157 mpg!!!!!!

[Dandaman]

http://www.ifenergy.com/50226711/loremo_on_the_edge.php

you could drive across america on 20 gallons!!!

daniel

[naturetrance]

Holy cow, I want one! :D

[taytho]

http://www.ifenergy.com/50226711/loremo_on_the_edge.php

you could drive across america on 20 gallons!!!

daniel
whoa.... where do i sign?

[balamw]

whoa.... where do i sign?
http://www.loremo.com/kaufen_en.php ?

B

[CanadaRAM]

You're going to find that it gets 157 MPG only when it is running at constant low highway speeds, where its low coefficient of drag comes into play. A slippery body doesn't mean too much at city speeds. The most efficient car in the world gets zero miles per gallon while idling at a stoplight... which is the theory behind the hybids that allow the gas engine to be turned off during low demand.

Also note that the LS version, which gets the 157 mpg, has a top speed of about 55 mph and they don't say anything about acceleration. The sport version, which they quote acceleration figures for, they don't quote MPG :rolleyes:

[Kingsly]

For $13,610 bucks!? Sign me up! (if, that is, its safe)

[maxterpiece]

157 mpg
seating for 4
no doors - the whole front including the windshield lifts forward, so you can get into the car standing up.
weighs 450 kg or about 1000 lbs.
available world wide in 2009.

This seems really really cool.

[WildCowboy]

Also note that the LS version, which gets the 157 mpg, has a top speed of about 55 mph and they don't say anything about acceleration. The sport version, which they quote acceleration figures for, they don't quote MPG :rolleyes:

Not quite...here (http://www.loremo.com/daten_en.php) are the specs. The LS model has a top speed of 160 km/h (100 mph). Acceleration is horrid. The GT uses almost twice as much gas as the LS.

[maxterpiece]

You're going to find that it gets 157 MPG only when it is running at constant low highway speeds, where its low coefficient of drag comes into play. A slippery body doesn't mean too much at city speeds. The most efficient car in the world gets zero miles per gallon while idling at a stoplight... which is the theory behind the hybids that allow the gas engine to be turned off during low demand.

Also note that the LS version, which gets the 157 mpg, has a top speed of about 55 mph and they don't say anything about acceleration. The sport version, which they quote acceleration figures for, they don't quote MPG :rolleyes:

http://www.loremo.com/daten_en.php
lower model has a top speed of 160km/hr or about 100 mph. It goes 0-60 in about 20 seconds.
high end model goes 220 km/hr or about 140mph. 0-60 in about 9 seconds.

An average economy car today goes 0-60 in probably like 17 seconds.

As far as having to go 55mph to get the advertised mileage? Well this is true for all cars. Think about it though, this car has a 2 cylinder diesel engine. It's going to be incredibly efficient.

[CanadaRAM]

Not quite...here (http://www.loremo.com/daten_en.php) are the specs. The LS model has a top speed of 160 km/h (100 mph). Acceleration is horrid. The GT uses almost twice as much gas as the LS.
Sorry, I misread it as km/h

It's a neat bit of spin the way they quoted the MPG of the LS, and then the performance of the Sport, glossing over that little fact :(

available world wide in 2009.
= Vaporware.

Meh.
Wake me up when there's something real to talk about.

[plinkoman]

20hp???? :eek:

no thanks.

[WildCowboy]

An average economy car today goes 0-60 in probably like 17 seconds.

Can you show me such a car? I imagine you'll be hard pressed to find a car (other than a huge hulking gas guzzler) than goes 0-60 in more than 12 seconds. Your entry level Corollas, Civics, and Elantras are all around 8-10 seconds.

0-60 in 20 seconds is ridiculous...you'll never be able to merge onto a freeway.

[Counterfit]

Can you show me such a car? I imagine you'll be hard pressed to find a car (other than a huge hulking gas guzzler) than goes 0-60 in more than 12 seconds. Your entry level Corollas, Civics, and Elantras are all around 8-10 seconds.
Road & Track tested the Ford Escape XLT and Hybrid (both FWD), the new Civic EX and Hybrid NAVI, and the Camry SE V6 and Hybrid. The fastest was the Camry SE, at 6.1s, and the slowest was the Civic Hybrid, at 10.1s. The slowest to 60 in their Summary, is the Prius (1st gen I think, tested in May '01) at 11.6s. And just for kicks, the Scion xB would take approximately 34s to hit 100.

the GT model will reach up to 135 mph with a 0 to 60 mph acceleration of 9 seconds.
By the time you hit 135, you'll already be where you're going!

you could drive across america on 20 gallons!!!
And it would only take you 20 days! :p

[Chip NoVaMac]

I am sorry, but we need to start to relook at our lives. The greed that drives the "need" for cars that so 0-60mph in under 10 seconds needs to be looked at.

At least they way I looked at my visit to London in February, there seems to a disconnect between the US and and the rest of EU as to what we should and could drive. At least in Iceland they made a well thought of issue for 4x4's. Though it did not mean that I did not see a good share of Ford Focus or Toyota Yaris vehicles.

