Overview: teams competing in the Automotive X-Prize
Click on the Loremo for a high-res gallery
After the success of the original Ansari X-Prize, the X-Prize Foundation started creating new X-prizes in areas like medicine and cars. The Automotive X-Prize was announced in 2006 and in April of this year, the organizers released the first draft of the rules at the New York Auto Show. While numerous high-mileage car competitions have been held for decades, the X-Prize is distinctly different. Many previous competitions have yielded tiny little stream-liners running on bicycle wheels with tiny engines. While these vehicles have yielded efficiency of hundreds or thousands of miles per gallon they weren't very useful.
The goal of the X-Prize is to produce vehicles that got the equivalent of at least 100 mpg of gasoline and could be sold in volumes of at least 10,000 a year profitably. Two classes were defined, a mainstream one for vehicles with a minimum of four wheels and four seats and a second alternative class for vehicles with at least two seats. In August an initial list of thirty-one entries was announced by the foundation. The first batch of entries run the gamut from names that will be familiar to readers of this site, such as Tesla and Phoenix to home-builts like Maine Automotive X. We decided to take a look at some of these teams, and you can see more information and plenty more picture galleries after the jump.
Gallery: Automotive X-Prize entrants
Gallery: Team Velozzi - Automotive X-Prize
The competition is intended to be technology neutral, with equivalency formulas for calculating the well-to-tank efficiency of each power-train. Standardized models will be used for each type of fuel whether it's electricity, ethanol, hydrogen, or gasoline. The electric vehicle start-ups like Tesla, Phoenix and Zap would seem like obvious entrants and, indeed, they have all signed up. Whether all of the competitors who've signed up actually compete remains to be seen. Since the rules still are not yet finalized, some may determine that they don't actually have a vehicle that qualifies.
Gallery: FuelVapor Technologies Alé
Gallery: AFVI Zap solar truck
Tesla won't be able to compete with the Roadster since it can't meet the 10,000 unit annual production level. Their upcoming WhiteStar sedan, though, will meet that threshold, but depending on the formula for the well-to-tank efficiency, they may or may not meet the 100 mpge threshold. The same will likely hold true for other electric vehicle manufacturers. Other teams are looking at a variety of different options like plug-in hybrids and tiny little engines. We've already covered several of the entrants like Velozzi and Loremo and we'll be looking into other teams in depth in the coming months. You can find the list of current entrants here.
Gallery: AFVI Ride & Drive Phoenix SUT
Gallery: Lotus APX concept
Gallery: Bricklin EXV-LS
Members of the Automotive X-Prize team have also given AutoblogGreen in-depth interviews, one of which ended up in our podcast. Here's a sample of Neal Anderson describing the upcoming races:
"Imagine a Tour de France for vehicles. But we're really going to test these vehicles in ways that consumers understand and show their actual mileage, their actual fuel economy" (Read the rest here).
AutoblogGreen will continue to keep an eye on the companies and automobiles involved in this X-Prize, as things will get more and more exciting as we get closer to the actual contest dates. Until then, let's speculate. Who do you think has got a chance of winning this thing? Who shouldn't bother? The comments are open.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kardax 4:57PM (10/05/2007)
The Auto X-Prize's "alternative" class is kindof a mess. The bar is set so low that just about any design that is fast enough and seats two will be admitted. Not surprisingly most of the 30+ competitors are going here.
The "mainstream" class is likely to be the most interesting. Besides the 4+ seats requirement, the rules implicitly require that all entrants at least theoretically meet all NHTSA regulations. This means cars in this class are the kind the mass market would actually buy.
As of right now, I'm not expecting the Automotive X-Prize to work. As easy as the alternative rules are, there's still squabbling over them (CommuterCars and Venture Vehicles don't like the side-by-side requirement, which was presumably added to exclude motorcycles). On the other side of the coin, the mainstream rules are so difficult I only expect 3 or 4 prototypes to show up for race day, and they'll probably all be EVs.
Reply
naggs 4:04PM (10/06/2007)
auto x prize is a total waste of time and energy
if a major automaker could build a car that got 100+ mpg and sell it at a profit, they would be "awarded" with thousands of times more than this prize.
it is not currently possible to produce a car that gets 100 mpg, passes all current safty regs, has all the comfort and features that customers expect, is fast enough to sell, has styling that will sell all at a price that will sell...
notice that that is very different than saying that it is not possible to make a car that gets 100 mpg. everyone knows that is not hard. an old honda motorcycle with a sidecar will seat 2 and get at least 150 mpg.
Reply
Chris M 4:20AM (10/09/2007)
The preliminary rules were changed to allow for tandem seating in the alternative class, but still reqiring an enclosed cabin to rule out motorcycles and scooters.
Some entrants don't really have their own car design, but have designed new powerplants presumably to be put in existing car frames.
Reply
Kardax 4:59PM (10/10/2007)
Chris M: Do you have a link to the updated rules?
Reply
JohnPaul Kusz 11:50PM (10/13/2007)
IS THE X-PRIZE 25+ YEARS BEHIND THE TIMES?
It is curious that the X-Prize is so hot when the auto industry developed a street ready, 100+ MPG, highway and 65 + MPG city vehicle in 1980.
YES 1980...
Volvo developed and built the Volvo-LCV, a high-efficiency diesel (no-electric, no hybrid) that met California emission standards and Volvo crash worthiness tests in 1980.
The vehicle looked great,especially for 1980. It had super acceleration and carried 4 passsengers comfortably.
It was featured as an example of technology waiting for the next fuel crunch, fuel was seen as too cheap in 1980 to market the car according to Volvo. All this information can be found in a documentary produced in 1990, narrated by Meryl Streep entitled: Race to Save The Planet."
Why doesn't Ford Motor Company, the now owner of Volvo Automobiles, dust this off and get on with it, maybe picking up the X Prize on the way?
perhaps Ford can squeeze another 10-15% out of its 25-year old design. That would cinch the "X."
JohnPaul Kusz
Reply
Chris M 12:52AM (10/14/2007)
Kardax: I don't have a link, I had commented on the exclusion of tandem designs, and they later sent out an e-mail noting that they had reconsidered due to all the complaints. The reason for the "side by side" rule was to exclude motorcycles and scooters, but they altered it to include enclosed tandem seat vehicles in the alternative class.
JohnPaul Kusz: The Volvo LCV may have met the 1980 California clean air standards, but it wouldn't meet the much tougher standards now in place. There must have been very good reasons why Volvo didn't market it - perhaps it was too expensive (exotic materials?) or too underpowered, or maybe just not sturdy enough to meet the high safety standards set by Volvo.
Reply
Bob 10:18PM (10/14/2007)
If everyone would look at the big picture here, The oil companys would loose billions of dollars if anyone made a vechicle that got over 100mpg. So think about it, I know we have the technology and the need but what wins out. Money! Thats the whole reason we dont have an affordable fosil fuel burning vechicle out there that can get 100mpg. But hey maybe Im an ass... Think about it.
Reply