Rethinking the Automobile

Good answer. There have been attempts to built small commuting-only vehicles. The 'Smart Car' being one example. I've seen a few on the road. I can't help but think 'that will cull the herd.'

Well, there must be dozens of reasons why people don't pursue things. Lack of ambition is probably the reason why American automakers have been steadily losing market share over the past three decades. To quote Obama in his last State of The Union: "We need to encourage American innovation... We need more production, more efficiency, more incentives... We need to export more of our goods. Because the more products we make and sell to other countries, the more jobs we support right here in America... We have to seek new markets aggressively"...

My Space-Efficient Vehicle or SEV is meant as a convenient alternative - shouldn't be pricey, obviously, like a Tesla roadster. Fossil fuels will not get any cheaper. Space will become more costly in dense urban regions. If only 1 out of a 100 prospective buyers would be interested in this 80-120 mpg (some say 140 mpg) crossover, then it may well be one of the best-selling vehicles out there, and create thousands of new jobs!

If you compare the Space-Efficient Vehicle with the Smart Fortwo (50,000 sold in the U.S. over the past two years) then you may notice that the SEV is more practical with its three-seat capacity, offers better energy efficiency due to its ultra-sleek profile, better comfort (long wheelbase!) and more built-in safety features.

"If you compare the Space-Efficient Vehicle with the Smart Fortwo (50,000 sold in the U.S. over the past two years) then you may notice that the SEV is more practical with its three-seat capacity, offers better energy efficiency due to its ultra-sleek profile, better comfort (long wheelbase!) and more built-in safety features."

That is a tiny drop in the ocean compared to total sales of just cars alone. So far 2,887,961 cars have been sold as of July 1st for 2010. That's 6 months of sales in a down market.

Two years of Smart Car sales have grabbed one month's sales (June, 2010) of Ford F-150 trucks (the Smart Car's natural enemy).

I think your concept looks like a better alternative to me, but lack of ambition is not going to be the stumbling block for gaining enough market share to change the world. I suspect that you will be lucky to survive 5 years in the business just to turn a profit.

Not that I a trying to convince you not to try, but a healthy dose of reality is critical to make a good business plan work. You really need to understand your market, your vision, and business in general to be successful. In addition to that, it takes an incredible amount of perseverance and sacrifice to push a business to success in a good economic environment.

I know Obama's pep-rally can fire up the inspiration, but it has been a long, long distance phone call between what he says and the actual groundwork he lays out toward that end.

The Smart for 2 size is fine but the mileage (33 mpg city/41 highway US version) is lousy.

When gas hits$5.00/10.00USD per gallon, you likely will see more of these cars. Just as we did when it hit $4.00/Gal.

All you have to do is find a way to artificially raise the price of fuel and keep it there.

Superb design! My hat is off to you.

Well, if no one in the USA is interested, you may try to contact the Indian auto companies. Everyone here is trying to make a people's car. One is already very much in demand, and the bookings have closed. The production capacity is unable to cope.

This is the Tata Motors 'Nano'. ≈ $ 3000. You may try Mahindra, Bajaj and a few more....

Having seen many very bad accidents on Indian highways I would not want to be in a light car there. Many truck drivers have only learned to put their foot on the floor and have to drive 20 plus hours a day to make a living.

The Nano when built to US safety standards is going to cost far more than 3,000 USD.

When I first arrived there I learned the 5 window rule. The side and back windows are for the passenger and the front window is for the driver only. If you look out front you are (or should be) in a constant panic when you see the near misses and crazy stuff drivers are doing.

The ubiquitous "Autorickshaw", a three-wheeled 'taxi' is the most common urban public transport vehicle.... even exported to some countries. Undeniably unstable, it is only ok for use within the city. Here is wiki/Auto_rickshaw

i agree with you that a non-Indian would not at all be comfortable in it, though some adventurous ones do try and are exhilarated mostly . On inter-urban highways though, we would rather recommend a Toyota or a Sumo...more like the Hummer.

Rode in a rickshaw many times! The things are barred from downtown Mumbai though - traffic is bad enough without them. They serve the purpose nicely for much of the population though anyone with money wouldn't be caught dead in one - the social disgrace!

Once in Surat I was giving some of the Mumbai based engineers a lift to the train station. They noticed a rickshaw driver using his foot for a turn signal and my guys broke out laughing upon seeing a foot extend either to the right or left.

You are right! The three wheelers will turn on a dime and without any notice.

