6 ms·

Very 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 eve

Very 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 ago
I 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 ago
  Definitely 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 ago
Ha. 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 ago
  There 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 ago
    I 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 ago
    From 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 ago
      My 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.
      - 001sky 12y ago
        Fair enough, but in the linked article the example would not meet even your test of "Look like cars and function like cars"...because the thing is basically a luge-position with an aero-fairing. This was the starting point of my comment--its not a "car" really in any sense--because it fails the technical/legal/regulatory (not obvious) in addition to the practical/function (more obvious).
RankingMember 12y ago
Wow you weren't kidding. "That’s pretty amazing, isn’t it? Yes, it is!"

prawn 12y ago

I 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 ago
Definitely 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 ago

Ha. 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 ago
There 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 ago
  I 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 ago
  From 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 ago
    My 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.
    - 001sky 12y ago
      Fair enough, but in the linked article the example would not meet even your test of "Look like cars and function like cars"...because the thing is basically a luge-position with an aero-fairing. This was the starting point of my comment--its not a "car" really in any sense--because it fails the technical/legal/regulatory (not obvious) in addition to the practical/function (more obvious).

RankingMember 12y ago

Wow you weren't kidding. "That’s pretty amazing, isn’t it? Yes, it is!"