Electric Vehicles

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't care what they are "intended" as. They are driven on the road, used as day to day drivers, used to commute to work, etc.

Much of the same argument could be made for bikes ridden on the road. Any vehicle that doesn't have an enclosed cabin with all the airbags and whatever are inherently more dangerous.
 
I suppose we had motorcycles long before we started ramping up the safety standards for cars and there's never been one moment when anyone could seriously consider saying "You know what, let's just ban motorbikes".

But having "cars" which claim to be bikes is a result of those being the only defined classes available. If there was some class of light car that wasn't just "ah, to hell with it, I'm a bike", then a reasonable safety standard for those could be created. A bit like that French legacy class of restricted lightweight VSP cars that 14 year olds (and, frankly, older drivers who lost their licence for DUI) could drive.
 
Ever been to Asia and seen a family of 5 riding a motorcycle together?

I'm very concerned that automakers have stopped making affordable cars to focus only on cars for rich people. Mobility is important. This little vehicle has to be safer than an e-bike.
 
Much of the same argument could be made for bikes ridden on the road. Any vehicle that doesn't have an enclosed cabin with all the airbags and whatever are inherently more dangerous.

Yeah that's my point. So hand wringing about whether some cheap little car from China meets our "safety regulations" is silly.

If it's already safer than a motorcycle, let it on the road. What's the problem?

Now I'm against safety regulation per se, but if to put a "car" on the road it has to have crumple zones and airbags and backup camera and antilock brakes and so forth and so forth but to put a "motorcycle" which is driven on the exact same roads at the exact same speed, on the road doesn't that's just silly, especially with companies openly using the distinction as a way to get around safety regulations by making things which are "technically a motorcycle, not a car" but are obviously going to be treated like a car by consumers.

We can't keep adding more and more safety regulations to cars every years, but just leave motorcycles on the road and not expect this to get weird at some point.
 
Last edited:
I suppose we had motorcycles long before we started ramping up the safety standards for cars and there's never been one moment when anyone could seriously consider saying "You know what, let's just ban motorbikes".

But having "cars" which claim to be bikes is a result of those being the only defined classes available. If there was some class of light car that wasn't just "ah, to hell with it, I'm a bike", then a reasonable safety standard for those could be created. A bit like that French legacy class of restricted lightweight VSP cars that 14 year olds (and, frankly, older drivers who lost their licence for DUI) could drive.

A nice benefit of motorbikes is that, while they are very dangerous to the rider, they are much safer to others on the roadway. A collision between car and motorcycle is much less likely to leave the car's driver injured. For similar performance, bikes are also much more fuel efficient given their reduced weight.

Tying it back into EV's, electric bikes are almost certainly easier to achieve than electric cars. The reduced weight makes them ideal for smaller batteries that can still achieve adequate mileage for daily driving.
 
I think there's plenty to think about with relation to little cheap substandard cars, but I would suggest that, dangerous as they are, motorcycles may fall into a different class. For one thing, the users are a fairly self-selected group. They do not expect that their motorcycles will be cars. They are also generally, if sane, willing to don protective gear, and in many places if not most they are road tested on actual motorcycles, so they are expected to understand at least the basics of how such things go, stop and steer. Generally speaking, also, at least here in the northland, people do not use motorcycles very much in the worst weather, whereas tiny cars are likely to see a lot of use in snow and ice and heavy rain. People of a certain age who do not expect to be able to balance on a motorcycle or to handle it, don't generally go into that market.

Licensing little minicars as motorcycles helps some, but it won't do too much if the drivers don't really understand that they're riding closed motorcycles, not odd little cars.

I would think especially after the past year, it should be obvious that there are a lot of people around who do not understand a lot of things, and who do not take risks seriously enough.

If people start getting lax on safety issues, start taking their kids to school, driving in the snow, and so forth, things could get pretty ugly.
 
That's kind of worrisome to me, that the US could wind up with a significant subset of commuters that lack the benefit of vehicle safety regulations, not because they are reckless or don't care, but because the only options affordable to them fall into a loophole. In a sense the financial pressure incentivizes the sale of vehicles through such a loophole, so I'm not even imagining any bad guys here... just a massive structural flaw in the industry and market.
 
Last edited:
That's kind of worrisome to me, that the US could wind up with a significant subset of commuters that lack the benefit of vehicle safety regulations, not because they are reckless or don't care, but because the only options affordable to them fall into a loophole. In a sense the financial pressure incentivizes the sale of vehicles through such a loophole, so I'm not even imagining any bad guys here... just a massive structural flaw in the industry and market.