The small bus drivers are the worst for that here in Turkey - taxi drivers looking for customers are bad but the small bus drivers are from another planet.

Well, it's not like this has never been though of before.

Here are just a few images found in a quick Google search:

Some are just concept vehicles, some have actually been in/ are in / production.

Here's the link.

http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=3+wheeled+automobile&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=ewZPTJrtB4OB8gbr8ZHsDQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQsAQwAA&biw=1246&bih=606

Someone comes up with a four-wheeler... and you are saying: enough of those eh... automobiles, they are called, already out there. Same with motorcycles. It's the package and the whole concept, Sir. I am very aware that it's a very tough business the car industry. I am also aware that there's a lot of rhetoric coming from politicians. What do you expect? Doesn't imply that what they are saying has no meaning.

I never said any of that. I'm just saying that 3-wheel vehicles have been done before. So far, their acceptance has been very limited.

I'll add that off-road 3-wheel vehicles were banned in the US due to safety concerns. I think that ban has left a stigma that 3-wheel vehicles are inherently unstable compared to 4-wheel vehicles.

3-wheel vehicles are a popular design because they do not need to meet the same safety standards as cars and trucks. They are still classified as motorcycles.

However, my understanding is that states are reconsidering that classification in some cases. It remains to be seen what way things will go.

You are right about the inherent stability issues with a 3-wheel vehicle versus a 4-wheel vehicle. However, the bigger issue is crash safety. A collision with even a Miata (let alone a mid sized car) would be a no-contest KO against the smaller 3-wheel vehicle.

The dream is that everyone would merrily surrender their 4-wheel gas guzzlers for these environmentally responsible machines.

While I would be the first to say that I would be happy to see the large cars and SUVs recycled, the reality is that is not going to happen. People like them and we have a lot of boat owners here that tow them or tow lawn care trailers. We also have a lot of equestrian farms in Florida.

Small 3-wheelers are not going to fare well in the winds we get here, either. We don't get snow, but any enclosed vehicle must have a robust AC system to counter the solar heat and heavy rain. The best defense for heavy rain is mass.

3-wheelers have a place as a short commute vehicle, but most people here that desire that feature either buy a scooter or a motorcycle. It seems when people retire down here one of the long realized dreams is buying a Harley, growing a long grey beard, and wearing old biker leather clothing. ;-)

The best defense for heavy rain is mass.

Excellent point. More than once I was caught in heavy downpours on I-75 north of Tampa. Tons of rain and sudden gusts of wind. A small car in a squall like that would probably be at much greater risk of getting blown sideways across the lanes, and/or of hydroplaning. If a small car is your only car, at some point you'll be out on the major freeways along with the trucks, SUVs and Winnebagos.

Oh, and just for the record: Go Gators!

The SEV will take off and be a big success in today's market only if the price can be kept under 10k for a reasonably well appointed vehicle. It also must preform in all weather. The smart car was well named as it describes what it does to the pocket book. Any saving you had in driving and parking it were lost in the capital cost. The Indian NANA car is a promising new comer.

I do like the look of the SEV and sense it would be fun to drive. It will also likely get me on the ferry to Wolfe Island when you can find a small space to cram into.

HI Voyager,

Welcome to CR4

what kind of power plant, front, rear or 3 wheel drive?

how much are you estimating the weight to be?

the instability of 3 wheeled ATV's was due to the single front wheel high center of gravity

Another of the members here is also involved in a 3 wheeled project

http://gaiatransport.com/index.html

& of course aptera

http://www.aptera.com/

while your seating arrangement may be different, it will probably be a bit dangerous. the driver turning to the back when talking to the primary passenger. you can't underestimate the social aspect. it would also make it harder to keep dogs in the back

I love the idea, but the major drawback that I have seen in vehicles with this type of limited mission is cost. Most normal people can not afford to spend big bucks for a limited purpose (commuting) vehicle. That is one of the major draw backs to the electric vehicle market. The limited range coupled with the cost (the battery pack alone is $16,000 or more) putts this idea beyond the range of consideration for most people. I drive a Chrysler sebring convertible because it is a good commuter and a good long distance drive that gets good mileage and serves both purposes very well. The market will solve this issue if there is a consumer demand and if the government stays out of the way. Mandates will not work. I would love to have a small efficient commuter vehicle and leave the "nice or bigger" vehicle in the garage. That vehicle has to be cheap, dependable, efficient, and able to carry what I need.

