The new X-Prize is for a car that gets 100 miles-per-gallon and like the previous X-Prize is for ten million dollars...
Now there are a lot of rules but in general the car must get 100 MPG, it must reach a performance level (but not high performance), it must have four wheels (if it's in the four seat category), it must be possible to manufacture, and it will be compared to other entries.
I can do this but really I'm too busy at this time...and the prototype would cost about $250,000 to shop produce.
------------------------------------------------------
The above is from my first posting about the 100 MPG X-Prize...
And since the car must be possible to manufacture and will be compared to the other cars we can say that the car must be practical.
Also the car must have a climate control system and the car must be current automotive emission standards.
And I've been looking around but I see that I am not going to be able to raise the $250,000 I need to produce a prototype vehicle.
So I'll just lay my cards on the table...
The best that I would have been able to do with the mere $250,000 would be to get a Caterham Super7 kit car in the extra wide version but special order the frame in aluminum rather than steel. And I could't use a motorcycle engine and transmission (which could save 300 pounds in weight) so I would use the smallest 4-cylinder engine currently available and certified for emissions standards in the U.S. market (like a 1.5 Yaris engine). Then I would have to find a transmission for the engine since the car frame that I am using is for rear-wheel-drive. Next I would take the car to an Italian design studio and have them design a bodywork and shape for the car. And the thin flexible fiberglass or Lexan bodywork would attach to mounting points but also push down over plastic shapers. Of course a master fiberglass shop would have to make and fit the bodywork. That's Car A and would weigh about
1200 pounds. The Car A result would be about 75 MPG in highway driving...So the problem with Car A is the weight but I can't go to a motorcycle engine to save weight because I would have to develop the motorcycle engine to meet emission standards...and that's too much for me.
And I can't lighten Car A with a smaller frame because a strong frame is necessary for a practical car. Why ? Well for example a large adult often gets on a very small child's bicycle and leans into a curve. Then the bicycle goes into a big wiggle. That big wiggle is the frame becoming a spring. So a car that can go 0 to 60 mph in 12 seconds and that can also go
100 mph top speed...must have a strong frame or else it could wiggle off the road. In other words frame strength is very important for a car while not so important for something like a 10 mph golf cart...And also very small tires can't be used on a practical car because turning into a corner could turn small tires into liquid rubber and let the car run wide in a curve. In other words the current tire design of being wide but also having a short sidewall is a tire that holds up to the demands of the car but also a tire that does not wiggle. And a tire that does not wiggle is a tire that saves fuel...
Now Car B would be the same as Car A but would have the 2.0 Solstice turbocharged engine that makes 260 horsepower and 260 foot-pounds of torque. Why ? Well to take advantage of the high torque at low RPM but to ignore the high horsepower at high RPM. In other words Car B would have the engine speed limited to make an ultra-low RPM engine. Then the 0 to 60 mph run of Car B would likely fully use five gears while Car A could make 60 shortly after hitting third gear. And again Car B takes advantage of the low RPM torque but avoids high RPM fuel draw. And Car B would weigh about 1300 pounds while the MPG result would be about 70 MPG. Also Car B might practically need an automatic transmission for the short shift points...
Now I see the first X-Prize event is September 2009 and that means that I could build Car C.
Car C would be the same as Car A but Car C would use the 2009 VW 2.0 diesel engine. Car C would weigh 1300 pounds and the MPG result would be about 90 MPG. Oh hey, 90 MPG is getting close to the requirement. But there is no way to get the extra 10 MPG. Weight, tires, aerodynamics, and everything else has already been considered. For instance the car is low, has a smooth shape, has a front spoiler, and has side skirts. And the car might also have secondary flexible skirts all the way around that hang down to within 1/2" of the ground. (But moveable aerodymanic devices are banned on race cars by international agreement.)
Now Cars A, B, and C are based on a convertible car that does not have doors or windows. So the newly designed bodywork would likely have a top that swings back to allow the driver and passenger to step in. And these cars are two-seat cars. Now consider a two-seat car that does have traditional doors and windows and the weight goes to 1500 pounds. Consider a four seat four-door car and the the weight of a practical car goes to 2200 pounds. (Keep in mind that a carbon fiber frame car would be too expensive.)
So the 100 MPG X-Prize car can't be done as a practical car unless a motorcycle engine is brought up to automotive emission standards. And the motorcycle engine and transmission would have a difficult shifting linkage...
Now one of the X-Prize entries is a 900 pound car with a 50 horsepower diesel engine. Of course that does it. But is the frame a practical strength ? Are the tires a practical size ? Is the car a practical cost ? Well...if the 50 horsepower diesel is about the same weight as a motorcycle engine and if it meets emission standards...then that does it. Most of the weight would be in the frame of the car with a very light engine...