just churning out content to draw search traffic primarily for advertising.
- prawn 12y ago"Flipping through the rest of the site, it does unfortunately read like they're just churning out content to draw search traffic primarily for advertising." Sounds like most online news sites. And I see many errors (uncorrected typos) in articles written by professional journalists using their first language, and even after a proofread from an editor!
- 001sky 12y agoHa. Its not even a car - it's a tricycle[1] ! The distinctin may sound pedantic but legally speaking they are quite distinct: It’s lack of a four wheel, and low production volume, exempt the Morgan from most safety and emissions regulations. At least in the US...Quite Ironic. [1] see, eg> http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/morgan-three-wheeler-is-it-a-car-or-a-tricycle/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/morgan-three-wheeler-is-it...
- corin_ 12y agoThere may be legal differences between types of car, but I don't see why three wheels should make it "not even a car". For example in the UK we had a mass-market three wheeler called the Reliant Robin, which was culturally considered to absolutely be a car (albeit a car worthy of having jokes made about it). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliant_Robin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliant_Robin
- fractallyte 12y agoI prefer the Bond Bug as the exemplar of classic three-wheel design ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_Bug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_Bug
- 001sky 12y agoFrom your citation: It is markedly different from most mainstream cars due to its fibreglass bodyshell and compact three-wheeled platform which allow it a special taxation and licensing class under British regulations. Also, the Morgan I linked to is British and is very capable--far more so--as a piece of engineering. My guess is that three-wheel regulations were originally set up for motor-cycles with side-car. These evolved a seperate lineage of both engineering and regulation. For modern examples, see: Can-Am Spyder.
- corin_ 12y agoMy point is that culturally they can be considered cars, if they look like cars and function like cars. I'd argue that they are cars, even if they get taxed differently than most cars.
- RankingMember 12y agoWow you weren't kidding. "That’s pretty amazing, isn’t it? Yes, it is!"
- codehero 12y agoI don't understand where the 2072 mile figure came from. The Shell competition was only 16km. And why describe fuel economy in miles per liter?
- easytiger 12y ago> And why describe fuel economy in miles per liter? err, why not?
- nixy 12y agoThe most common fuel efficiency ratios are expressed either in miles per gallon or kilometers per liter (or liters per 100 km). Mixing imperial and metric units is pretty unusual.
- baq 12y agowhat's the difference between a car that does 20 mpg and 40 mpg? what's the difference between a car that does 40 mpg and 60 mpg?
- stinos 12y agohttp://www.shell.com/global/environment-society/ecomarathon/events/europe/2014-highlights/winners-and-awards.html http://www.shell.com/global/environment-society/ecomarathon/...
- danbruc 12y agoWhy shouldn't they just extrapolate? 1 l / (fuel-used-for-16-kilometers-Shell-competition-in-liters / 16 km) * 0.621371 mi/km
- rlpb 12y agoI wonder what the maintenance efficiency of this car is.
- Shivetya 12y agoYour too generous, its not a car. It is a rolling science project, a trike, something no one could drive to work or play. I want to see work done with existing vehicles, full safety and comfort features, where through inexpensive aerodynamic changes and propulsion tricks improve on what manufacturers offer now.
- arethuza 12y agoHave you seen the VW 1-litre car? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
- Jach 12y agoThanks for posting this. My own first thoughts on seeing the project were: looks like a soapbox racer (and I laughed watching a video where they gave it a manual push down a slope to get it going), does France not have speed bumps or steep driveways or road litter, what's its top speed, and how survivable is a collision? This competition is just pure PR for Shell and other companies, engineering constraints for an actual car don't seem to matter. (I'm sure the students enjoy it and learn a lot though.)
- hcho 12y agoSpeed bumps would be prohibitive for F1 too. Yet, many technologies perfected in F1 made their ways into every day cars. This is a race car. The purpose of the race is not to be the fastest but to consume the least amount of petrol.
- chrismcb 12y agoNot to bad... But you do need two helpers to close the "door" for you.
- stinos 12y agoAmazing. Anyone has an idea what kind of bearings used in the wheels? The if you would spin its wheel, it would not stop spinning for almost 2 miles, whatever that actually means, makes it sound like they are something special. Also somewhat funny how such competitions are usually sponsored by fossil fuel companies. It's like they are preparing for the future with a business model idea like 'so, within x years there's going to be not enough fuel for the cars. Prices will skyrocket. Hmm, better make some cars that don't use a lot of fuel so we can stretch it to the fullest'. Perfectly understandable from an economic point of view, but would't research into alternative, cleaner mobility a better solution for everyone in the long run?
- Loughla 12y agoCorrect me if I'm wrong, but isn't moving the same distance using less fuel cleaner?
- TylerE 12y agoDepends. If you have to build a new car to do it, the answer is almost certainly no.
- smoyer 12y agoNot always ... the emissions of a push mower are dramatically higher than automobile emissions (on a per horsepower basis).
- saalweachter 12y agoIt's probably better than where we are (assuming, as someone else pointed out, emissions standards aren't reduced). I think the point being made was more about local minimums versus global. The most optimized ICE car possible will be impressive, but the emissions will never beat electric (assuming clean electric sources, obviously), and the rolling resistance will probably never beat trains or canals (which are of course only useful for arterials, and possibly only freight).