What I have seen in the past; small cars are introduced and each year they grow an inch or two. The sub compact becomes a compact and ends up a mid size car. The price has gone up, fuel consumption has gone up, horse power has gone up, speed has gone up. Why can't they leave well enough alone? I think the VW beatle was the ideal size. Detroit "assumes" the public wants large cars. The major factor to fuel economy is vehicle speed. Keep the speed to a maximum of 70mph and you will save fuel. 65 or 60 mph would save even more. transmissions can be geared for better acceleration and lower top end. I can't see why most vehicles on the road today are capable of 100+ mph. If you could poll the driving public, the average mph of all driving would be around (a guess) 25 mph taking into consideration, traffic conditions.

If we are to think fuel economy, we have to think small. I think computers can be a great feature on small cars. They could moderate the flow of fuel taking into account optimum driving conditions and the lead foot. Under ideal conditions, smaller engines, smaller cars, limited speed and acceleration, I don't see any reason why 50 mpg could not be a reality. The technology is already here and has been for a long time. Instead of EPA targets of 25 mpg, they should be looking at way higher numbers.

"Detroit "assumes" the public wants large cars."

I don't know where you are from, but Detroit is right! People do want big cars. Heck, even Japan is making big cars for the US market and guess what? They are selling large cars!

"The major factor to fuel economy is vehicle speed. Keep the speed to a maximum of 70mph and you will save fuel."

You are absolutely right, but people don't care. It's their money and if they want to pay more per mile it is their prerogative to do that.

"transmissions can be geared for better acceleration and lower top end."

That actually decreases gas mileage, not improves it.

"I can't see why most vehicles on the road today are capable of 100+ mph."

Because people like to be able to drive their cars 70 to 80 mph on the highway without having to wait 5 minutes to get up to that speed. Some people do drive faster than that, but I don't endorse that behavior.

Have you ever driven a high performance car? It is a blast. I don't need a better reason than that.

"I don't see any reason why 50 mpg could not be a reality. "

Because people don't want to drive Smart Cars. Actually, Europe has a number of cars that already get that kind of mileage. In the US people like big cars. They haul stuff, people, tow boats or ATVs, travel long distances (the US is BIG and towns and cities spread out).

"Instead of EPA targets of 25 mpg, they should be looking at way higher numbers."

Why? Have you appointed yourself to save the people from themselves? Have you considered that most people may be happy with the performance they get?

What I don't understand is the prevailing thought that people are incapable of managing their own lives and making their own decisions and someone or some minority group of people feel empowered to fix that perceived flaw by insisting that everyone else do what they say (and not what they do).

"Detroit "assumes" the public wants large cars."

Detroit dictates what the public wants. The majority of new car buyers end up spending more than their budgets allow. Detroit can show you two cars side by side; one with all the bells and whistles and the other a small utilitarian vehicle. Almost all will go for the fancy car despite the final price tag. Their justification can be; "we can cut back on going out", "we can eat less steak and more hamburger for a little while; after all, I'm supposed to get a raise pretty soon", "we worked hard and deserve it". The dealer counts on this to make the sale. He doesn't make much on economy cars, but a bundle on the big luxury car. The dealer doesn't care if you can afford it or not.

"I don't know where you are from, but Detroit is right! People do want big cars. Heck, even Japan is making big cars for the US market and guess what? They are selling large cars!"

I am from New York City and BTW, response #22 was mine. I thought I was signed in at the time. Japan does not make big cars by Detroit standards. They make compact and mid-size cars and do so just for the American market. There are few large cars in Japan. The only large cars you see there are American imports that belong to American diplomats and some high ranking CEO's. The Japanese are very practical people. If they see a huge car, they might speculate what it would be like to drive one, but they would never want to own one.

"Have you ever driven a high performance car? It is a blast. I don't need a better reason than that."

Yes I have; on several race tracks; Thompson and Sebring. Sure it was exhilarating, but doesn't mean I want to drive on the road the same way. I confess, I like to drive fast, but only when the conditions are favorable.

"They haul stuff, people, tow boats or ATVs, travel long distances (the US is BIG and towns and cities spread out)."

Voyager made the comment "save-rent-borrow the 'big car' when you need the extra space."

This is a very good argument.

He also stated "90-95 percent of all cars carry just one person". Without getting into statistics, which I never rely on for accuracy, this is a good reason for a small economical car. I personally would not want a three wheel car, but a small four wheel car would do me fine. I have two vehicles. A small Toyota for everyday driving and a full size Chevy pickup for hauling either a boat, lumber or taking trash to the dump. I've rented motor homes and even boats for vacation trips. These are high ticket items that doesn't make any sense to be sitting around idle 90% of the time. Unless one is RICH, that's their business. Most of us more practical people don't live like this.

