In reply to mblommel : That's a pretty sunbelt-specific scenario. Speaking of which, air conditioning is a pretty big energy thief. I'm just saying that their claim is hyberbolic.
On a different note: It looks like they've widened it. Whatcha think?
In reply to mblommel : That's a pretty sunbelt-specific scenario. Speaking of which, air conditioning is a pretty big energy thief. I'm just saying that their claim is hyberbolic.
On a different note: It looks like they've widened it. Whatcha think?
In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :
Definitely hyperbolic. The 1000 mile range claim has me wondering too. It does make good marketing copy though. 
The fact that I'm in the sun-belt plays into my interest. We get quite a bit of sun, and for the most part it's wasted. I was also wondering about HVAC. The big difference between Florida and SoCal is the HUMIDITY. Functional airconditioning is a must and lack of it is one of the reasons I sold my Elise.
Overall it's an interesting concept that employs some extremes in it's design. When I was a kid (1982-ish), I visited the world of motion in EPCOT. From what I saw there I thought we'd all be riding around in high-tech, ultra aerodynamic cars like the Aptera by now. The 21st century reality of bro-dozers, CUV's and minivans is a bit of disappointment, so I'm intrigued by this possibility to bring some of that future into reality. I guess it's intriguing enough for me to give 'em a hundred bucks so far. 
I'm not sure how much wider it is than the original verison. I do think the new version looks much better. The small LED lights are better, and losing the oddly shaped rear quarter windows helps too. I like the black color. I like the new taillights. At the end of they day they are allowing aerodynamics to dictate much of the body shape, so aesthics are what they are to a certain degree. The interior is lightyears better in the new version, although I've read that while the current seats look cool they aren't very comfortable. I'm interested to see where it goes.
That's my wife topping off in NJ (exit 9 off the Turnpike) on her way from here in Baltimore to eastern CT, normally a 6 hour drive. This added 30 minutes to that due to needing a bit more charge in the February cold. In the summer, the range increases to over 300 miles (336 to be exact) so can make the trip with no stops except to pee and eat, so might as well top off a bit then, too. This is simply not onerous.
The Bolt, for the last year and half has had transaction prices in the sub-$25k range. No government incentives, but GM can still make money on them at those prices. And EVERYONE gets those prices unless the dealer "forgets" GM's own incentives ($8500 off the top to the customer, and $4-5k off to the dealer, most of whom pass that on to the buyer, like the dealer I bought mine from). So no, you can no longer use MSRP to judge the cost of a Bolt any more than you can when looking at pickups (which MSRP for $60k and up, but everyone gets $10k off anyhow).
How can GM make money on them at these prices? Simple: Battery costs have dropped precipitously. In 2011 when the Volt came out, batteries cost about $1000/kWh so it's mere 16kWh battery (with a 38 mile EV range) cost $16,000! That meant that GM was indeed losing money selling the car at $35-40k. By the time the Bolt came out in 2016 as a 2017 model, battery costs had dropped to about $300/kWh, making the then 60 kWh battery cost just over $18,000. So at 35-40k, they were not really making money. BUT, by 2020, the price had dropped to ~$100/kWh, making the 2020 Bolt's larger 66kWh battery pack cost a mere $6600! So now they can make money at $25k (and the top trim level, Premier, has dropped from $43k to just under $30k).
BTW, the Bolt is NOT a Fit sized car. It's bigger than a MINI Cooper, and is more akin to a slightly taller GTI, and at $25k is priced like one. If you're on the fence, go test drive one, turn of traction control, put it in Sport and hoon a bit. Fun little car.
Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to mblommel : Given that they are claiming that their integrated solar panels will make the car unnecessary to charge, it's clear that they haven't lost their penchant for stretching the truth.
Lemme stop you there, in hopefully the coolest way possible: Here's Aptera's list of questions Aptera is answering off their website about the vehicle. Right now it's right at 500 total questions; if you search around you'll find pictures of their functional prototypes of their solar inverter, their motor supplier (Elaphe) and their investors include Sandy Munroe. I'd say they're completely legit.
