157 MPG for only $13,000

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 157 MPG for only $13,000 (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 2/27/2006 9:55:19 PM EDT

www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=1000

www.loremo.com/design_en.php <----Tells you how to get in

Posted: 2/27/2006 9:57:04 PM EDT

[#1]

Looks kinda gay.

I guess it could be worse. . .it could be built with the front suspension of the Chevette up front and the drivetrain of a Citation in the rear.

Posted: 2/27/2006 9:57:35 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Looks kinda gay.

I guess it could be worse. . .it could be built with the front suspension of the Chevette up front and the drivetrain of a Citation in the rear.

Die a horrible death

Posted: 2/27/2006 9:57:37 PM EDT

[#3]

The 50 HP model actually looks practical. They would sell well if brought over to the US at that price.

ETA: How do you get in?

Posted: 2/27/2006 9:58:52 PM EDT

[#4]

Kinda cool looking, I doubt that I'd fit in it though...

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:02:27 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
The 50 HP model actually looks practical. They would sell well if brought over to the US at that price.

ETA: How do you get in?

2nd link has the details on it.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:03:09 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Looks kinda gay.

I guess it could be worse. . .it could be built with the front suspension of the Chevette up front and the drivetrain of a Citation in the rear.

Ahem, as a former citation owner I can testify that they are front wheel drive. That would not work very well.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:03:34 PM EDT

[#7]

How to you get in it?

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:03:49 PM EDT

[#8]

So for $4800 you get a motor with 30 more horsepower?

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:04:46 PM EDT

[#9]

Think I would have to seriously contemplate one for a commuter car if nothing else. $13K is incredibly cheap for something that would save you so much money.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:10:12 PM EDT

[#10]

Would like to see that meet up with a gravel truck. Wouldn't be pretty.

Like how they gave some nice fluffy safety speak about how well it did colliding with a crash barrier. Well, that really only measures how it survives its own mass. Add in a large vehicle you're likely to see on the roads and then get back to me.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:12:11 PM EDT

[#11]

If I get a job in DC (*crosses fingers*) I want to buy a house with land without my grandkids being in debt.

This will require me to live far away. 2 hours probably. 157 mpg would be a godsend.

I would buy this car. In a hearbeat. Also, I think it looks badass.

Would like to see that meet up with a gravel truck. Wouldn't be pretty.

Probably the same as my Saturn Ion.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:13:17 PM EDT

[#12]

Still doesn't beat the Reliant Robin.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:14:58 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
How to you get in it?

Entry
The structure of the body is unconventional: You will get into Loremo by a lateral threshold - it's as easy as stepping into a bathtub! Its innovative linear cell structure is the basis for Loremo's safety . Instead of two lateral doors there is one "gate". A frontal door opens forward before the seats, taking the steering wheel with it.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:15:29 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Still doesn't beat the Reliant Robin.

www2.uol.com.br/bestcars/carros/classicos2/reliant-robin-2001-serie65-4.jpg

But thats ugly.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:17:41 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Still doesn't beat the Reliant Robin.

www2.uol.com.br/bestcars/carros/classicos2/reliant-robin-2001-serie65-4.jpg

But thats ugly.

and it looks like it would tip over in a wind storm.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:18:55 PM EDT

[#16]

That looks pretty nice! For a purely commuter car, I think it's a good idea. Small, light, efficient turbodeisel. As long as the seats are comfortable... I'd buy one.

That, or the VW EcoRacer, if they ever produce it.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:23:44 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
How to you get in it?

Entry
The structure of the body is unconventional: You will get into Loremo by a lateral threshold - it's as easy as stepping into a bathtub! Its innovative linear cell structure is the basis for Loremo's safety . Instead of two lateral doors there is one "gate". A frontal door opens forward before the seats, taking the steering wheel with it.

Apparently my college degree has failed me, and those two years at RIT, because I have no idea what the hell that means.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:26:59 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How to you get in it?