"What I don't understand is the prevailing thought that people are incapable of managing their own lives and making their own decisions and someone or some minority group of people feel empowered to fix that perceived flaw by insisting that everyone else do what they say (and not what they do)."

My perception of the Original topic was that the public needs more education to keep from falling prey to car dealers, governments and all others who try to manipulate you. Most people are very capable of making their own decisions, but sometimes they arrive at decisions that are not politically correct.

"As far as safety goes, no amount of technology can make a micro-compact safe from large SUVs, trucks, and commercial trucks."

I can't argue against that. Personally, I have never feared driving small cars (about 60% of my cars have been small). I do fear being a passenger with some drivers. Some people don't understand their vehicle and probably shouldn't be driving in the first place.

I am not advocating we should all drive small economical cars. If you got the money and don't care how much fuel costs or the environment, then go for it, but there should also be some momentum for small instead of the negatives that seem to exist

"Detroit dictates what the public wants."

Really? How do you substantiate that claim?

Look at imports. They make up more than 42% of total US sales. They are getting bigger and bigger and that is not because every car manufacture is forcing the US into bigger cars. It's because people want bigger cars.

"The majority of new car buyers end up spending more than their budgets allow."

So, what are you claiming here? Are you saying the nasty, greedy business are making people spend more then they can afford? I guess I feel that people should be responsible for their actions and that they should pay the price when they make mistakes. We seem to be a bailout society where so many people expect safety nets for their irresponsibility. The same goes for private business. If you make bad decisions you fail and go down the tubes or you file for bankruptcy and restructure, and kick out the leadership that got them there.

Again, when you walk on a tightrope without the net you are more cautious about each step you take.

You are right about Japan not having large cars. The same goes with Europe. It's the culture and population densities that drive that. Personally, I like smaller cars, but I will not force others to adhere to my principles.

"I confess, I like to drive fast, but only when the conditions are favorable."

Same here - no tickets, but I enjoy my car and drive it well without putting others or my self at risk.

"My perception of the Original topic was that the public needs more education to keep from falling prey to car dealers, governments and all others who try to manipulate you."

Again, that would be a self correcting problem if people are forced to take off the training wheels and the safety nets were revoked.

"Most people are very capable of making their own decisions, but sometimes they arrive at decisions that are not politically correct."

That's how we learn. Sometimes you need to burn your hand.

"I am not advocating we should all drive small economical cars. If you got the money and don't care how much fuel costs or the environment, then go for it, but there should also be some momentum for small instead of the negatives that seem to exist"

Got my vote on that! I am thinking that people will move to smaller when fuel costs dictate it or the next fad comes along. Until then supply and demand will work fine.

When the auto manufacturers were forced to increase gas mileage and lower emissions, we had vehicles like the Ford Crown Victoria with a 5 L engine, variable venturi carb, and it started, ran, and drove like crap. Current electronics have allowed much higher fuel mileage, drivability, and lower emissions than any air cooled VW ever could. Oh and by the way you don't need to worry about that front suspension crushing your legs in a front ender because the floorboards have been rusting away for years. The VW beetle was the right size, for who? Did you ever have to ride in the back seat? Did yo ever try getting heat while you were back there? How was the air conditioning system? Did you ever wonder why the country that gave us the VW had a road with no speed limit? Who needs a speed limit, when most of the cars can't do over 55 mph?

How would you get away with limiting a car to 55, 65, or even 75 MPH, by putting steeper gear sets in them. Great, now when driving at 65, the engine will be at 4,000 RPM, not an efficient 2,000 RPM.

There are tires that will increase your gas mileage by 5-10 %. They will ride harder, and not be as stable in the rain. Did you pay extra to put them on your car?

I'm never very happy driving an original bug

damm the metal dashboard is hard on my knees

ever see when someone put a bug motor in a van top speed 45 with a tail wind...

I object to the title "Rethinking the Automobile" as it really is not dramatically different than many other designs. It is innovative, in that it sets the bar high for fuel efficiency, and uses multiple design ideas to accomplish that (presumeably).

I think that the rear wheel steering problems have to have speed-sensitive controls that limit issues that arise at speeds greater than parking lot speeds.

"Rethinking the automobile" will be a much more fundamental shift... like modularity, or roadable flying car, or entrainable, (able to hook together and reduce fuel by travelling longer distances as a road train). or... ??

