Loremo AG: Sporty 157 mpg Diesel

Actually, there's two trims to the vehicle, and the one with the 20 HP engine takes 20 seconds to hit 100 km/h. The "GT" version gets there in 9 seconds, but gets 87 mpg, compared to the 157 mpg of the base model.

http://www.loremo.com/daten_en.php

It'd be nice to see how this car specs out if they ever decide to have it meet US safety and emissions standards.

Will we ever see cars like this in the US? How long will it take?

looks like a great car, and i hope it makes it to the market very soon

however, with such a huge 0-60 time, it should never be called a sports car

Um, how do you get into that thing?

We will not likely see cars like this due to the safety lobby and NHTSA. The problem is 5 Mph bumpers, air bags and other safety equipment adds weight to a vehicle. By the time they were done with this car to comply to US standards it would add several hundred pounds reducing it's economy and performance. I'm not saying "safe" cars are bad just that there is a price that we pay for that safety.

Hybrid technology is not fancy. It can be added in combination with diesel, biodiesel, solar, electric cars, anything. It's just a braking system that recovers energy into some batteries.

Got your point on safety but as mentioned before, it is all relative. Small cars are more common in Europe. The "arms race" in carweight needs to be reversed. Combined with lower speeds you could do away with a lot of "safety" measures which are really measures to reduce impact consequences. Lower vehicle weight and speed would contribute a lot more to safety.

Nothing wrong with safety requirements. They are not the issue here at all.

The problem with a 1,000 pound car is that even if it meets crash test standards at 35 Mph, it would be less than half the mass of even a reasonable car such as a Civic. It would be 1/5th the mass of a heavy car or minivan, not to mention an SUV.

We are also talking about a two-seat vehicle, a non-starter for families.

I'd rather have Prius-class plug-in hybrid, which could get 100, 200 MPG, or more under typical local use, and less on long trips. A 3,000 pound car is not light, but it's lower than the national average. That's a reasonable thing to do while also trying to get that average to go down.

I think it's immoral to buy a car deliberately to outweigh your neighbors. But I also think, particularly with a family, that there is nothing compelling about allowing one's own to be totally outmassed by even average cars on the road.

As Paul van Dinther stated, Europe is full of small cars and German is known for its highways and speeds. If the Germans do manage to put out this car, I don't see why they shouldn't put it out in full force out there. At least they'll be ahead of the game. So what if the NHTSA doesn't like it. As long as it meets Europeans safety standards.
So what if the US families with their enormous cars and need to pack every toy their child owns to go on an overnight vacation with them doesn't like it. I loved my road trips with my aunts and uncles in Germany - in the BMW or Mercedes; we packed minimally and had four people in the car ... gone for 2 weeks! The US is spoiled, with its "all the comforts from home" vacations.

Paul, I was not refering to the "arms race" of vehicle weight but the added weight of all the US required safety systems. As Alonso said I also think it's immoral to try to outweigh your neighbours vehicle. It's just silly as is bringing all the childs toys on a car trip. I don't get how some people think about vehicle choices. I was totally shocked when my wife told me that a co-worker found out she was expecting her first child and promply when out and bought a mini van. This child still months away from seeing the light of day.

Over at Green Car Congress they have a full write up on the vehicle. The front and rear are crushable structures but those will not pass the US 5Mph bumper rule so add a 100Kg or so to comply with that.

Interesting,

As one who is involved with many alternative drive systems, no doubt, there is room for more in US market now that Green is becoming hip recently. (g)

We are producing a compressed gas vehicle and is exempt because of three wheels, so why not lobby for an exemption for vehicles weighing less than 1200 lbs. as this vehicle would be. Put in in motorcycle hybrid class and all the reinforced 5 mph bumpers and airbags are not needed.

Good luck, Mike
Gas-Rip-Off.com

True 3 wheels would get around the safety requirements as it would be considered a motorcycle.

Can't happen here. It's a tghreat to the Hummahs!

Interesting car, wonder when we will see this in US.
Thre is miss undestanding what hybride technology is (that not only by average person but also most of the car makars). Most of them thinking about recovering power from braking. Too limited, the most efficient hybrides are that do not have transmission & differentials, and all energy avaiable from internal combustion motor move electrical generator and is send to the wheels that have direct drive electrical motors. Even with out extra battery that hybrides get 2 to 5 time more milage (look for e-traction)

Don't worry so much about securtiy issues: Small cars aren't necessarily dangerous. Just as big heavy cars aren't automaticaly secure (SUV's tend to be very dangerous, also for passengers!).

