Aptera Pushes Back Vehicle Production to October 2009

"Being able to grab a burger in a drive-thru"

This is a very legitimate concern. Seriously though, I thought the potential buyers of this car wouldn't be so petty. All new car buyers seem to think that they can't live without "power options". I guess Aptera buyers are no different. Here's a novel solution: Get out of the f***'n car and go inside.

Uh... drag coefficients are around .2 for somewhat aerodynamic cars; adding "a couple of tenths" would be a major dealbraker. I thought the point of this car was the best aero to have amazing efficiency. Who would buy this car and complain when they can't get their Big Mac form the drive through?!?!

Get out of the car, go inside, and get compliments.

Not bad, I say. . .

I'm not surprised at all. Aside from the prototype (that the media's been eating up) the Aptera's been vaporware from a consumer perspective since day one.

I'd love to see it, but this thing keeps getting pushed back.

I think this is ridiculous! People who are eating hamburgers are effecting the design of a highly advanced automobile that will set a new bar for useless companies like the ones in Detroit. This is a company that was started by a brilliant man to create a product that will change the landscape of automobile design and function, and help the environment. But because of the false environmentalists who want to be part of the “hype” and the “feel good” green movement, they have actually changed the company's position to sell a no compromise product. Instead their confused brains voted that they should be able to go to a DRIVE THRU TO GET A BURGER with this car.

Now where do we put the blame for this? The consumer? Partially, but not effectively. Why? Because the consumer is called “consumer” because of their intrinsic INABILITY to decide their purchases rationally and intelligently. Hence the all the companies in our current economic model that are feeding on the “consumer mind” with "conventional" products. These products have minimal environmental consideration because of the inconvenience this would cause. Let’s look at the plastic bottle industry as an example.

The real blame lies with the weak media and news systems. ALL of them, including TreeHugger.

You see, I am a lover of this planet. I also want our world to be a better place. And I am an avid environmentalist. I have changed my life in the past 10 years to be part of what really matters… our world. I am number 42 on the list of depositors for an Aptera. I have invested in Solar Panels that will charge my Aptera. I practice medicine in a the first of it’s kind, green medical office that I designed. I started a nonprofit environmental activist agency. I am vegan.

The last one is the most important. Not eating meat is agreed to be one of the most effective means of bettering our environment. Not only just because of the CO2 emissions associated with the meat industry, but because of all the environmental effects of the industries that are peripheral to meat. This is a well documented and understood fact. Regardless of your position on the relevance of CO2 in the discussion of climate change, Meat is a problem. From water, to feed to transportation and containment, meat is an issue that MUST be addressed.

But here we have new sources that current and future environmentalists refer to for perspective, and the meat issue is never pressed. Take TreeHugger for instance. Here is the source, a well respected resource for the “beginner environmentally concerned” individual, and instead of aggressively pushing the meat issue, hence making the most impact of our environment, they report on a loft in Florence made of recycled materials? http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/01/stair-reno-b-arch-florence.php Now, how many actual people in this country can afford to live like that? And even if they could… how many would change their entire living condition to live like that and be environmentally conscious. But how many of those people could easily reduce or stop their meat intake? Almost all.

So the fact that TreeHugger doesn’t take a harder line against the meat industry and the effects of meat in our diets and it’s effects on our environment proves that they are another in-effectual environmental resource facade.

If you really want an accurate and honest perspective about the environment, visit http://thegoldenspiral.org and there you will read honest and reporting about what is happening and what you should be doing. I know there will be challenge to this, but most you are informed about the upper 30% of the issue. I haven’t even discussed the environmental effects of meat taking medical diseases into consideration. So rather than argue the fact, get educated about the facts and then come to the table.

The bottom line is that until we have strong, non conventional news sources who show the public the real issues and push them, nothing will change. Future Aptera’s of the world will release products that are made to concede to the lazy and overweight fat food culture of America. Not because they are unethical, but because they see that the greater good is served by releasing a product that WILL raise the bar for the competition; even if that means making a small compromise in your philosophy. The sad part is not the compromise. It’s the fact that the media hasn’t educated the public well enough that they WOULDN’T desire an Aptera that can be functional in a drive through.

This is why things are not going to change fast enough.

See those side view mirrors? They originally didn't exist because the "in-dash" video screens made them superfluous. The state (California) and federal guidelines mandating side-view mirrors forced Aptera to add them back in which also added slightly to the drag co-efficients.

As far as being able to roll down a window for a burger... okay put that aside for a moment. What are you going to do if (God forbid) you're pulled over a policeman who demands you "roll down your window"? He does not want to see a door open.

Raiyn, I respect your viewpoints on "meat and society" but are you really suggesting mandating some sort of a "meatless society" by federal law? However, I agree that consumers suffer from over-packaging "itis", but this is corollary to a car that takes a quantum leap forward in automotive transportation. If a few tweaks might encourage more people to buy the car it's worth a couple tenths of points off the total drag coefficient. It's still going to be heads and tails more efficient than virtually any other car on the road.

Believe me consumption of meat products should be amongst the least of your societal worries.

Vaporware says it best..the deal is that you make up a gee Whiz prototype and then milk the system for all your promises because there is far more money in that than actually building a car which people would eventually buy, and that would cause gas prices to actually fall and we cant have that..

Time to forget about the so called professionals and build our own if we want something. There are several available 100mpg autos that could also be on line in a year.

We need a tea party where we just torch a couple oil company accomplice dealerships to show how we feel about what our past administraiton has foisted on us and about the pretense of progressive development now.

I couldve built this car myself in half the time these fakirs are taking. And a high school teacher in Pittsburgh did it last year with dropouts.

The more you pay them the longer they will take do do it. Its a big horse and pony show..not a real development..Like alternative housing and other Green scams, just less for more with PC agendas designed to suck up the money instead of actually helping anyone...(I want to divide the gallons saved by RD money spent and see how much has been saved by any of this, its like a guy who catches a fish that costs about $500 per pound with all the gear and the boat and beer..but he caught it himself