Why do designers feel the need to make electric or hybrid cars look so bloody ugly? They don't have to - look at the Lightning: http://www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk/
Chrysler look set to follow General Motors and put its own electric car into production in 2010 based on the four-door ecoVoyager concept it showed off earlier this year. At the time, Chrysler claimed the entirely electric ecoVoyager will have a range of 300 miles. Put that in your Volt and smoke it, GM. To be fair to GM, its …
This really is ugly. It's like a chromed banana-flavoured rollerskate.
Whatever happened to the Chrysler designers who came up with cars like Batman's weekend getaway car - the Atlantic concept?
Designers need to learn that a "green" car needs to be just different-looking enough so that people can identify that "hey, that person's driving a 'green' car! look how environmentally responsible they are!'. That's why the Prius outsells the Accord hybrid by a silly margin. People want other to know they drive a hybrid.
However, employ too radical a design, and people just think it looks like ass.
A little more of the former, a little less of the latter, please.
"To be fair to GM, its Chevy Volt, which can travel 40 miles on a battery charge, was this week being touted as a model that's ready for production"
If it's ready for production what are they gonna do between now and late 2010 when they are scheduled to start trying to sell it? Poor old GM just doesn't have what it takes any more. By the time that clunker hits the streets Toyota will have have been kicking their hybrid ass with the Prius for 9 years (13 if you count sales in Japan). It's going to take a much bigger leap of technology to be a winner in 2010.
It's something Chrysler likes to call "cab-forward design" (http://www.allpar.com/corporate/cab-forward.html), but it's taken to the extreme with this car (the bottom corner of the windscreen is over the center of the front wheel, for crying out loud).
I agree with the others here who think the design is a bit too radical for a production car (which is a nice way of saying it's butt-ugly).
My guess is that these all-electric cars are large because of the space needed to store all the batteries and still give you a usable boot/trunk.
I hope this
"One of the models, the paper says, drops the ecoVoyager's fuel cell in favour of a petrol-powered generator that kicks in to feed the electric engine with volts when the battery drops below a certain point. This is the same approach taken by the Volt."
was not the product of a scribe at The Reg!
Feed the "Electric engine" with "volts"? Someone needs a good smack with the clue-bat. It's an "electric motor", not an "electric engine". The generator that produces the electricity is powered by an "engine".
What's the difference? Well someone once put it to me this way, "engines produce power to do work.. motors use power to do work".
"One of the models, the paper says, drops the ecoVoyager's fuel cell in favour of a petrol-powered generator that kicks in to feed electricity to the motor when battery levels drop below a certain point. This is the same approach taken by the Volt."
See the difference?
yes, the hydrides are also a fuel, but environmentally in every way a billion times cleaner than a petrol or hybrid car. but GM, Shell, Exxon etc will not allow such cars to exist for the obvious reason that they would be signing their own death warrants.
That model in the driver seat is must be a member of Little People of America (I'm all for modeling industry's promotion of non-conformist body types). Either that, or s/he's too young to drive.
For large sedans and SUVs, 20 inches is the bare minimum wheel diameter for da-shizzleness in America. According to advanced mathematical models using geometric transformations and taking into account typical human physiology, that person is approximately three and a half feet (1.07m) tall.
This is a typical marketing tactic. If this person modeled jewelry, a half-carat promise ring would look like the Hope Diamond.
Like all green cars, they are not made for tall and/or fat folks (i.e., most Americans). I suspect they are made like this on purpose. Subjecting oneself to the cramped ride at least twice daily is a modern form of self-flagellation engineered to appeal to those suffering from Liberal Guilt.
Of course it has not a plug; you might as well put a "clean coal addict" bumper sticker on it.
It should sell well on both American coasts but nowhere else. Unfortunately, it will never have the range to get from one to the other.
I think the passenger has been photoshopped into the car. It's on a rotating display, and they usually don't let models sit in the cars on show like that. Plus, she is obviously an adult, but as commented on, otherwise ridiculously small. So, photoshop.
I don't mind the shape - kinda moon-buggyish - except for the rear, which is butt ugly.
Why is it that car manufacturers have to make their electric and / or hybrid cars look so stupid? (Toyota Prius, Honda Insight etc)
Only Lexus seems to be able to comprehend that people might want to choose a car .... and be able to have the exact same car with either a standard combustion engine or a hybric.
So why currently if you want a hybrid car, you have to look like an idiot driving around in a car that looks like it was designed by a 5 year old for transporting disabled animals. Oh I know why.... because if you buy hybrid/electric then you are an idiot because they are a false economy
** People want other to know they drive a hybrid. **
Only people who value appearance over other more common-sense things (I'm talking about all you SUV/Hummer people...) would buy an hybrid or an electric car for those reasons.
I like to think most people buy hybrid or electric cars because they want to avoid petrol and its consequences (related to petrol used for fuel...). Unfortunately, many people don't get it.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021