As much as I would want this car, I did the math on the Toyota Prius and my 3yo Subaru Baja. Given the low annual milage I drive (about 7-10K a year), there is no way that it would make sense for me to trade. I am better off paying the loan, and soaking up the "excess profits" that the oil companies are getting.

Th only benefit that I wold see is a psychological one, cutting down my bi-weekly gas costs in half.

[pseudobrit]

= Vaporware.

Meh.
Wake me up when there's something real to talk about.

Anyone else getting that "$12,000 DeLorean" feeling?

Volkswagen already made a 3L/100km Lupo (~78mpg) and they didn't take it out of Europe.

They understood that with its small size, very little power and lack of convenience features there would be a limited market for such a vehicle, especially when they have to ask for more money for less car.

This thing is supposed to weigh less than 1000 lbs. I just don't see how that's possible without it either being a total deathtrap or using massive amounts of carbon fiber and aluminium. The webpage says it uses steel and costs €12,000. They explain it away by talking about some special structural design. Mainstream automakers spend billions on R&D and haven't produced a steel car weighing less than 2000 lbs in quite some time. There's a reason for that.

[Chip NoVaMac]

By the time you hit 135, you'll already be where you're going!


And it would only take you 20 days! :p

Your comments sounds as if you live in the US.

At 60mph a trip from the DC area to SF takes just 48 hours (or two days if you allow for a solo driver and proper rest).

Speed at taking off from a stoplight is not all the end all be all. I don't know how many times I caught up with a driver that did well above the posted limit, weaving in and out - only to catch up with them at a traffic light.

In the end I saved gas and stress,

[dmw007]

Wow, 1-5-7 MPG! :eek:


I wish that my car got that kind of gas mileage! :rolleyes: :)

[pseudobrit]

Speed at taking off from a stoplight is not all the end all be all.

My car gets 54 highway (real life numbers), weighs a touch under 3000lbs and has about 160ft-lbs of torque. It also climbs like a goat with all that low-end grunt.

20hp on a turbodiesel = generously about 35ft-lbs torque.

1000/35=28.5
3000/160=18.75

To Hell with taking off from stoplights, this thing couldn't climb a slight grade at 65 mph on an interstate highway. Like a loaded tractor, you'd have to gear down and floor it to keep it above 50.

[CanadaRAM]

Wow, 1-5-7 MPG! :eek:


I wish that my car got that kind of gas mileage! :rolleyes: :)
Yeah, but you have the machine guns and the ejector seat, so its all good.

[dmw007]

Yeah, but you have the machine guns and the ejector seat, so its all good.

This is true. Those little things easily make up for the poor gas mileage that MI-6's cars get. :) ;)

How anyone can live without machine guns, rockets, and a refrigerated champagne compartment built-in to their cars I will never know. :rolleyes: ;) :)

[Chip NoVaMac]

My car gets 54 highway (real life numbers), weighs a touch under 3000lbs and has about 160ft-lbs of torque. It also climbs like a goat with all that low-end grunt.

Care to share this option?

[pseudobrit]

Care to share this option?

TDI

[Chip NoVaMac]

TDI

Should have seen that coming. :)

[Abstract]

Can you show me such a car? I imagine you'll be hard pressed to find a car (other than a huge hulking gas guzzler) than goes 0-60 in more than 12 seconds.

Perfect, because "huge hulking gas guzzlers" make up a massive chunk of the US market.


By the time you hit 135, you'll already be where you're going!


And it would only take you 20 days! :p

Ah yes, but other than the selfish consumerism promoted throughout the world, especially in America when it comes to cars and driving, there isn't anything wrong with 0-60 mph in 9 seconds, and at the prices they're asking for, it would be competitive. Unfortunately, people won't judge based on their needs and on benefitting the environment. People are selfish and will not buy this cheap car because a Civic might get to 60 mph a second faster. Also, it's an unconventional car, so the conformists definitely won't go for it.


Volkswagen already made a 3L/100km Lupo (~78mpg) and they didn't take it out of Europe.

They understood that with its small size, very little power and lack of convenience features there would be a limited market for such a vehicle, especially when they have to ask for more money for less car.

Personally, I think it's about time that people begin to realize that they're going to have to make a sacrifice in performance in order to minimize damage to the environment, and to preserve what little petrol we have left. Instead of buying the car that can go 220 km/h, which nobody really drives at anyway, they're going to have to get a car that "only goes to 160 km/h", which is faster than most people drive anyway (in most countries), so I don't see what the big deal is. The large majority wouldn't notice this performance difference. It'll only look bad on the specs page, but in their own reality, it won't matter much. Despite that, people will buy the car that can get to 220 km/h because people are quite selfish, and even if they'll never drive that fast in their entire lives, they still want it.

[gekko513]

I don't need a lot of acceleration, but I need to be able to keep driving at 80 km/h uphill. Can it do that with only 20hp? I doubt it can if you add 250 kg worth of passengers and baggage.

