Already Been Done

[RSchneider]

Well said Rickb. ELIO maybe "everything" to somebody but it's "imaginary specs" can't be compared to any other 3wheelers with verifiable test results, sorry.

It was like when I was at the BMW dealer picking up a piece of trim for my i3. They have a Mini dealer there too. When I came out, a guy was looking at my i3. He wanted to know if I liked it and then went into a long speech a to why he'd never own one. I just told him that I wouldn't expect him to own one because it doesn't fit his needs. Then I told him why I'd never buy a Mini. Then I just listed the specs of my VW. In the end when he found out it was a salvage vehicle and what I bought it for and that every panel unbolts thus all you have to do is find the used panels the same color (thus no trip to the body shop) he was amazed. I did let him know that I'd never buy one brand new because even with the tax credit, it's too expensive.

For next week, I'll give my reasons why I won't buy a 1963 Split Window Corvette to use for when I go skiing.

 

[Rickb]

It was like when I was at the BMW dealer picking up a piece of trim for my i3. They have a Mini dealer there too. When I came out, a guy was looking at my i3. He wanted to know if I liked it and then went into a long speech a to why he'd never own one. I just told him that I wouldn't expect him to own one because it doesn't fit his needs. Then I told him why I'd never buy a Mini. Then I just listed the specs of my VW. In the end when he found out it was a salvage vehicle and what I bought it for and that every panel unbolts thus all you have to do is find the used panels the same color (thus no trip to the body shop) he was amazed. I did let him know that I'd never buy one brand new because even with the tax credit, it's too expensive.

For next week, I'll give my reasons why I won't buy a 1963 Split Window Corvette to use for when I go skiing.

I’m old and obviously miss the point. If everybody drove what they needed we would all be driving VW Beetles........my first affordable, high mpg, and reliable car. “Drive what you Like, Like what you Drive.” Unfortunately their are some limiting budget constraints to that quote..........or sadly unavailable for a test drive to confirm your likes. I like the Mini and the i3, but wouldn’t buy either if I could afford the i8 or the X7 because I like them even more.

 

[RSchneider]

You did miss the point. It's that people like to say that what you want or have never meets their specifications. I'll put it this way. I'd consider a FUV but it doesn't have 600 mile range, can't be used in the winter, no service areas nearby, not enough storage and it's too pricey. Instead, I'll take my Elio. Now you come back with a rebuttal of how the FUV works for you.

 

[Rickb]

You did miss the point. It's that people like to say that what you want or have never meets their specifications. I'll put it this way. I'd consider a FUV but it doesn't have 600 mile range, can't be used in the winter, no service areas nearby, not enough storage and it's too pricey. Instead, I'll take my Elio. Now you come back with a rebuttal of how the FUV works for you.

That statement indicates you considered an FUV to determine it didn’t meet your needs. I’ll take your Elio too! The FUV works for me because I can place an order for one.

 

[raptor213]

You can register early for the livestream of Tesla's Model Y unveiling to take place at 8PM PST (11PM EST) tonight:

https://livestream.tesla.com/

 

[RSchneider]

That statement indicates you considered an FUV to determine it didn’t meet your needs. I’ll take your Elio too! The FUV works for me because I can place an order for one.

I just use specification package as opposed to needs. It's the same reason why the person that gave the list of reasons for not having a Solo was the same. It didn't meet his needs or specification package.

 

[AriLea]

I never understand these statements. It would be like me saying that I'd consider an RX-8 but it doesn't have a 995 cc three cylinder engine and it's not front wheel drive. or I'd consider a new Miata but it does not have tandem seating, it has two doors, doesn't give 85 mpg and it's too expensive vs an Elio. Only thing I can figure out is people create a specification package and it narrows everything down to one vehicle, thus they need to tell you everything they won't buy because it doesn't meet those specs. At this point I might as well tell you that I won't be buying a new Porsche GT3RS because it doesn't come in a diesel or have an 8ft bed to haul plywood.

It's because these 'specs' aren't your measure of acceptance.
Look, I want the suitability of the wheelbase because I've seen and felt what a failure from that is like. For example, I've seen a short wheelbase bronco spin like a top when he braked a little too hard on the freeway. Other dynamics due to CG are at issue too. After you experience it traumatically, you will up your requirements as well.
And RWD? Well ,no problem if you never encounter ice or snow or gravel. But I do. As an example, I rolled a VW bug on a gravel road because of the interaction between center of gravity and where the power was. The VW had other failures due to the RWD. Liveable ? yes, desireable? not as much. Could I have driven more carefully? Yes. Could anyone have made my mistake? Yes. It was just a bit too easy.

As for cash worthiness? All US city freeways are scary as hell. This matters.
An another thing, FWD has a heck of a lot more impact for a 2F1R than any common 4 wheeler, that just pure engineering.
I built a 2F1R-RWD vehicle. Several failures were visible. Take my word for it.

I also built a mid-engine sportscar-sleeper(4wheel). It was awesome. But the CG was 'just-right' for the power and placement. Good in the wet, never tried it in ice or snow.

 

[Ty]

It's because these 'specs' aren't your measure of acceptance.
Look, I want the suitability of the wheelbase because I've seen and felt what a failure from that is like. For example, I've seen a short wheelbase bronco spin like a top when he braked a little too hard on the freeway. Other dynamics due to CG are at issue too. After you experience it traumatically, you will up your requirements as well.
And RWD? Well ,no problem if you never encounter ice or snow or gravel. But I do. As an example, I rolled a VW bug on a gravel road because of the interaction between center of gravity and where the power was. The VW had other failures due to the RWD. Liveable ? yes, desireable? not as much. Could I have driven more carefully? Yes. Could anyone have made my mistake? Yes. It was just a bit too easy.

As for cash worthiness? All US city freeways are scary as hell. This matters.
An another thing, FWD has a heck of a lot more impact for a 2F1R than any common 4 wheeler, that just pure engineering.
I built a 2F1R-RWD vehicle. Several failures were visible. Take my word for it.

I also built a mid-engine sportscar-sleeper(4wheel). It was awesome. But the CG was 'just-right' for the power and placement. Good in the wet, never tried it in ice or snow.

Yeah, I wouldn't dig a single rear wheel providing all the power either.... though most rear wheel trucks will spin one tire easily enough.

 

[RSchneider]

I would suggest that you all forward this engineering study to Polaris..

 

[RSchneider]

And RWD? Well ,no problem if you never encounter ice or snow or gravel. But I do. As an example, I rolled a VW bug on a gravel road because of the interaction between center of gravity and where the power was. The VW had other failures due to the RWD. Liveable ? yes, desireable? not as much. Could I have driven more carefully? Yes. Could anyone have made my mistake? Yes. It was just a bit too easy.

You better let the Germans know this. I never realized that something like a VW beetle rolled because of it being RWD. With that now being a fact, then Porsche is in big trouble with their product line.

I'm lucky I never rolled my 914, 911, 928, 944 and Z4 because they were RWD. My Z4 I had snows and drove it all year and racked up over 200K in it.