Their maxed-out version is slated to get ~40 miles a day off solar alone, but it's worth noting that the Aptera is actually very long and wide, and that level has panels literally on all surfaces of the vehicle. It's similar in size to a common truck, but like half the weight.
I'd put down a pre-order too if I knew what my money situation would be.
NermalSnert (Forum Supporter) said:How much of the quick acceleration is just the nature of the beast? (Flat electric motor torque curve)
Most of it. Voltage is at ~400 when it hits motor and the Elaphe motors are in the wheels themselves (here's a link) so I doubt they could "slow" it very much without just adding complexity.
In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :
Thanks for the link. Hope I get the chanc to read through it soon.
In fairness, streaching the truth, is not the same thing as not being legit. Caroll Shelby hisself was a master at it!
I hope they do archive their stated goals. but I'm also sure there is some sales hype there, too.
The long and wide is a good thing for solar panels; panel tech. has also come a LONG way since their first time around. I only discovered the Aptera last night, so I have a lot of catching up to do; despite knowing I'll never afford one, they do intrigue me.
Legit question... has panel tech. advanced enough for curved panels to be efficient? If not that could cause some aero concerns. If panels can be efficient and shaped into compound curves, mounted flush, there is a lot of potential.
In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :
It's adspeak. kinda like a certain misleading term that another electric vehicle company uses: "autopilot".
Aptera looks more legit than they ever have, but you can't blame people for being dubious given their rocky past. I hope that they make it, because theirs is a pretty unique and interesting product. In a way, it's the anti-cybertruck. Lightweight and aerodynamic versus heavy and brutish.
03Panther said:In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :
Thanks for the link. Hope I get the chanc to read through it soon.
In fairness, streaching the truth, is not the same thing as not being legit. Caroll Shelby hisself was a master at it!
I hope they do archive their stated goals. but I'm also sure there is some sales hype there, too.
The long and wide is a good thing for solar panels; panel tech. has also come a LONG way since their first time around. I only discovered the Aptera last night, so I have a lot of catching up to do; despite knowing I'll never afford one, they do intrigue me.
Legit question... has panel tech. advanced enough for curved panels to be efficient? If not that could cause some aero concerns. If panels can be efficient and shaped into compound curves, mounted flush, there is a lot of potential.
Yeah, its a berkeleyton to read. I think I got though it all over several shifts. I think flexible panels have been producing on the same level as modern monocrystalline cells, but here they could just be a piece of curved glass (i.e. the panel is still as hard as ever).
In Reply to Kreb :
No debate here on the adspeak.
It really IS the anti-Cybertruck, aint it? Fast due to light weight and low drag, looks super aerodynamic instead of a steel monolith of BERK YOU in the rear view.
I'm with Kreb regarding Aptera, "Burn me once, shame on you, burn me twice, shame on..."
Anyway, it's not small: "Overall Length: 172 in. Overall Width: 88.0 in. Overall Height: 57 in.", won't fit in our garage. Then again, if we pretend it'll never be plugged in, it needs to be outside anyway. Speaking of the auto-charge, yeah, I get so tired of manufacturers cherry picking their facts, but they all do it. Any mfg saying their car gets 30 mph AND can go 200 mph is so common, we all know that the two claims never occur at the same time.
Back to the auto-charge, much like the solar industry, they cherry-pick actual facts to arrive at the 40-mile range extension. I'd bet money that they conveniently assume that the car is parked in the correct orientation to the sun's path, that there is zero shade, no mountains on the horizon, the car is clean, it's June 21 (longest day of the year), the solar panels are new, and the car is parked on the earth's equator. Is that realistic? No, but that's the world we live in. If you're really serious about getting one, it's probably worth a spreadsheet calculation to figure out if the $900 solar panels make sense, because it's probably more like 10 miles a day.