Look i.e. at the SMART. I think it is an ugly car, no doubt. It is small, expensive and horrible to drive (I have a LOT of experience with this little fella... sometimes you just wanna punch the stick and kick the transmissions butt ;-) But, nevertheless, it is a bloody safe car. They did crash test a SMART vs. Mercedes S-Class and the passengers in the SMART had the same chance of surival. There is even a video where a SMART hits a concrete wall at 100 km/h and they were still able to open the door after the crash. Try that with an Excursion ;-)

So, I believe the Loremo(which btw fullfills European safety regulations that tend to be more rigorous than US regulations) is a great project. And safety is the least of my concern for this project. I rather do worry about performance in everyday use. How will it i.e. "fit" in with the traffic in terms of acceleration etc.

Cheers

P.

Coming from Europe, working in the automotive industry (also with the US as target market I will probably never understand the american "way of life":
Smaller cars are unsafe?
According to me the US cars are about the most outdated models still being build (although, the Russian Lada 2105 models might be of a lower quality) :
- very oldfashioned technics
- ABS equipment rate which is below any European country
- in case of ABS equipment in a lot of cases only a 2 channel system is used
- Braking systems equipped in the aftermarket with pads or rotors from the lowest (chinese) quality (Import chinese rotors in the US last year 32,8 million Pcs) and you're talking about safety?

Wasn't there a research in the US last year about the possibility of saving some lifes by using ESP equipment in cars???

Sorry but from a European point of view US cars are about as modern and safe as cars we had here 15-20 years ago. (even without talking about the gas consumption)

btw, Before you all start to write nastygrams as a reaction on this message please take into consideration that in fact I do like the design of (a lot of) US models, I just do not understand how a "safety minded" country like the US does not have a problem with their technicaly hopeless oldfashioned (there will always be some exceptions)domestic models.

Leon

People in the U.S. or anywhere else (average consumer) are not techinally minded enough to know what real saftey is.
Rather, people in the U.S. are concerned with a preception of saftey. S.U.V.s are Big, and therefore, the average U.S. consumer thinks that they are safe, no matter how much research proves otherwise.

I would like to see this vehicle combined with an electric engine powered by an ultracapacitor to give it excellent acceleration AND still have excellent overall fuel economy projected for the LS model!
There was a post here about some teenagers in Pennsylvania that put together a kit sports car with a VW 1.9 liter Diesel engine with an electric engine powered by an ultracapacitor to give it a 0-60 time of 4.0 seconds! + because of the 1.9 diesel engine, it still got 50 m.p.h. and the total cost of this project car was only 15,000 U.S. Dollars!
why couldn't these German Engineers do the same thing?

Lil' Hugger, I believe the post you are referring to is this one (for those who hadn't seen it).

When will this car be in Ireland?

I already got 200 mpg in 1990
from a 2500 pound car.
I drove that car for a week on one gallon of gas

AL >>>>.... What car is that?

The info for this car says it meets all necessary safety features (which are as high in Germanyas they are in USA). It has 4 seats (so it will suit my family) and access is by opening the front (for front seats) and rear (for back seats) of the car. It has a turbo-diesel engine so it can run on biofuels. By 2025 oil will be too expensive to run SUV's and minivans and it will not be possible to grow enough biofuel to meet demand, so cars like the Loremo are the only option... unless you like walking.

Another wishfull thinking car - reminds me of all these other good ideas which sink without trace

HOW ABOUT NOW. 2 YEARS FROM NOW, WE BE WALKING. THE TWIKE,SAM, OR ANY OTHER 3 WHEEL,WOULD BE NICE.IF 1/10 OF THE PEOPLE BOUGHT ONE. WE BE BUYING GAS FOR 1 BUCK A GALLON.IN TOWN DRIVING ELECTRIC. TRIPS THE CAR,TRUCK. EVERBODY CRYING OH WE NEED SAFTY,NO DRIVE MORE SAFE. WAIT ,I SEE, MANATORY 2009 LIC.REG. WHAT IS EXTRA TODAY IS MANATORY TOMARROW.BACK IN 1960 SEATBELTS? GUESS WHAT...I TRAVEL 100 MILES A WEEK THATS 5 GALLONS TOWN DRIVING AND YOU KNOW I AM STRAP IN, FOR SAFTY. I WOULD LOVE TO GET A TWIKE. A SAM ,SPARROW ,PULSE.
I AM LOOKING FORWARD FOR MY FIRST HYBIRD.HOW MUCH 20,000 BUCKS + 5,000 BAT+ 12,000 BUCKS TO CONVERT OH I AM HYPE ON SAFTY

