What Do We Know About The Elio Chassis?

[goofyone]

Do we know what the Elio's drag coefficients are? It's frontal area is only half as wide as the Aptera or Edison which I don't recall, but remember were very, very low. Elio is by far a lot better value than either of these were proposed to be, and wonder if the Elio's price killed off Edison's investors as they weren't planning on manufacturing it themselves? It is too late now, but if Elio if had combined the aerodynamics of these with the lower frontal area they would already be way above 84 MPG.

I do not have a good reference for the drag coefficient however I do know of this video, from early January 2014, where Paul Elio gives the more important drag area, or CdA, number which is the multiplication of the Cd value by the front area. At that point the Elio had a CdA of 0.26 square meters. This 0.26 number is likely the initial P4 drag area as this interview took place the week before the P4 was publicly unveiled.

The relevant discussion happens at about 38:00:

Here are some production vehicles CDA numbers for comparison:

CdA m2 Automobile model
0.260 m2 Elio Motors P4
0.279 m2 2011 Volkswagen XL1
0.367 m2 1996 GM EV1
0.474 m2 1999 Honda Insight
0.530 m2 1990 Honda CR-X Si
0.533 m2 2002 Acura NSX
0.539 m2 1986 Toyota MR2
0.550 m2 1994 Porsche 911 Speedster
0.565 m2 2008 Nissan GTR
0.565 m2 1989 Geo Metro
0.569 m2 1991 Acura NSX
0.576 m2 2012 Tesla Model S
0.576 m2 2014 Toyota Prius
0.580 m2 2004 Toyota Prius
0.583 m2 1986 Porsche 911 Carrera
0.583 m2 1992 Chevrolet Corvette
0.590 m2 1999 Lotus Elise
0.596 m2 2003 Smart Roadster Coupé
0.608 m2 1991 Saturn Sports Coupe
0.610 m2 1985 Chevrolet Corvette
0.644 m2 1982 Delorean DMC-12
0.663 m2 1995 Subaru Legacy L
0.669 m2 1995 Nissan Maxima GLE
0.682 m2 2001 Honda Civic
0.687 m2 1994 Honda Accord EX
0.717 m2 1993 Subaru Impreza
0.725 m2 2012 Nissan Leaf SL
1.08 m2 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid
1.56 m2 2006 Hummer H3
2.46 m2 2003 Hummer H2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient#Drag_area

 

[AriLea]

oops, yes .246, not 2.46. I'll correct that above.

The 'Red' was out by then, it maybe the number for the long nose and underpan

 

[goofyone]

I don't remember exactly but I think Jerome said something like 2.46cd. That isn't too good for a fully enclosed vehicle but this is with those outrigger wheels. What ever the cd is the lower cross-section makes up for it enough to reach the MPG goal. Fully covering the wheels would lower the cd but increase the cross section, and the expense. They made the right tradeoffs I'd say.

As far as the Edison is concerned, they just didn't connect with a angel investor, so they focused instead on licensing their technology. Unfortunately it usually takes the faith of the inventor to be willing to go the distance. Edison has interest in racing and may well be happy just playing in that field until they find other opportunities.

Edison is resourceful and creative, I've communicated about single and tandem seating with them before. There was lots of acceptance and comprehension in their responses.

I really like Edison's in wheel suspension technology. I would love to see EM implement this in a future model.

 

[goofyone]

oops, yes .246, not 2.46. I'll correct that above.

The 'Red' was out by then, it maybe the number for the long nose and underpan

I believe you are confusing the years and values. The video I posted is from January 10, 2014 which is about a week before the P4 was unveiled on January 18, 2014. The 'Red' did not arrive until some time in the second half of 2014. Also the value in the video is the CdA number not the Cd as Paul said he did not remember the Cd as he does not pay attention to it. Of course if we knew the frontal area we could calculate the Cd from the CdA.

 

[Ty]

I really like Edison's in wheel suspension technology. I would love to see EM implement this in a future model.

That is pretty nifty but looks like it only has and inch or two of travel. I do like it though. It seems it would make for a more quiet ride as that noise would be away from amplifying bodywork.

 

[Smitty901]

I really like Edison's in wheel suspension technology. I would love to see EM implement this in a future model.

You aint getting that on a $6,800 base car.

 

[AriLea]

I believe you are confusing the years and values. The video I posted is from January 10, 2014 which is about a week before the P4 was unveiled on January 18, 2014. The 'Red' did not arrive until some time in the second half of 2014. Also the value in the video is the CdA number not the Cd as Paul said he did not remember the Cd as he does not pay attention to it. Of course if we knew the front area we could calculate the Cd from the CdA.

I'm sure they don't like to state the number because compared to side by side seating it doesn't sound good. And a lower cross-section is just a detail that gets lost. So they conveniently forget.

For me, I'd go with quoting the overall drag HP and compare that, which would compare very well, but then right away that subject as a train of thought would turn back to the cd. So from a PR standpoint, it's better to stay on the MPG, and avoid the aerodynamic numbers all together.

There are definite contradictions in three wheelers that confuse the public, and EM has been very well thought out about what they can and can't say. After the Elio is a year old, it will get a lot less restrictive, and less intense about such things.

 

[goofyone]

You aint getting that on a $6,800 base car.

You are definitely correct about that.

However when I say future models I mean that hopefully EM can do well for themselves and eventually expand their lineup with some premium priced models outfitted with some premium features.

 

[goofyone]

I'm sure they don't like to state the number because compared to side by side seating it doesn't sound good. And a lower cross-section is just a detail that gets lost. So they conveniently forget.

For me, I'd go with quoting the overall drag HP and compare that, which would compare very well, but then right away that subject as a train of thought would turn back to the cd. So from a PR standpoint, it's better to stay on the MPG, and avoid the aerodynamic numbers all together.

There are definite contradictions in three wheelers that confuse the public, and EM has been very well thought out about what they can and can't say. After the Elio is a year old, it will get a lot less restrictive, and less intense about such things.

I agree that these details are only relevant to a small group of us and would actually confuse people which is why EM stays away from them. However even with that P4 CdA, which has likely been improved in 'Red", when we compare it to the list I posted it is pretty impressive with only the super pricey, and slower than the Elio, XL1 anywhere close to the Elio CdA number. Even the super slick, and very fuel efficient, first gen Honda Insight has nearly 2x the drag area of the Elio.

 

[Bert]

That is pretty nifty but looks like it only has and inch or two of travel. I do like it though. It seems it would make for a more quiet ride as that noise would be away from amplifying bodywork.

Looks can be deceptive. The bottom of the coil over is mounted half way between the pivot point and the connected end. The two inches or so you see that can depress, is twice that much at the end. I see five to six inches of travel there.