Entry
The structure of the body is unconventional: You will get into Loremo by a lateral threshold - it's as easy as stepping into a bathtub! Its innovative linear cell structure is the basis for Loremo's safety . Instead of two lateral doors there is one "gate". A frontal door opens forward before the seats, taking the steering wheel with it.

Apparently my college degree has failed me, and those two years at RIT, because I have no idea what the hell that means.

Just like the BMW Isetta, but a little more modern.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:28:25 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How to you get in it?

Entry
The structure of the body is unconventional: You will get into Loremo by a lateral threshold - it's as easy as stepping into a bathtub! Its innovative linear cell structure is the basis for Loremo's safety . Instead of two lateral doors there is one "gate". A frontal door opens forward before the seats, taking the steering wheel with it.

Apparently my college degree has failed me, and those two years at RIT, because I have no idea what the hell that means.

So the entire "hood" swings open, taking the whole dash and windshield with it? Hmmmmm.

ETA
You beat me with the pic. Nevermind.

Posted: 2/27/2006 10:42:07 PM EDT

[#20]

Wow, 0 to 60 in 20 seconds.

And looking at my commute distance of about 4 miles (both ways), the fuel cost savings would not be all that much.

I'll pass.

Posted: 2/27/2006 11:13:05 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How to you get in it?

Entry
The structure of the body is unconventional: You will get into Loremo by a lateral threshold - it's as easy as stepping into a bathtub! Its innovative linear cell structure is the basis for Loremo's safety . Instead of two lateral doors there is one "gate". A frontal door opens forward before the seats, taking the steering wheel with it.

Apparently my college degree has failed me, and those two years at RIT, because I have no idea what the hell that means.

Just like the BMW Isetta, but a little more modern.

www.atspeedimages.com/limerock2002/concours/bmw_isetta.jpg

That is the limo model, the "normal" isetta didn't have the second door, just the front.

I found one of each model sitting in a field in western Ky. The guy wouldn't sell them for anything. They are just sitting there rusting away. I heard a tree fell down and crushed the roof of the limo one. Guy still wouldn't sell them

Posted: 2/27/2006 11:29:25 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Think I would have to seriously contemplate one for a commuter car if nothing else. $13K is incredibly cheap for something that would save you so much money.

Is the key to spending less money on gasoline really more fuel efficient cars?

Consider this possible scenario; Eventually 75% of all passenger cars sold in the U.S. must get at least 70 mpg. That means the demand for gasoline would decrease. Gasoline producers/distributors would begin to lose money. Many of them would would go out of business. That would decrease the available supply. To maintain neccessary profit margins, the remaining gasoline producers/distributors would have to increase prices. What good is 70 mpg if you are paying $7.00 per gallon?

Sure, when the average passenger car gets 25 mpg and your car gets 70 mpg, you can save a bundle on fuel costs. But when the average car gets 70 mpg, do you really think that oil companies are going to sit back and do nothing when their sales drop by 50%?

The key to cheap gasoline is to produce more gasoline. The only real answer to lower fuel costs is to develope inexpensive alternatives.

Posted: 2/27/2006 11:34:57 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Think I would have to seriously contemplate one for a commuter car if nothing else. $13K is incredibly cheap for something that would save you so much money.

Is the key to spending less money on gasoline really more fuel efficient cars?

Consider this possible scenario; Eventually 75% of all passenger cars sold in the U.S. must get at least 70 mpg. That means the demand for gasoline would decrease. Gasoline producers/distributors would begin to lose money. Many of them would would go out of business. That would decrease the available supply. To maintain neccessary profit margins, the remaining gasoline producers/distributors would have to increase prices. What good is 70 mpg if you are paying $7.00 per gallon?

Sure, when the average passenger car gets 25 mpg and your car gets 70 mpg, you can save a bundle on fuel costs. But when the average car gets 70 mpg, do you really think that oil companies are going to sit back and do nothing when their sales drop by 50%?