- hengheng 12y agoCup and cone bearings are about the best you can get with some manual fine tuning. If you carefully hone the surfaces with wax and toothpaste, and then select the beads running between the two halves of the bearing to have almost equal size, you're already good enough for track cycling championships. Regarding the sponsoring by Shell, I doubt Shell cares. They are paying for this with pocket money, and they get some greenwashing in return. Doesn't sound bad.
- jofinjo 12y agoI am wondering how far is this from getting to mainstream city cars! I would be happy with a 100 miles per litre!
- arethuza 12y agoThe VW I mention in another comment has the goal: "The 1-litre car was designed to be able to travel 100 km on 1 litre of diesel fuel (280 mpg-imp; 240 mpg-US), while being both roadworthy and practical." Edit: I do find it amusing that VW Group make the super efficient XL1 as well as Bentleys, Lamborghinis and Bugattis.
- dpcx 12y agoThere are those that prefer form over function. There are others that don't.
- nileshtrivedi 12y agoHere are the detailed results of the contest (and yes, the original results are in km/l): http://s08.static-shell.com/content/dam/shell-new/local/corporate/ecomarathon/downloads/pdf/europe/2014-results/sem-europe-2014-results-prototype-gasoline-220514.pdf http://s08.static-shell.com/content/dam/shell-new/local/corp...
- utopkara 12y agoThere are more than ten contestants who beat 1000 km/l. That's a lot of contestants ignored by an article about a research contest. Without getting into a long argument about how science and collaboration works, narrow sighted articles that cover events like this do a lot of damage.
- chrismcb 12y agoTo be honest with you, even the second place was not even close to this car. In all seriousness though, the top car beat the 2nd place vehicle by 50%. While the other vehicles were impressive (even the last place one achieved 200+ mpg) this one was much more impressive than all the rest (yes it is!) I'm not sure what damage you think this article is going to do.
- ohwp 12y agoProject page: http://www.la-joliverie.com/projets-pedagogiques/microjoule-cityjoule/ http://www.la-joliverie.com/projets-pedagogiques/microjoule-... Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microjoule_%28vehicle%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microjoule_%28vehicle%29
- jacquesm 12y agoThis one has always intrigued me, especially the modifications done to get it to perform that well: http://www.59fiattestcar.com/ http://www.59fiattestcar.com/
- vaadu 12y agoCalling it a car does not make it a car. 3 wheels and space for one passenger makes it closer to a Can-Am Spyder Motorcycle.
- sigzero 12y agoI'd give them 'vehicle'...not 'car'.
- kopparam 12y agoThis is pretty cool. But at what speed did the car travel that many miles?
- larrydag 12y agoThese types of articles gloss over what the researchers are trying to perform. To say its a "car" is an exaggeration. They are basically piston engine prototype vehicles. They are testing the limits of piston engine fuel efficiency and that is their main and only objective. The driving strategy is very different to normal car driving. They do a lot of pulse throttle acceleration where they tap the gas and then coast for as long as possible. They also drive very, very slowly to minimize wind resistance. The idea is to test conditions to optimize fuel efficiency and not for practical every day driving. That said there is a lot of benefit to the research. They are testing which conditions work best for fuel efficiency in all sorts of designs from engine performance to vehicle body. Here is a great site to look at DIY improvements to help with fuel efficiency. http://www.ecomodder.com http://www.ecomodder.com
- adwn 12y agoA nice engineering project, sure. But it has nothing to do with cars. They only thing that their results show is that you can get vastly different results for vastly different constraints and requirements.
- onion2k 12y agoIt does have something to do with cars - it shows that if we changed our requirements we could be driving much more efficient cars. Even if safety and comfort meant than we could only get 1/10th of the demonstration, that'd still be a good deal better than what we have now.
- jerf 12y agoYou need to drop a lot of the safety, grossly raise the price, or both though. I've got some family in the auto industry, and their consensus is that we are either really rapidly coming up on the point where we've got just about all the safety and fuel economy we can have without sacrificing safety, or we're already there. You're getting into the space where arguing for increased fuel economy is going to be directly arguing for killing more people. You may find this a tough sell. Especially since telling the automakers to "make less safe cars" is also going to have to come with an ironclad guarantee that when people die in these cars, the car companies won't be sued. And getting that law passed is going to be a tough sell, too, for a lot of reasons. The safety advocates aren't exactly going to stand passively by while you try to tear their stuff apart. Basically, you can't have it all. Not even if you pass a law saying that you have to have it all. And while we're at it, let us also not forget that "grossly raise the price" also is not something you can just wave into being. The Democrats can hardly try to make "inequality" into a major issue, then do something that unambiguously makes cars much more expensive for everybody.
- onion2k 12y agoI don't have any family with a vested interested so perhaps I can be more impartial. ;) There is a very straightforward way to make cars both more efficient and safer - make them smaller and lighter. Then they'll require less energy to move around and they'll have less energy if they hit things. The challenge to overcome is that driving a small and light car is actually more dangerous while big and heavy cars are still on the road. So we have to get rid of them. That's actually very easy too - ramp up taxes on fuel to the point where people actually give a damn. It's what we're doing here in Europe, and the proliferation of small, light cars is very noticeable.