Reading through their site (which is kind of convoluted), they say they will/do offer HVAC, but it's not listed on the options list. If it included in every car, why not list it? If it's an option, what's the price and why isn't it listed? I thought it was funny that they list as a perk being able to keep the interior at room temperature during hot days. Yes, I'm sure that it can, but you and I know what that'll do to the battery charge.
So I continue to pick at them - they deserve it after their antics - yet at the same time, I really like the body shape. In my Milliken automobile design book, that line drawing from VW was noteworthy because they reached that shape as being the ultimate in low drag while still having an interior volume shaped to accommodate both people and the powerplant. Other factors come into play for me though, like how I plan to retire in the next few years, and my 50-mile commute will go away. Moneywise it's probably a waste, and if I have to go electric, would be better spent on something like a used Bolt. For that matter, if we don't drive much, why go electric at all? It's all about everyone's specific situation.
Oh, and lastly, starting a car business in Carlsbad California is fine as long as it stays as a design, but actually building cars is a huge deal, needing huge buildings, and around here, are both unavailable and reeeeeally expensive. They'll have to leave the state or head to the desert, and they've made no mention of where and how these will be constructed in such a way that they can keep up with demand.
tuna55 said:There are pedestrian collision tests that this thing will be subjected to.
Also stainless steel doesn't really mean anything over and above carbon steel other than it will be more corrosion resistant. It's not any tougher, and actually weaker in some important ways than alloy carbon steel.
True, but the thickness of the steel is the main takeaway here. It's also said to be bulletproof up to a 9mm. My main point is that it's built of stuff that's far tougher than other vehicles, and it's going to be heavy, as well. Cybertruck wrecks are not going to be pretty for the other vehicle.
Good point on the pedestrian collision tests. I don't see pedestrians fairing well against this either.
Chris_V said:
That's my wife topping off in NJ (exit 9 off the Turnpike) on her way from here in Baltimore to eastern CT, normally a 6 hour drive. This added 30 minutes to that due to needing a bit more charge in the February cold. In the summer, the range increases to over 300 miles (336 to be exact) so can make the trip with no stops except to pee and eat, so might as well top off a bit then, too. This is simply not onerous.
The Bolt, for the last year and half has had transaction prices in the sub-$25k range. No government incentives, but GM can still make money on them at those prices. And EVERYONE gets those prices unless the dealer "forgets" GM's own incentives ($8500 off the top to the customer, and $4-5k off to the dealer, most of whom pass that on to the buyer, like the dealer I bought mine from). So no, you can no longer use MSRP to judge the cost of a Bolt any more than you can when looking at pickups (which MSRP for $60k and up, but everyone gets $10k off anyhow).
How can GM make money on them at these prices? Simple: Battery costs have dropped precipitously. In 2011 when the Volt came out, batteries cost about $1000/kWh so it's mere 16kWh battery (with a 38 mile EV range) cost $16,000! That meant that GM was indeed losing money selling the car at $35-40k. By the time the Bolt came out in 2016 as a 2017 model, battery costs had dropped to about $300/kWh, making the then 60 kWh battery cost just over $18,000. So at 35-40k, they were not really making money. BUT, by 2020, the price had dropped to ~$100/kWh, making the 2020 Bolt's larger 66kWh battery pack cost a mere $6600! So now they can make money at $25k (and the top trim level, Premier, has dropped from $43k to just under $30k).
BTW, the Bolt is NOT a Fit sized car. It's bigger than a MINI Cooper, and is more akin to a slightly taller GTI, and at $25k is priced like one. If you're on the fence, go test drive one, turn of traction control, put it in Sport and hoon a bit. Fun little car.
The only thing I don't like about my Bolt is the color. That teal is wonderful!
I just checked some numbers and the Aptera is 8" wider than my F150! Granted, if you park it nose-in, it should be easy to get in and out, but there may still be a learning curve when turning.
infinitenexus said:tuna55 said:There are pedestrian collision tests that this thing will be subjected to.
Also stainless steel doesn't really mean anything over and above carbon steel other than it will be more corrosion resistant. It's not any tougher, and actually weaker in some important ways than alloy carbon steel.