"OR ANY OTHER 3 WHEEL,WOULD BE NICE"
well may be 2 weels,
I find on the net electric scooter that used less then 1kw/h and can be driven for 40 mils with speed of 15mi/h. If you will work in city where distance is relativly short that might be an alternative. The charge will cost you below $0.2/h (in NY the 1kw/h is $0.22). In NYc the cost of one ride in subway or bus is $2. That mean you could get at list 10 time lower cost to comute using that electric scooter. What they saing that the price is like $400 (that like 2 time less then my 1 year pass to subway). I expect before that charging electric vehicle from utility is more expensive then buing gas and use gasoline engine, no sow. The whole tric is that this whole scooter waight very litle compare to car, so basicaly it need energy to move the driver body. That very efficient. So people live your SUVs and get the ... LOL
Check the link: http://www.duropower.com/item.asp?PID=36&FID=1&level=0

you get into the car by being more agile and flexible, and not being a french-fry-eating, soft-drink-gulping ignorant biotch.

the possibility of extreemly low fuel cost with the appearance something far less than a Box, would make this desirable for me - current cost of Gas is $110 a week in my Van, small car would be about $75.00 but with the use of BioDiesel and a 150+MPG would put my cost to about $1.50 week

The 5 mph bumpers are required to protect consumers from having to buy a new car (or pay for major body-work) every time we have a little fender bender. The bumper is sacrificial. The Lotus Elise was awarded an exemption when sold in the US because they could show that the front "clamshell" was less expensive to replace than bumpers for many cars sold in the US.

The solution to safety requirements such as the 5 mph bumper and perhaps even selected areas for reinforced door shield panels would be to make the bumbers and the reinforced door panels from carbon fiber. They are light, tough resilient and easily repairable.

If they are using a motor at every wheel, with no differential, how do they adjust the speed of the wheels when entering a turn? One wheel has to slow down or speed up, or the car will enter a spin...

If you've got a motor on each wheel, you don't need a differential. Each motor can run at its own speed: no need for any control systems, linkages, etc.

Think of a motor as just producing thrust (the correct word is torque), the speed it runs at is merely a reflection of the resistance.

If you want to be really clever, then with electronic control systems, it's trivial to reduce power on one motor, while increasing it on the other, if the vehicle is turning (just use one motor controller for each motor, instead of connecting all the motors to the same controller).

The other advantage of having seperate controllers for each motor is the ability for advanced electronic control. So, per-wheel traction control becomes a possibility. Conventionally, if traction control sensors detect wheel spin, then the engine is told to reduce power. But electronically, on the wheel that is losing grip can have its power reduced instantaneously and by a precisely controlled amount.

Very nice looking car... It's nice to see someone using exisiting tech to get more miles to the gallon, tho by the time the car gets here gas will prolly be $20 per gallon...

cool car, but can it haul ass?

Good idea overall, but thing it's still fugly. Not fitting into the sports car definition (can anyone see Jeremy Clarkson driving it?).

Also, not everything has to be a hybrid. What do you do after a couple years when you those batteries can't be charged anymore? Get new ones. Where are the old ones going? There's still a lot of mess with the acid kids. And in a crash, stuff is going to leak once in a while. I'd rather see a bigger push for biodiesel than relying on a battery, or the capacitor idea from Lil' Hugger.

--
editor note: Hybrid batteries last for the life of the vehicle, can be recyled and are not lead-acid.

I happen to drive one of the biggest and heaviest SUV's on the planet, a 1989 Suburban. If some suicidally intoxicated Honda driver hits me head-on with less than one third of my weight, if I can maintain control of my own vehicle I will likely be unharmed. I don't see how deliberately outweighing one's neighbor is necessarily immoral. I am likely a better driver than average. I'm attentive and my reactions are quick. I don't drink, smoke, use cell phones, follow too closely, speed, play with the radio, or cut in front of large trucks. My safety equipment including my tires are well-maintained, and I always signal my lane changes well in advance. Don't I deserve to be well protected from all the lunatics out on the road, some of whom break all of these rules? Preservation of one's self and loved ones is not a luxury, it is a moral imperative. In my view, since I am unlikely to be the initiator of any car accident, I am therefore reducing overall highway fatalities by choosing to drive a heavy vehicle. On the highway I get anywhere from 15.5 to 20 MPG inclusive which is not terrible. Clearly I am paying a price for this safety, but to me, it is well worth it. Ecologically speaking, mitigating factors to my fuel economy are that I often carry one or more passengers (occasionally as many as 6 plus myself) and I do not drive every day.

I would love to see a car like this, steps back to the old VW bug days cheap to buy, but it should be cheap to take care of too. Somthing brakes it's easy to fix. this would make this car 1000 times more worth the money spent on it. Why do you think people love Old VW's and American muscle cars? you can take care of it your self. You do not need to be some sort of car enginer just to open the hood.

The real advantage potentially available in hybrids isn't so much regenerative breaking as it is running the engine (esp. a diesel) at it's peak-efficiency "happy place" RPM.