The GT could be fine, though, and it still uses only 0,25l per 10 km.

[Stridder44]

Not quite...here (http://www.loremo.com/daten_en.php) are the specs. The LS model has a top speed of 160 km/h (100 mph). Acceleration is horrid. The GT uses almost twice as much gas as the LS.

Can you show me such a car? I imagine you'll be hard pressed to find a car (other than a huge hulking gas guzzler) than goes 0-60 in more than 12 seconds. Your entry level Corollas, Civics, and Elantras are all around 8-10 seconds.

0-60 in 20 seconds is ridiculous...you'll never be able to merge onto a freeway.


Agreed. Have fun trying to get to California highway speeds in that 20hp thing....
Besides, I'll believe it when I see it on the road.

/Is tired of all the "potential" fuel saving vehicles that never make it to production

[Timepass]

I am sorry, but we need to start to relook at our lives. The greed that drives the "need" for cars that so 0-60mph in under 10 seconds needs to be looked at.


Well for me I dont think I could go back to having a car that takes more than 8 sec to get 60. Now do I normally get to 60 in under 10. No not very offen but when I need the power or accelration I have it. I grown very used to it. When I drive any of my parents cars or my brother car I end up flooring them unknownly just to get the acceleration I am used to. In my car I dont floor it that offen. That being said I drive a Sentra Spec V so larger engine small car that is set up to race off the lot. But I still get desent gas mileage at highway speeds.

Times that it comes in handly. At a stop light I need to get over 1 lane (either made a mistake and didnt move over in time to begin with or just couldnt get over). I able to blaste a head and make a lane change.

Having to pull out into traffic doing 60+ from a dead stop and not a large amount of room to do it. Being able to get up to speed is a safety thing.

That or pulling out and relazing that room was tight I can floor it and get out of the mess.

And before some says they are all driver error. You are right most of them are but then again no one perfect driver who makes no mistakes. It be that ONE time that you make that mistake that you would wish your car had the accerlation to pull out of it.

That being said there is a lot of merit in the safety side of it. Plus it nice to have the power for passing on a 2 lane road. You are able to gun the car and get around the guy in frount of you quicker and out of on coming traffic.

[dmw007]

I don't need a lot of acceleration, but I need to be able to keep driving at 80 km/h uphill. Can it do that with only 20hp? I doubt it can if you add 250 kg worth of passengers and baggage.


I doubt that it would do very well at all. 20hp just does not seem like enough power to do that.


The GT could be fine, though, and it still uses only 0,25l per 10 km.

The GT would be better, but still not very good.

[Les Kern]

You all have good points, but look at it this way: There ARE people who's lifestyles or needs demand that car.
I just filled my truck up yesterday and got a few extra gallons for the lawn tractor. $78.00. And that's at only 3.00 a gallon. The truck gets, on a good day, 20mpg. My car, a Taurus, gets 22mpg. Our van gets 25+ on the highway. I drive 12 miles to work on flat midwestern roads with one stoplight and 4 turns. I sell the truck and the car and get enough to buy (up to) 157mpg. It will cost me nothing to run, in fact saving me nearly an infinite amount of money.
I was talking to a friend who bought a hybrid. The verdict? HATED it. Why? Just didn't have that "punch" they were used to... like flooring it at a green light to rush to the next red light... I asked about the mileage... "GREAT! but I don't want this car any more" ... the mentality HAS to change here. I've been looking at the Smart car (www.smart.com) and I'm on their waiting list. The problem there is that by the time it's "Americanized" (read: Guzzle-readied) that car goes from 65mpg to a more wasteful 40. WTF? Does it pass through the White House "Big Oil" division after import? In Canada you can get the diesel which get 70+mpg.
What will they do to THIS car?

[Sdashiki]

Anyone remember the:

Small Wonder (http://www.smallwonder.tv/) tv series?

I recall an episode where the Vicki (sp?) designed or tweaked an engine at a mechanic shop where the car got 1000+ miles to the gallon.

but one tank of fuel gone and the car would blow up, or at least the engine would.

now why hasnt anyone tweaked this idea? do we really have to design cute childlike robots to do this for us?


in the end, when all cars are Hybrid (Toyota says it will have all models Hybridized by 2010) the technology might have it so that the car that is hybrid vs its total gas previous counterpart will get 2x the MPGs. Which is good enough for now.

Getting 18MPG in a bullsh** SUV and then getting 36MPG might not look much to those who went from say the 35MPG Camry to the 70MPG Hybrid Camry. But a reduction in gas consumed is a gallon or two saved...and a few dollars saved at the pump.

my Matrix gets about a flat 32-35MPG no matter where I drive or how I drive, as long as its not like a madman flooring it all the time. and until this car explodes, in about 8-10 years, I will buy another car that I would expect to get twice the MPG I currently do. Thusly Id buy a Hybrid, cuz like I said with the technology progressing the MPGs will always go up.

until we have another fuel, or no more gas, having a gas/electric car is the way to go without being pussified into a lower HP car and all that other bunk jerks complain about.