This isn't something we see with ICE vehicles now, which may have similar incentives. I really doubt this is going to be an issue. Most people are not going to want a car that doesn't have 4 wheels.
 
I'm not thinking about it for EV's in particular... really across the whole set.

If vehicles with enough of the amenities of a car, but which are legally "motorcycles", appear at a lower price point than a "proper" car, it seems a danger.
 
I actually have wondered how cheap you could make a "safe" car (or how safe you could make a "cheap" car depending on how you want to look at it) by using only passive safety features, things which aren't complex mechanically or electronically.
 
Such a vehicle would be termed a quadricycle.

The new Citroen Ami is an example. It's limited on speed and in France can be driven, without a licence, by people as young as 14.

https://www.citroen.co.uk/models/future-models/ami.html

Here in France there's a whole little industry of "voitures sans permis", including manufacturers such as Aixam just down the road from me. In traffic you soon learn to watch them very carefully on the grounds that nearly everybody driving one has presumably lost their licence because of drink-driving.
 
I actually have wondered how cheap you could make a "safe" car (or how safe you could make a "cheap" car depending on how you want to look at it) by using only passive safety features, things which aren't complex mechanically or electronically.
I think it's probably not that hard to make a fairly cheap safe car, but it would only be safe for people who utilize its safety features. Though I think some things have changed with such things as side impact airbags, the wisdom for some time was that if you actually wore your three point belts right, you wouldn't need the bags.

But I think also that a cheap safe car would also not likely be a very little one, simply because there is so little room for energy absorption. One of the very small cars now in service, for example, the Smart car, has a fantastically rigid inner structure such that the passenger area remains intact even if it hits a wall at highway speed, but because it has so little room for energy absorption, I've heard that the actual result might well simply be people who die without visible injury.

I think we could make safe, economical cars, but people would have to give up some creature comforts and performance. We're used to a level of luxury and of acceleration that would have been unheard of 50 or so years ago, and we're paying for it.
 
Such a vehicle would be termed a quadricycle.

The new Citroen Ami is an example. It's limited on speed and in France can be driven, without a licence, by people as young as 14.

https://www.citroen.co.uk/models/future-models/ami.html

I'm amused that it comes with '14" 'Star' wheel covers as "standard". What a strange thing highlight.

More seriously, that sort of item would cover over 90% of my driving needs. Something like that is probably in my future.
 
I'd seen that Robin clip before, quite amusing. It is, of course, a bit contrived, but it's also true that a tricycle of that sort is pretty unstable, just as a tricycle with two front wheels and one rear is very stable. And it's also why ideally a vehicle should always have a slightly wider track in front than rear.

Morgan 3 wheelers and Can-Am motorcycles seem to have figured this out. Long ago for the Morgans. So did BMW with the otherwise horrifically deadly Isetta.

e.t.a. side drift - as most know, another rollover curse is had with nearly any vehicle which has independently sprung "swing axles," as were present on various things including the pre-1968 VW, the early Corvair, and others. The camber change would cause terrible oversteer, often cluminating in a wheel tucking under, and a flip. An acquaintance back in the 1960's had a Fiat 600, which he could flip with almost no effort at all. He welded a heavy reinforcement to the roof, so he could do it for sport, much as the Reliant driver above does.
 
Last edited:
The first two incidents were contrived. The car is moving rapidly down a sloping street then the driver makes a quick, sharp turn with the result the car tips over. No ****, Sherlock. That said, I enjoyed watching the whole thing.
There certainly are genuine road situations that require making quick, sharp turns. This was a real test of such a situation.

Assuming we're talking about the Top Gear clip of the Reliant Robin? I didn't watch the video.
 
I'm amused that it comes with '14" 'Star' wheel covers as "standard". What a strange thing highlight.

More seriously, that sort of item would cover over 90% of my driving needs. Something like that is probably in my future.

I live rurally, so something limited to 28 mph may be a little slow (when I lived in Bristol it wouldn't have been a problem). The Wuling Honggang Mini EV OTOH seems fine. It can do 100km/h has sufficient range to get to the local towns and looks like I could get a guitar, kit bag, keyboard and stand into it.
 
I'd seen that Robin clip before, quite amusing. It is, of course, a bit contrived, but it's also true that a tricycle of that sort is pretty unstable, just as a tricycle with two front wheels and one rear is very stable.

As an aside, we think a Can Am Ryker might be in Karen’s future once the weather warms up...

50884618092_9ec5dd6621.jpg


She’s had a hip replacement, and not having ridden motorcycles regularly in decades is a bit nervous on two wheels. But we think the Ryker will be perfect for nice rides in the countryside with me on two wheels (for now) and her on three.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom