No Guarantees...

[cantwait]

My understanding. The P5 is stated as the final design, and is for the most part. But in actuality, as a contingency, it's building is as an exercise, supposed to finalize how the E1-25 will be built. Then if there are any changes in the E's due to testing, the P5 is supposed to be adjusted to that so they all match in every way. It will have to match for any P5 testing to legally represent the Elio production models.
For the 75 mpg ATVM requirement to qualify, there has to be a reasonable expectation that the final version was tested. I think therefore some E testing must happen first, but that's not quite clear at this point, at least for us looking in, from the outside.

As Elio enthusiasts, we might want the government to just accept Elio's computer simulations and hand over the money. As taxpayers, we might hope that the government would require real testing and evidence of financial viability of the company and the product. I suppose that we are all a bit conflicted here. If the P5 and the E's can get 75/84/92 mpg, then Elio will have a pretty strong case to present in the ATVM loan application.

If the E's do as well as anticipated, Elio will have a good chance to attract the other $240 million without any government intervention.

This is another reason why the P5 needs to be a home run, and not a bunt.

 

[Ekh]

My understanding. The P5 is stated as the final design, and is for the most part. But in actuality, as a contingency, it's building is as an exercise, supposed to finalize how the E1-25 will be built. Then if there are any changes in the E's due to testing, the P5 is supposed to be adjusted to that so they all match in every way. It will have to match for any P5 testing to legally represent the Elio production models.
For the 75 mpg ATVM requirement to qualify, there has to be a reasonable expectation that the final version was tested. I think therefore some E testing must happen first, but that's not quite clear at this point, at least for us looking in, from the outside.

This is my understanding as well.

 

[JEBar]

I can't help but find it interesting how some of our self declared experts are able to make judgments on so many aspects of the P5 when it may or may not even be fully built and none of them has seen it in person ....we do have some (but not much) factual info to go on and I suggest that we not get all worked up until we know if there is anything to be worked up about .... as for our expectations, we all have them and at this point in the project they matter little .... when the call comes to those with a reservation for them to place an order, that's the time when our expectations become a critical part of our decision .... until that point, EM is working to meet their expectations, not ours

 

[3wheelin]

I'm really missing where you're getting that from.
Could you please provide the URL?
I thought I had read the ATVM UEV stuff pretty carefully, but maybe I missed something.

Come on man it's common sense, so your read some or all, but the reality is this P5 is where the E series will be built upon - so how are these E series validate, adjust and modify "if any" for the work done on the P5 if it's not tested in the first place??? I am of course like anybody else that's merely making educated/uneducated guess but P5 needs to "empress" or we MAY not see the E-series at all! The window of opportunity for EM to succeed MIGHT rely heavily on this P5 and this window is closing fast. Strictly my opinion only.

 

[3wheelin]

I can't help but find it interesting how some of our self declared experts are able to make judgments on so many aspects of the P5 when it may or may not even be fully built and none of them has seen it in person ....we do have some (but not much) factual info to go on and I suggest that we not get all worked up until we know if there is anything to be worked up about .... as for our expectations, we all have them and at this point in the project they matter little .... when the call comes to those with a reservation for them to place an order, that's the time when our expectations become a critical part of our decision .... until that point, EM is working to meet their expectations, not ours

Not self declared experts, but rather uninformed opinions and everybody have one. Some may not say or write it loud and some write it anyway. And that's the point of the discussion isn't it? It's about everyone's expectations, and it's all different because we're humans that makes us unique. But once again, you CALMED me down so thanks bud.
Stepping down from soapbox!

 

[JEBar]

our problems usually stem from over enthusiasm .... that really isn't a terrible thing .... unfortunately, we have a history of one person expressing an opinion (nothing wrong with that) which is shortly in the minds of some become facts .... eventually, they are proven not be be facts, some people get ticked off, and hard feelings/emotions flow .... good example, Paul was reported pushing to speed up the P5 build so as to get it to the LA show .... from there we evolved to embellishment where things like fully functional, thoroughly tested, ready for the road work their way into the commentary .... sometimes folks with EM feed the flames, sometimes we create our own ....

 

[Rickb]

As Elio enthusiasts, we might want the government to just accept Elio's computer simulations and hand over the money. As taxpayers, we might hope that the government would require real testing and evidence of financial viability of the company and the product. I suppose that we are all a bit conflicted here. If the P5 and the E's can get 75/84/92 mpg, then Elio will have a pretty strong case to present in the ATVM loan application.

If the E's do as well as anticipated, Elio will have a good chance to attract the other $240 million without any government intervention.

This is another reason why the P5 needs to be a home run, and not a bunt.

A triple like from an Elio enthusiast and taxpayer.

 

[Ekh]

our problems usually stem from over enthusiasm .... that really isn't a terrible thing .... unfortunately, we have a history of one person expressing an opinion (nothing wrong with that) which is shortly in the minds of some become facts .... eventually, they are proven not be be facts, some people get ticked off, and hard feelings/emotions flow .... good example, Paul was reported pushing to speed up the P5 build so as to get it to the LA show .... from there we evolved to embellishment where things like fully functional, thoroughly tested, ready for the road work their way into the commentary .... sometimes folks with EM feed the flames, sometimes we create our own ....

What's even more annoying to me than the embellishments is the occasional combativeness with which they are attacked or defended. One would prefer civil discourse to dealing with blowhards. It's one thing to be in error because one mis-remembered something or had overlooked something, and quite another to fail to do one's homework in the first place -- and then defend the position that results.

A related problem, one that occurs all over the Web, is that posts go up but don't come down -- and are not prominently dated or time-stamped. Things change, the world revolves, and last September's plans have evolved into this year's realities. Yet people seem to persist in using out-of-date information as if it were Holy Writ, the law laid down in black and white. This problem is not unique to our forum. It is rampant, and very destructive. My wish would be that the original posting date of any blog entry or news story anywhere on the web be clearly identified by author, publisher, and date. I don't expect to get my wish.

But barring that, I do think members of this forum have an obligation to see if what they're fixated upon is still relevant or valid BEFORE sounding off. Posts on our forum do have posting dates. These should be looked at before opening mouth. Newer members especially should realize that there's a huge amount of information here, and much of it no longer applies (at least without modification) -- then take the trouble to check for updates, or even just to ask questions which older hands will gladly answer.

 

[WilliamH]

I find some of this interesting. At various time in my career, my job required me to read and respond to Requests for Proposal and Requests for Quotes as well as to prepare Requests for Proposal and Requests for Quotes for well into hundreds of thousands of dollars. As a result, I tend to read requirements documents very carefully. It also means I tend to look at government rules and regulations the same way. If I ask someone for a URL it is because I am trying to find out if I read something incorrectly, not because I am challenging them. I try never to let my opinion of how it should be cloud my judgement of what it actually says.

 

[AriLea]

A quote is of little use at this point. Even for what is actually written and quoted, the use and qualifications of the P and E series and what they get for it, is pretty much built on sand. They can adjust how and when things happen, in relation to the developing opportunities.
We'll just have to sit-tight until things are done rather than just talked or written about.