True, but the thickness of the steel is the main takeaway here. It's also said to be bulletproof up to a 9mm. My main point is that it's built of stuff that's far tougher than other vehicles, and it's going to be heavy, as well. Cybertruck wrecks are not going to be pretty for the other vehicle.
Good point on the pedestrian collision tests. I don't see pedestrians fairing well against this either.
6000 lbs isn't that heavy for a truck. My 20 year old silverado is close to 7000. It's an ext cab, short bed 2500hd srw gas, so cab and bed size should be similar to the cyber truck. I like that its stainless, here in ohio trucks rust out long before they wear out. I dont think I could own a cyber truck because I think they look hideous, just ridiculous.
I dont currently own an EV but I'm on board, at least theoretically. One thing that holds me back is just the fact that they are advancing so quickly I would feel like if I waited a couple years I would be able to buy a better product for less money.
gearheadmb said:infinitenexus said:tuna55 said:There are pedestrian collision tests that this thing will be subjected to.
Also stainless steel doesn't really mean anything over and above carbon steel other than it will be more corrosion resistant. It's not any tougher, and actually weaker in some important ways than alloy carbon steel.
True, but the thickness of the steel is the main takeaway here. It's also said to be bulletproof up to a 9mm. My main point is that it's built of stuff that's far tougher than other vehicles, and it's going to be heavy, as well. Cybertruck wrecks are not going to be pretty for the other vehicle.
Good point on the pedestrian collision tests. I don't see pedestrians fairing well against this either.
6000 lbs isn't that heavy for a truck. My 20 year old silverado is close to 7000. It's an ext cab, short bed 2500hd srw gas, so cab and bed size should be similar to the cyber truck. I like that its stainless, here in ohio trucks rust out long before they wear out. I dont think I could own a cyber truck because I think they look hideous, just ridiculous.
I dont currently own an EV but I'm on board, at least theoretically. One thing that holds me back is just the fact that they are advancing so quickly I would feel like if I waited a couple years I would be able to buy a better product for less money.
There's some wisdom in that last statement. When I bought the Bolt it was between that and a Mazda 3, ultimately for carrying this sack of meat back and forth in comfort, safety, and economy. The Bolt will probably be dramatically overshadowed in range and performance within my planned ten years of ownership. I was hesitant, but then I thought "so what?". Even if next year an EV comes out that gets 1000 miles of range and charges in fifteen seconds it doesn't change my use case, and the Bolt still totally works. It would feel like I timed things wrong, but oh well. You'd never buy a stock that way either.
Does anyone make moon discs for modern wheels? The Bolt would look sweet with a set.
tuna55 said:... The Bolt will probably be dramatically overshadowed in range and performance within my planned ten years of ownership. I was hesitant, but then I thought "so what?". Even if next year an EV comes out that gets 1000 miles of range and charges in fifteen seconds it doesn't change my use case, and the Bolt still totally works. It would feel like I timed things wrong, but oh well. You'd never buy a stock that way either.
Think of it like getting married, pick a spouse, then stop looking!
tuna55 said:There's some wisdom in that last statement. When I bought the Bolt it was between that and a Mazda 3, ultimately for carrying this sack of meat back and forth in comfort, safety, and economy. The Bolt will probably be dramatically overshadowed in range and performance within my planned ten years of ownership. I was hesitant, but then I thought "so what?". Even if next year an EV comes out that gets 1000 miles of range and charges in fifteen seconds it doesn't change my use case, and the Bolt still totally works. It would feel like I timed things wrong, but oh well. You'd never buy a stock that way either.
The concern here for some is depreciation, which can get super steep when tech is advancing this quickly. I would be pretty disappointed if I bought a $35k Bolt only to see dealers selling them for $10k lightly used a few years later.
ProDarwin said:The concern here for some is depreciation, which can get super steep when tech is advancing this quickly. I would be pretty disappointed if I bought a $35k Bolt only to see dealers selling them for $10k lightly used a few years later.