The key to cheap gasoline is to produce more gasoline. The only real answer to lower fuel costs is to develope inexpensive alternatives.

Are there special pills you take to make you this stupid?

Posted: 2/27/2006 11:38:04 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Think I would have to seriously contemplate one for a commuter car if nothing else. $13K is incredibly cheap for something that would save you so much money.

Is the key to spending less money on gasoline really more fuel efficient cars?

Consider this possible scenario; Eventually 75% of all passenger cars sold in the U.S. must get at least 70 mpg. That means the demand for gasoline would decrease. Gasoline producers/distributors would begin to lose money. Many of them would would go out of business. That would decrease the available supply. To maintain neccessary profit margins, the remaining gasoline producers/distributors would have to increase prices. What good is 70 mpg if you are paying $7.00 per gallon?

Sure, when the average passenger car gets 25 mpg and your car gets 70 mpg, you can save a bundle on fuel costs. But when the average car gets 70 mpg, do you really think that oil companies are going to sit back and do nothing when their sales drop by 50%?

The key to cheap gasoline is to produce more gasoline. The only real answer to lower fuel costs is to develope inexpensive alternatives.

Are there special pills you take to make you this stupid?

Fish on!

Posted: 2/27/2006 11:42:33 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Think I would have to seriously contemplate one for a commuter car if nothing else. $13K is incredibly cheap for something that would save you so much money.

Is the key to spending less money on gasoline really more fuel efficient cars?

Consider this possible scenario; Eventually 75% of all passenger cars sold in the U.S. must get at least 70 mpg. That means the demand for gasoline would decrease. Gasoline producers/distributors would begin to lose money. Many of them would would go out of business. That would decrease the available supply. To maintain neccessary profit margins, the remaining gasoline producers/distributors would have to increase prices. What good is 70 mpg if you are paying $7.00 per gallon?

Sure, when the average passenger car gets 25 mpg and your car gets 70 mpg, you can save a bundle on fuel costs. But when the average car gets 70 mpg, do you really think that oil companies are going to sit back and do nothing when their sales drop by 50%?

The key to cheap gasoline is to produce more gasoline. The only real answer to lower fuel costs is to develope inexpensive alternatives.

Are there special pills you take to make you this stupid?

Fish on!

Jevon's Paradox... go look it up

Posted: 2/28/2006 2:50:28 AM EDT

[#26]

I kinda like it. At least it's a solution to a problem being developed with existing proven technology. It's not practical for me currently, but I'd consider it if I needed a commuter car today.

Posted: 2/28/2006 3:25:40 AM EDT

[#27]

i-Robot mobile?

Posted: 2/28/2006 3:44:39 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How to you get in it?

Entry
The structure of the body is unconventional: You will get into Loremo by a lateral threshold - it's as easy as stepping into a bathtub! Its innovative linear cell structure is the basis for Loremo's safety . Instead of two lateral doors there is one "gate". A frontal door opens forward before the seats, taking the steering wheel with it.

Apparently my college degree has failed me, and those two years at RIT, because I have no idea what the hell that means.

Hey Spade,

I'm an RIT Grad. '83 What year did you get out?

Posted: 2/28/2006 4:23:04 AM EDT

[#29]

I think that the guy who says that if we have more efficient cars, gas prices will rise is correct. I also think that it won't get better unitil we find a different energy source (so that we can rid ourselves of OPEC). Opec screws us, you all know it. The only reason we don't have alternatives now is because opec and the oil companies aren't letting it happen (al la microsoft)

Posted: 2/28/2006 4:53:38 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
I think that the guy who says that if we have more efficient cars, gas prices will rise is correct. I also think that it won't get better unitil we find a different energy source (so that we can rid ourselves of OPEC). Opec screws us, you all know it. The only reason we don't have alternatives now is because opec and the oil companies aren't letting it happen (al la microsoft)

One thing everyone has forgotten is that while we the US are reducing our demand for oil, demand in Asia is going up very fast. Whether the price will go up to compensate for reduced sales is irrelevant; it will go up regardless of what we in the US do. The Chinese/Indians will want the oil, and the increased demand will make the price go up. So we're going to see higher prices whether we are more efficient or not.

