Five Thousand Euro Electric Car Catches VW's Attention
by Christine Lepisto, Berlin on 05. 9.08
"Oscar is smarter than the Smart", read the headlines of the Berliner Morgenpost after the little electric flitzer made a visit to the capital city. Oscar, for Open Source CAR, is an electric car developed by Felix von Borck of Akasol and a group of students at the Technical University of Darmstadt (which you may remember as the winner of the 2007 Solar Decathlon). Oscar was invited to Berlin for a meeting of the Green Party members in Germany's Bundestag (Parliament). There, Oscar drew the attention of a VW engineer. It is certainly not the looks, so what is it that draws VW's attention to Oscar?
According to von Borck, it is the drive train concept, with a powerful lithium-ion battery, that draws attention to Oscar. The Oscar project started with simple data: the average occupancy of an auto is 1.3 persons. 90% of all trips are under 9 km (5.6 miles). The Oscar is designed and developed specifically for this everyday use. The Oscar seats two adults, one behind the other, with a drawer for luggage that slides out from under the seating area. And it consumes 6kWh per hundred kilometers, the equivalent in electricity of one liter of diesel per hundred kilometers or 235 mpg.
Von Borck credits manufacturers like Tesla with moving the electric car cause forward, but dismisses Tesla as a toy: "It is like a Ferrari, which people will not be able to afford." By contrast, he calculates the Oscar could be sold for 5000€ if it is mass produced.
And the Oscar may be a step closer to mass production. At the Green Party meeting, that VW engineer took a test drive. Von Borck reports to Germany's Die Welt that the test drive promptly resulted in an invitation to Volkswagen.
Via ::Akasol and Berliner Morgenpost (German)
I wonder where the VW interest is going .. probably buy it and then let it rot while they make vague promises for the distant future.
Although if the car really is open source, then it might just have a chance :)
I want to buy a car, but I do not want to pollute and neither to cost me a lot. The Tesla roadster is great but too much expensive for me. A 2 seater with 200-300 km range, air conditioning and 4* NCAP safety would be great for me.
Good initiative, seems little costly. In India we recently saw TATA's Nano which is much cheaper but may no be as green as this.
This is just incredible. That mpg really throws me back, though considering it is going to be made by VW, the price of a new lithium battery would probably be the price of a new car. Still, thats a major breakthrough. Hopefully the 2 seater idea will catch on, that's a great design.
That little car is a fantastic concept. If it is really that cheap to mass produce, it would catch on quick in most countries. If VW do take up the option, it would be all over Europe in no time.
If 90% of trips are under 9km, what about the last 10%?
It seems that Volkswagen already has a solution, the VW 1-Litre Car. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
It has the same fuel economy as the Oscar, plus has room for a passenger and 80L storage space.
Hopefully VW can meet its promised 2010 production year.
I disagree that this is a great design. I think most people will be turned off by the F-14 (Front/back) inspired seating. I would be.
Which is exactly why VW is releasing their 235 MPG concept car in 2010.
http://gas2.org/2008/05/07/vw-confirms-1l-concept-will-become-reality-in-2010/
While the mileage of cars like this sound great, my biggest concern is safety. If everyone were driving similar vehicles, that would be great. But in the u.s., everyone (it seems) has SUV's. I'm pretty sure that a vehicle like this would come out on the losing end in a wreck with something like a suburban or Ram pickup truck.
Dallas:
Well I like it, so my vote cancels yours.
I'm actually going to get one if the final marketed model is not too far off the concept model in terms of efficiency.
Most of the time I drive alone, and the empty rear seat can be used to supplement the 80L trunk.
Looks a lot like the failed Corbin from California a few years ago ... as does the new one mentioned yesterday in
The other one, available in EU and quite sexy is the Carver carver-ww, although it's priced waaay beyond reasonable, very sad.
@Daniel: If you want 200-300 range, definitely look at the Aptera, but the hybrid rather than the all electric. I do wish they'd stuck with a diesel hybrid though.
As for the Tesla being priced like a Ferrari, it's less than half the price of a Ferrari (I still want a Ferrari though) and Tesla's strategy is to get the process refined by building a small quantity of high quality expensive vehicles ... which makes a lot of sense, then produce a vehicle for the masses (check out their station wagon).
Bicycles work great too :)
-P
I do wish the article gave some hint as to how far Oscar goes on a charge, 100mpg (equivalent) is cool and everything but not if it won't get me to work.
===auth. note===
Although 90% of trips are under 9 km, the Oscar has a range of 100 to 300 km. (see "Reichweite" at the link Oscar)
I love this idea.
I want to respond to the SUV comment. A test was done with the SMART,at 60 km an hour it slammedn to a brick wall. The car was totalled but the passender was unharmed. In contrast, in same test with an average sedan the person had multiple injuries.
So yes, an SUV crashing into your car at 60 km an hour would probally destroy this car. But you would be fine.
Until people stop using the " yes but is it safe?" tag line there will be no change in behaviour.
If you are that worried about safety mabye you should take public transit- much greener too!