So my "marriage" analogy still applies :)
gearheadmb said:infinitenexus said:tuna55 said:There are pedestrian collision tests that this thing will be subjected to.
Also stainless steel doesn't really mean anything over and above carbon steel other than it will be more corrosion resistant. It's not any tougher, and actually weaker in some important ways than alloy carbon steel.
True, but the thickness of the steel is the main takeaway here. It's also said to be bulletproof up to a 9mm. My main point is that it's built of stuff that's far tougher than other vehicles, and it's going to be heavy, as well. Cybertruck wrecks are not going to be pretty for the other vehicle.
Good point on the pedestrian collision tests. I don't see pedestrians fairing well against this either.
6000 lbs isn't that heavy for a truck. My 20 year old silverado is close to 7000. It's an ext cab, short bed 2500hd srw gas, so cab and bed size should be similar to the cyber truck. I like that its stainless, here in ohio trucks rust out long before they wear out. I dont think I could own a cyber truck because I think they look hideous, just ridiculous.
I dont currently own an EV but I'm on board, at least theoretically. One thing that holds me back is just the fact that they are advancing so quickly I would feel like if I waited a couple years I would be able to buy a better product for less money.
Isn't that always true? Pick something and future technology seems to make it better and cheaper. My first cell phone was a joke and much more expensive compared to what I have now which is already 7 years old.
I know a new truck has more power and gets better mileage. Cars do the same. But I can't be without transportation until the best comes out.
If you're willing to take the depreciation hit you can always upgrade with the newest.
In reply to kb58 :
88" wide? I knew it looked wide, but hadn't actually thought about the number. That would just fit through my garage door - with about an inch on each side (just measured it). Eek.
Amusingly, I am almost certain I would have to give up my beloved stow-n-go seats in an EV minivan. I can live with that. So far, the VW Buzz is the only possible option on the horizon (2024-ish in the US?), but as cool as it looks, I have to reserve judgement until I can see one in person and measure the interior space. I have a small collection of classic cars for fun driving. I buy modern cars purely to be a reliable utility appliance.
Ian F (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to kb58 :
88" wide? I knew it looked wide, but hadn't actually thought about the number. ...
Yup, I cut and pasted that straight from their site, so unless it's a typo at their end, it's REALLY wide, but whatever it takes to not tip over, I guess :)
I also read on the Aptera site that they're going to deliver something like 300 cars in "2021." Hmm, 2021 has 7 months left, and as far as I know, no one's taken delivery of Car 1, so it seems like an unrealistic promise.
In reply to tuna55 :
I like teal.
But I like your red bolt better.
If I could afford something like that, it would be a good appliance car for me.
Re: buying too early; it's such a dilemma. It always is, but it's true things have been changing so fast.
OTOH, I feel like at least we're past where it matters *as much*. I say this because my (EDIT: 2013) Leaf ended up being not enough for The One Household Appliance, but any of the 3, Mach E, Ioniq 5, Polestar, and an increasing list would have plenty of range AND have more usable performance than most ICE cars I've had.
That is, we might see big changes, but tripling the (early) Leaf's range changes *everything*, while tripling the Model 3's range hardly changes anything (for me).
Now it's coming down to "which of these would make me so happy I want to drive it for a decade or maybe the rest of my life."
Re: Quickly changing tech, and buying too soon
My dad had a '19 GTI for about a year. Never warmed to it. He just sold it for what he paid for it, and "needed" another car, but as he's retired and has a truck and a fun car - both of which live at his vacation home - he didn't NEED a car. So he was casually looking. He felt very similar to the sentiment, that the next generation will be much better - maybe not in actual day to day use, but there will be more options, there may be more self driving options, range and charging times may be lower... And for him, it is all convenience. He could get a V12 and fill it with premium for the amount that he drives, he has extra cars, etc.
So with all of that, he decided that he'd get a stopgap car. And now he has a 1990 325i, automatic, coupe for a DD. I doubt the next one will be an EV, but he likes to say it will be.
You'll need to log in to post.