That having been said, I'd rather see more efficient vehicles all around. I can see the possibility of wars over the dimishing oil reserves, just like water wars are likely.

Posted: 2/28/2006 4:55:31 AM EDT

[#31]

i'll pass.

when it turns 300hp and blows enough smoke to choke a spotted owl, give me a call

Posted: 2/28/2006 5:01:15 AM EDT

[#32]

The base model take 20seconds to run to 62mph (listed as 100 miles an hour) basically means that there is no way you could ever take this thing on the interstate, you'd be rear ended at every on ramp.

Posted: 2/28/2006 5:12:28 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
i'll pass.

when it turns 300hp and blows enough smoke to choke a spotted owl, give me a call

my thoughts exactly

Posted: 2/28/2006 5:20:55 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Think I would have to seriously contemplate one for a commuter car if nothing else. $13K is incredibly cheap for something that would save you so much money.

Is the key to spending less money on gasoline really more fuel efficient cars?

Consider this possible scenario; Eventually 75% of all passenger cars sold in the U.S. must get at least 70 mpg. That means the demand for gasoline would decrease. Gasoline producers/distributors would begin to lose money. Many of them would would go out of business. That would decrease the available supply. To maintain neccessary profit margins, the remaining gasoline producers/distributors would have to increase prices. What good is 70 mpg if you are paying $7.00 per gallon?

Sure, when the average passenger car gets 25 mpg and your car gets 70 mpg, you can save a bundle on fuel costs. But when the average car gets 70 mpg, do you really think that oil companies are going to sit back and do nothing when their sales drop by 50%?

The key to cheap gasoline is to produce more gasoline. The only real answer to lower fuel costs is to develope inexpensive alternatives.

Are there special pills you take to make you this stupid?

This coming from a guy who took his name from and apparently bases his life on some whacky tinfoil hat theory.

Posted: 2/28/2006 5:28:29 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
The base model take 20seconds to run to 62mph (listed as 100 miles an hour) basically means that there is no way you could ever take this thing on the interstate, you'd be rear ended at every on ramp.

0-60 in 20 seconds = HMMWV turbo 6.5L V8 or the Hummer H1 pre-alpha. It's street legal.

Posted: 2/28/2006 5:34:09 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
If I get a job in DC (*crosses fingers*) I want to buy a house with land without my grandkids being in debt.

This will require me to live far away. 2 hours probably. 157 mpg would be a godsend.

I would buy this car. In a hearbeat. Also, I think it looks badass.

Would like to see that meet up with a gravel truck. Wouldn't be pretty.

Probably the same as my Saturn Ion.

2 hours in normal DC traffic may not get you too far away.

Posted: 2/28/2006 6:09:56 AM EDT

[#37]

Savings is relative, economically. If you wait to purchase a 157mph car until it becomes the norm, you save nothing. If you buy one now, you will save much.

The problem with applying Jevon's paradox nowadays is government regulation which always screws up market forces. Gasoline is polictically incorrect and taxed very heavily in many places around the world; unlike the period of the coal and the steam engine which Jevon analyzed. They did not have air quality, greenhouse gases, and global warming issues then.

So how much will Jevon's paradox affect the scenario descibed by Sukebe? I do not know as we do not know how much meddling governments and the UN will induce into the marketplace at that future date. I suspect it there will be a significant impact, worse if Algore had been elected for 8 years.

Posted: 2/28/2006 6:32:12 AM EDT

[#38]

Never mind. I just woke up.

______________________________

Posted: 2/28/2006 6:38:46 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
169 MPH for only $11,099.00.

2006 Hayabusa 1300.

Turbocharged Hayabusas hold many top speed records, including the FIM 1350cc world record of 252.832 mph.