Re: safety, I think the solution would be to allocate specific lanes on the interstate for any cars that exceed a certain curb weight, such as SUVs, tractor trailers, limousines, buses, etc. We already see this sort of division in the parkway system and on the New Jersey Turnpike.
Ooh I have to disagree with DDP here - with a 3 year old, the FIRST thing I think about with cars is "is it safe". And living in an area where public transportation is almost nonexistent and the common view is people driving around with their SUVs and pickup trucks (or, heaven forbid, their tractors!), having a SAFE car that could allow the two of us to do errands while my husband is working (I'm a stay at home mom), that also happens to have that kind of mileage and/or be gas-free at a cheaper price is a REAL plus.
"Yes, but is it safe" is going to be the calling card of moms like me throughout America. Making it affordable with more mileage is also going to please a greater range of people as well. If car makers would take into account that the average driver in America is going to have kids (hey, we're not all single or married without children living in a city!), and market to THEM, they might find they sell more cars.
Americans DID drive lots of SUVs. At 4 bucks a gallon, you'll see that end real quick.
The front-back seating completely ignores human nature. Engineering is important, but it's not the only tool a car designer should use. Human factors are critical, not to mention plain old safety.
Perhaps the drivetrain has good technology and this caught VW's attention. But the design of the car body is not very good.
Aptera and Think! have much more balanced and interesting visions of what a small electric car can be. Also, Tesla may have lost its luster due to their delays, but their strategy is sound and if they are able to execute it, it may yet win the day.
"The front-back seating completely ignores human nature. Engineering is important, but it's not the only tool a car designer should use. Human factors are critical, not to mention plain old safety."
I think part of this reaction is the "different is bad" reaction.
Motorcycle riders often ride cross country two up, and that has to be less comfortable on a motorcycle than in this vehicle.
I see so many single occupancy cars, yet it would be a pain to not have a little storage for grocery or a friend in a pinch.
Where do I sign up?
TomS
www.waterpetrolcar.com
Where do I sign up?
TomS
www.waterpetrolcar.com
The front-back seating completely ignores human nature. Engineering is important, but it's not the only tool a car designer should use. Human factors are critical, not to mention plain old safety.
Perhaps the drivetrain has good technology and this caught VW's attention. But the design of the car body is not very good.
Aptera and Think! have much more balanced and interesting visions of what a small electric car can be. Also, Tesla may have lost its luster due to their delays, but their strategy is sound and if they are able to execute it, it may yet win the day.
This car, the Oscar, should be compared not to the Tesla, but to the Tango, already for sale at http://www.commutercars.com/
Both are electric powered, inline two seaters.
The best part of the tandem seating is the fact that it allows to move between cars during slow- moving traffic. Here in Caracas, Venezuela, average drivers spend 3.5 hours every day sitting alone in their cars due to the enormous gridlocks; which have encouraged lots of people to use motorcycles for commuting. The OScar and the Tango (and the CLEVER project) allows for motorbike-like mobility with car-like protection while leaving very little pollution. A winning formula!
Chris,
The F-14 is hardly the first aircraft to use tandem seating. If you'd like to make a comparison to an aircraft, the Piper J-3 Cub may be more appropriate, since many many more J-3 Cubs have been built, flown, and loved by many more people than the F-14. I learned to fly floats in a J-3 Cub, and it really flies the way that it looks -- low, slow, friendly, and fun. :-)
This looks like a neat electric car, but I'm concerned that it might be likely to tip on hard cornering. Maybe it has a low center of gravity, or maybe it can't go fast enough to tip over -- but I see enough bodyroll when I drive a Ford Ranger, and this electric car has a high profile. Also, would crosswinds blow it over?
P.S. I'm not willing to kill (when ordered, or ever) in order to fly an F-14. But I'll pay through the nose for a ride in fair weather in a Cub!
JC: Lots of people crash and die while in SUVs too, including moms and their children.
In rollovers, for example, your risk of death is 50% in a SUV, while it's only 20% if you're in a car.
Luke: A person's comment is above the name, not under...
Small vehicles are better to crash in than a big pig of an SUV. An Escalade going 40 mph is far more dangerous to everyone (passengers included) than a sub-compact car at twice the speed.
People need to remember that the most important factor in a crash is MASS, not speed. (Basic physics.) A hundred-mile-per-hour feather just isn't going to have the effect of a 5 mph ball of lead.
And anyway.... when was the last time you were in an accident?
What about an accident at anything above 20 mph?
How much of your commute is spent going any faster than 35 mph?
Answer those questions - truthfully - and you will see that a nice, lightweight commuter vehicle is far more rational than your fears of getting t-boned by a 100 mph Escalade.
CJ - you obviously failed physics. An escalade at 40 mph, which has 2.6 times LESS energy of the LIGHTEST subcompact (2200 pounds) going twice the speed, or here, 80 mph. So the subcompact is WAY more dangerous at this speed. Velocity is much more important than weight as the force of impact is proportional to the mass times the velocity squared. So the velocity is a much larger faster.
A subcompact could only be driving at 49.73 miles per hour to have almost the same amount of energy as an escalade.