The big auto manufacturers have thus far being doing "parallel hybrids: the drive wheels can be powered by both electric and internal combustion motors. By combining them you can get good power for short spurts.

Diesel-electric submarines and locomotives are the simpler "series hybrid": internal combustion motor drives a generator/alternator of some sort, that powers a battery bank, that powers an electric motor. The internal combustion engine can be run at it's "happy place" RPM at all times, or shut off, or throttled back for some purposes.

A really slick version would involve automatic control over the intern combustion engine's "gas pedal", controlling it's output to meet demand. A more crude home-brewed version would let the operator control the internal combustion engine, reading from an amp-meter that measures battery status and all amps poured in and out. Something specced from the world of alternative energy would do - google "bogart trimetric" for an example.

Series hybrids are simpler and in my opinion have more potential for fuel savings than the heavier, more complex parallel hybrid systems. Series hybrid wouldn't be as "sporty" of course. The battery bank wouldn't be that big and the electric motor and generator would be little heavier than the transmission they'd be replacing, if any.

I saw the prototype of this car at the Geneva Motor Show about 6 months ago.

As much as I like fuel-efficient cars, I think this one in particular is doomed.

Seats looked extremely uncomfortable and not adjustable, getting into the car is awkward at best, and if it's raining the interior of the car will be soaked because you have to remove the roof to get in...

Space at the rear is really limited (it's more a 2+2 than a 4-seats car), and the fact that you're travelling backwards can lead to passengers feeling sick.

The car's height is about half of that of a common car. This means that it's about as high as a SUV's tyre. For security, that cannot be a good thing.

They did not allow anyone in the car (even after I told them that I was extremely interested), which adds to my feeling that it must be very uncomfortable.

In addition to that, you can be sure that the very small engine cannot take the 300 Kg load of a driver and 3 passengers if there is some uphill sections to climb.

So, it's unlikely that we will ever see a large number of Loremo cars on the road.

Hi,

This car is brilliant and the insurance should be cheap (UK) based on this cars fuel efficency, and after all the safety equipment has gone in.

Thanks

That's crazy design. But the 0-60 time is not very safe for our country where you need rapid accelerations. It's more good for highways.

Jim has the right idea with the, run the engine at the "happy place" which is most efficent RPM. A series hybrid can do this provided the generator can provide enough power to propel the car down the highway at highway speed and have enough left over to charge the batteries up. Any less and you could find yourself without enough power. At less than highway speeds and when coasting downhill the engine cuts out when the batteries are fully charged.

Folco is correct, the highway of automotive history is littered with cars that while they my have been advanced they looked/drove too different to appeal to the driving public.

So it gets 157MPG with a german driving it. How many MPG does it lose when one of us obese americans drive it?

If it weighs less than 1000 lbs, I'd personally be adding over 25% to the cars weight just when i got in it. Put my girlfriend in there too and you've added over 40% to the weight!

I just traded in my mid sized SUV for a new Suburban with the largest available V-8 and I could not be happier. I don't care what the gas costs as long as it is available. I don't personally know a single person who is downsizing because of gas prices or availability. Plus my tank holds enough gas to get me 3 hours from home on one tank. What do I care how fast it burns? I disagree with the previous poster who said it is not safer to be in an SUV. I will take your Civic head on in my Suburban any day.

Dave in the Bay Area

--
editor note:

Know that safety is not just about head on collisions: A bigger vehicle takes longer to brake, is less nimble and has a harder time avoiding accidents. Its inertia pulls it harder in turns, it often blinds those in front with high headlights and blocks the view of those in the back. If it loses control and hits a tree/ditch/wall, the impact will be the same as if it had hit a vehicle as big head on (big disadvantage) and the chances of roll-over are much higher because big SUVs are often as tall - if not more - as they are wide. Not to mention how they kill pedestrians much more easily and you can back up on things and people without seeing them.

Small cars are becoming safer all the time. Active safety (not being in an accident in the first place) is just as important as passive safety, and small cars definitely have the upper hand there. Not to mention that weigth doesn't equal safety; otherwise bike helmets would be made of steel and you wouldn't see F1 pilots (with ultra-light cars) that crash into walls at 100+mph walk out with a couple bruises.

Dave in the Bay Area should reconsider: More money in the gas tank means less money for other things.

Let's say this car uses 8 times less fuel than a SUV, and you drive a 60-mile round trip to work, at $4/gallon, it would cost $60/week in the SUV, as opposed to $7.50/week in the other car! You're saving $2600/year! And that's just on a short commute to work when you are alone in the vehicle anyways... The savings could be staggering, when you factor in the cost of the vehicle, personal milleage, etc...

I welcome this car because it is the first (very) fuel efficent car that does not cost $100K to start with. Besides , the car looks cool, too. Not everybody lives in California!