______________________________

img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/Colt_SBR/57985sm.gif

I think we are talking about MPG here.

Posted: 2/28/2006 6:57:52 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Looks kinda gay.

I guess it could be worse. . .it could be built with the front suspension of the Chevette up front and the drivetrain of a Citation in the rear.

I don't care how gay it looks. For a car this cheap that gets 157 mpg (or the $17,500 GT, 0-60 in 9 sec getting 87 mpg), I'd buy one even if it came with those stupid fake testicles dangling from the rear bumper.

Posted: 2/28/2006 8:10:00 AM EDT

[#41]

Don't expect to climb a hill in one, and stay the hell off the highway if you live in a hilly area.

20 HP is not enough. 50 Hp is, barely, so long as the vehicle isn't fully loaded.

Posted: 2/28/2006 8:24:30 AM EDT

[#42]

So thats what they do with all the recycled plastic bottles

Posted: 2/28/2006 8:28:51 AM EDT

[#43]

After seeing what a van did to my mustang at 40mph in an intersection I'll pass on the uber light cars. I like being able to walk away from a wreck not be sponged up after one.

Posted: 2/28/2006 8:32:31 AM EDT

[#44]

i think i will stick to my 17 MPG and 650 ft-lb of torque.

Posted: 2/28/2006 8:43:45 AM EDT

[#45]

16,000 euros is a little ove 19,000 usd.

I wouldn't fit in one anyway. I do like the looks though.

Won't be available until 2009 anyway.

Posted: 2/28/2006 8:50:48 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Think I would have to seriously contemplate one for a commuter car if nothing else. $13K is incredibly cheap for something that would save you so much money.

Is the key to spending less money on gasoline really more fuel efficient cars?

Consider this possible scenario; Eventually 75% of all passenger cars sold in the U.S. must get at least 70 mpg. That means the demand for gasoline would decrease. Gasoline producers/distributors would begin to lose money. Many of them would would go out of business. That would decrease the available supply. To maintain neccessary profit margins, the remaining gasoline producers/distributors would have to increase prices. What good is 70 mpg if you are paying $7.00 per gallon?

Sure, when the average passenger car gets 25 mpg and your car gets 70 mpg, you can save a bundle on fuel costs. But when the average car gets 70 mpg, do you really think that oil companies are going to sit back and do nothing when their sales drop by 50%?

The key to cheap gasoline is to produce more gasoline. The only real answer to lower fuel costs is to develope inexpensive alternatives.

Are there special pills you take to make you this stupid?

This coming from a guy who took his name from and apparently bases his life on some whacky tinfoil hat theory.

Mythbusters deems the above scenario as: PLAUSIBLE
Here's why: there is a community not far from where I live who's utility board wants to add a Surcharge to their customer's electric bill because, get this.....They're Not Using Enough Electricity !!! We've had such a mild winter around here that apparently folks have not had to run the heatpumps on full blast, so instead of lowering prices...they just wanna jack up everybody's bill to make up for the losses.

Posted: 2/28/2006 8:54:37 AM EDT

[#47]

There's no way that thing would ever pass US crash safety tests or even emissions standards.

Posted: 2/28/2006 9:16:17 AM EDT

[#48]

Make a hybrid out of it using that diesel

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=440417

Hey maybe 300mpg

Posted: 2/28/2006 9:26:46 AM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Still doesn't beat the Reliant Robin.

www2.uol.com.br/bestcars/carros/classicos2/reliant-robin-2001-serie65-4.jpg

MEIN GOTT

Posted: 2/28/2006 9:34:30 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
There's no way that thing would ever pass US crash safety tests or even emissions standards.

You know, a vehicle doesn't have to be 3 tons of steel to be crashworthy. My previous car, a Honda Insight, while small, light (1800lb) and aluminum, was more crashworthy than quite a few SUVs I compared it to out of curiousity.

Big and heavy does not neccessarily mean safe.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 157 MPG for only $13,000 (Page 1 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us