Chris

Wow, a lot of comments. Thanks. Can't go into all of them. A couple of answers you will find on sevehicle.com , particulalry with regard to safety. Some of you imply a lot. Just get to the bare bones idea of the SEV:

- a handy runabout, a frugal, low-emission commuter, etc. somewhere 'classified' between automobile and motorcycle (many don't feel safe riding one)

- averaging between 90-140 mpg

- safer and way more comfortable than a New Mini (the three-wheel concept is not meant to cut corners as far as safety)

- costing around 20-25 K. (Aptera and Chevy Volt approx. 35 K)

The SEV is not meant to convince all people. No car does. If it's not something for you: fine. There's no socialist grand scheme about it. I agree: the SEV makes more sense in densely populated European countries where prices of gasoline are $7-9 per gallon. Over the past couple of years I have been discussing my ideas with traffic experts and automotive engineers, including the (semi) three-wheel platform. There are at least 5 basic principles/techniques by which you can achieve a very stable ride. Obviously, I cannot get into detail.

I don't object to the concept and in fact like the idea. However, when you talk about 20-25K for the SEV, I think you will find that most of the drivers will opt for a more multi-purposed car for the same price. I can buy a decent well appointed mid sized car with a good track record for that money and be able drive it in all weather. I believe you should start with a less ambitious model for intro into the market. People will buy a cheaper model (under 10K) for city commutes. I live in Canada where distances are very large between cities and practiced freeway speeds are about 120 km/hour. I would not jeopardize myself or family driving this type of vehicle here on a winter freeway. For small commutes a lot of people will buy into a SEV but only if the price is set as affordable compared to what is available. My original entry of 10K is likely close to that break point. Your competition should be considered as public transit or the second car currently owned by most families and used to short commute. Get the price down, build it, and they will come.

Even at $10K you can buy into a Kia or Hyundai, which not only offers much more versatility and safety, but has a very dependable reputation and a huge networks of dealers for support.

If you hit the $2,500 to $3,000 mark you would probably entice a lot of drivers to buy. Not much profit in that kind of sale, but you would at least attract a larger market.

The actual sale price should be arrived at with a real and paid market analysis.

I suspect that if these became popular enough the regulators would quickly put the brakes on by demanding higher safety standards beyond that of a motorcycle, which is what they qualify as now.

for $20k [2seat touring version] you can have one of these

with anti-lock & traction control & a dealer network

I sure it doesn't get 100mpg

Seen a number of them down here in Florida. They look pretty cool.

Incidentally, I came from the North East US and when I moved down here I saw more motorcycles riding in the rain than I have on sunny warm days in the north.

We have a large motorcycle and scooter population and riding in the rain is quite common. Then again, our rain usually lasts only minutes or an hour and then it tends to get clear again.

I keep thinking of getting a two-wheel motorbike, but I am still concerned about safety issues, even in a motorcycle centric place like Florida.

One point which I haven't seen mentioned here is that narrow cars take up far less actual road space than wide ones, because of the safety space you need to leave between you and the car in front. This is a five seater "narrow" car compared to a five seater small family saloon.

In the picture I've left a gap of 1 second at 55 mph. In the UK they recommend 2 seconds (I know no one does).

Of course this does require that the motorways agency start to provide special lanes.

this was a 6 person commuter bike I had about 10 years ago... could be made into a motorized vehicle concept. I'm just saying I like your idea. (I like the 'road train' idea too.)

from time to time on different threads

I throw out the idea of magnetically coupling a bunch of cars together only the one in front steering, coupling & uncoupling while driving would be tricky. The rest of the automation is already on some newer cars

I like that too. I remember you saying that before on the modular vehicle thread. It sounds like one of those 'perfectly natural' ideas to me.. why wouldn't we do it? those wooden toy trains do it. (forgive the childish image.. but it is just a concept. if it works here... it can work IRL too.)

(let me correct my post above. I meant to say that I had the commuter bike as an idea, not that it was a physical unit )

Another is better integration with rail

imagine driving your car onto the train in Toronto & catching a ride to Vancouver

spending the trip in a sleeper/club car

& not having to rent a car when you get there

I'm sure you can think of other deviations of that theme

We have the Autotrain from Orlando to Maryland. It leaves in the evening and arrives the next morning. Eat, sleep on the train.

Costs more than the airfare, but I would consider it if they can get my low ground clearance car safely onto the train and back off again.

one of the few examples

the process needs to be faster, more like the auto ferry

it certainly shouldn't cost more than flying, but the economics of scale aren't there

the bus n bicycle option is common around here, public transportation isn't very popular, no one likes to give up their personal space & ride with the riff raff

riff raff being defined as anyone you aren't related to or choose to associate with

Some parts of the US that could mean the whole county! ;-}

New designs or ideas for styles in autos are valuable - about a dime a dozen.

Develop the can, work out all the bugs and finally arrive at a good product then you have to sell it. If one wants to sell more than a handful you either need to concentrate all efforts in a small area or come up with distribution, sales network, maintenance shops etc.

New cars are designed all the time. At present Tesla is the only one that is surviving.

Aptera is a joke as are 99& of the efforts the past 50 years. SEV would be more welcome in crowded european cities - maybe. I would point out that where I live, patrol (gas) is about 9.25 per gallon and diesel 7.50 at present and inton parking is at a premium - meaning very difficult. The only people you see driving very small cars are those that can't afford anything else.

The price point you have to meet in order to sell to survive will more than likely put you out of the market before you ever get started.

Why start your blog off with a quote from a guy who knows absolutely zero about business not to mention a steadily dropping popularity?

That's for authorities to decide. For now, one can imagine that a single occupant of this type of vehicle is allowed to use the carpool lane. 'Reconfiguring' freeway lanes might be a serious option let's say 15-20 years from now, when more people start using space-efficient type vehicles, motorcycles included. Some sort of road pricing will be introduced in countries, like the Netherlands, and urban regions. Tariff will very likely be dependent on vehicle type/size/weight/emission.

Btw, don't wanna sound pompous by using the slogan "Rethinking the automobile". It's more to indicate a collective on-going thought process regarding people transportation. There's more to the automobile than many manufacturers want us to believe. That makes it so interesting. Their mission is to sell as many, be profitable. Governments have other priorities, such as traffic flow, emissions, use of the infrastructure. Drivers just want to get from A to B - safely, comfortably, and perhaps distinctively. If fuel prices go up, they tend to look for more fuel-efficiency.

"Drivers just want to get from A to B - safely, comfortably, and perhaps distinctively."

There is some truth to that, but a surprising number of us enjoy driving.

Most motorcycle owners don't put economy as the first reason to buy a motorcycle. Look at the number of sports cars, sport sedans, or convertibles on the road.

Quote: There's more to the automobile than many manufacturers want us to believe. That makes it so interesting.

I don't understand what you intend to say with this point.

One point that is incorrect - The safety and comfort of a car, and the agility and fuel economy of a motor scooter - Some comfort maybe but forget the safety part - most likely they will be less safe than a motorcycle. I can imagine driving the thing in a storm and snow or or on ice!

Neat little vehicle! But I wonder how many I would crush in a collision before I stopped moving with my 8500+ pound F 250 Super duty when I am pulling a 12,000 trailer behind it?

I bet it would be like hitting a heard of deer. Sure my front end would bet boogered up but at least I would live a (and probably still be able to back my truck up off of a few of them) at the end of it all.

Personally I would spend the $3000 to $4000 on a four wheeled ATV before I bought one of those cars.

Some of us have to drive big vehicles for our work and living conditions and no one will ever make that different. Lets see that toy drive through 12" to 16" of heavy wet snow like we get here every winter.

Maybe tracks like a snowmobile

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate performance cars. They're a blast. But for going back and forth to work, running errands, dropping someone off at the train station, etc. it's nice to have something smaller that's practical. Btw, I left out an adjective - my SEV will be fun to drive, more fun than a Smart Fortwo can offer for instance. So, it comes down basically to what type of vehicle for what purpose. Personally I drive an Alfa Romeo, and I have two motorcycles... plus a bicycle I use around town. Then again, it's pretty crowded over here.

Alfas are cool. Which model do you drive?

i am sold.

If i am still alive when your car comes out, include me in (to slightly paraphrase Sam Goldwyn)...i would love to drive one. (in 2 hours, i am going to be 66, so please be quick about it )

Happy birthday!!!

Happy birthday. BTW, while you are waiting for the last few bugs that need to be worked out, are you interested in a Renault Fuego?

First of all, Happy Birthday to kvsridhar

"Jai Guru Dev"

I drive an Alfa 156 2 liter twin spark sportswagon. It's my fourth Alfa. Contrary to what a lot of people are thinking, Alfa's are dead reliable... like any Volkswagen. Many forget to look after them; that's the problem.