Aptera may undergo some design changes before December production
The latest newsletter from Aptera has arrived and we can now inform you of their most recent interesting updates. As expected, the company is about to begin the process of moving much of their current crowded facility to their new, close-by Vista, CA location. The new shop will contain some offices, the R&D lab and, of course, space to begin series production of the all-new Mk-1. I say "all-new" because, as you may have noticed in the above renderings, there have been some "refinements" made to the super efficient three-wheeler which they say make it safer and even more efficient. Holding their cards close to their chest, the company would not elaborate about which or how many of these changes would appear on the final production version but they should be making those revelations in their next newsletter.
The latest rendering seems to stretch and lower our wingless friend which might allow them to give it a slightly narrower track. This version also adds side-view mirrors to an otherwise sleek exterior but we don't know if they are permanent since the side-view cameras are maintained. Interestingly, the rear-view camera gets its own little dorsal-fin enclosure that has been spotted on some pre-production Mk-1 out there in the wild. The other noticable change is the addition of another window behind the door. We're not sure if this is one of the permanent changes though perhaps it could be if the company gets enough positive feedback from its fans. Though seemingly brief, the newsletter does contain a nice chat between founder Steve Fambro and the company's new CEO, Paul Wilbur and hints about an all-new website coming soon.
[Source: Aptera]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
fnc 4:35PM (9/30/2008)
Do the mirrors and window mean the production model won't have the rear view cameras? That'll be a shame if so, I thought the panoramic rear view across the three dash screens was one of the neater features of the car. It might have been too expensive or just not as useful as it seemed it would be. The even sleeker shape is nice though.
Reply
Domenick Yoney 4:38PM (9/30/2008)
Sorry if I wasn't clear but from what I know, the side view cameras and "panoramic rear view" will be in the production vehicle.
Darrell 9:09AM (10/01/2008)
...Because it looks like it came from the Jetson's?
Reply
gulags 6:17PM (9/30/2008)
I really like the redesign, if this is the case. Much sleeker, even with the added bits.
I think, in the end, it was the Human Factors usability testing that caused them to put rear view mirrors on the thing, finally. It seems like it would be a bit distracting to have to look down from the road to merge.
Personally, I would have kept the cameras, but put little flatscreens on the inside part of the window in the same visual position as rear view mirrors in a standard car.
Reply
Kevin M 7:58PM (9/30/2008)
The side-view mirrors worry me a little bit because it seems that they would detract from the aerodynamics. But it shouldn't be too big of a deal. It's likely that people felt unsafe driving with no mirrors, considering how accustomed people are to them. Also, it is probably best to have them in addition to the cameras, seeing as you can't use the screens when the vehicle is off, or should a screen fail.
And regarding the forthcoming new website... about time.
Reply
Joe 9:40PM (9/30/2008)
A lot of states require a rear view mirror by law. A side-view camera does not suffice. The laws require an actual mirror, although some only on one side. The addition will allow it to be legal in more states without dealing with legislation.
They will add some drag, but it can be minimized to the point of being almost insignificant with proper design work.
I think the small amount of added drag is certainly worth not dealing with legal issues.
Reply
killroy 4:02PM (10/02/2008)
The camera in place of a mirror design is called "indirect drive" and it is being developed for armored vehicles, but it is much easier said than done. In the real world is is difficult to get indirect drive good enough to make users happy. The issues are resolution, color, contrast, motion blur, noise, depth, and vibration.
Reply
GenWaylaid 3:15AM (10/01/2008)
Notice the little roll-down cutouts in the windows. The Aptera is looking more and more like the DeLorean of the future. (Note that I'm not trying to insult them. I respect what Aptera is doing and I love both their unusual style and the DeLorean's.) Just remember, cocaine is not venture capital!
Reply
mr.ed 7:49PM (10/01/2008)
It's getting more universally legal, with mirrors, marker lights, etc. and practical with more rear visibility, though not enough. It needs Opel GT size glass at least. But where are the bumpers? The Prowler had to have them, and got a really ugly front treatment. It will take quite a trick to do much better, given the regulations.
Reply
rob 9:41PM (10/01/2008)
Motorcycles don't require bumpers, Ed. Remember that in many states this will be classed as a motorcycle.
In most states they DO require at least one mirror, however. :sadbanana:
Gary 11:11AM (10/01/2008)
What kinds of people would drive these on a day-to-day basis? And people said that Prius drivers are douchebags.
Reply
Frank 12:28PM (10/01/2008)
"Oh sweet, if I play with the contrast/brightness settings I can make the car look better"
"No! They'll figure that one out!"
"What if I add a mirror and a window"
"Dude. Sweet. You'll be golden"
Reply
Peter 12:35PM (10/01/2008)
Although I think the two renderings are at slightly different scales, it appears that the revised design is somewhat longer than the original. The improved aerodynamics of the longer design should offset the increased drag from the external mirrors.
And Gary, insults are uncalled for. If you don't like the car, don't buy one.
Reply
Paul Allen 1:21PM (10/01/2008)
I suspect that rear-view cameras are not yet a legally-acceptable alternative to mirrors in DOT's and/or NHTSA's eyes.
Reply
Hucbald 2:27PM (10/01/2008)
I really, really want one of these, but I'm going to wait for the hybrid with the added engine (I need to drive from San Antonio to Tucson in whatever vehicles I have).
I've ridden motorcycles for over 35 years, and since this is classified as a motorcycle, it would be the only practical one I ever bought.
The slightly larger size will help with taking along the gear I need, so I'm all for the revised design.
Reply
kyle 7:48PM (10/01/2008)
Gary, there's a clear difference between those driving priuses and those driving Apteras. Priuses LOOK like shit and Apteras ARE the shit.
Reply
Alan Johnson 1:49PM (10/02/2008)
In the eighties, I frequently drove a vehicle named the 'Pulse' (mfg. by Owosso Motors), a virtual airplane fuselage on wheels with essentially a parts bin parentage; at that time a quintessential hybridization of aerodynamic and fuel efficiency. The Aptera represents the zenith of organic design and engineering excellence prevailing today and will vehemently convene a new personal transportation paradigm. I will purchase this intrepid vehicle the moment it becomes available and will drive it on all but the rarest occasions when my HUMMER H1, H2 or Corvette Z06 would be more situationally pertinent, thus disabusing myself of the profound sense of guilt in the knowledge that my ostentatious conventional modes of transportation sledgehammer the environment rather than coalesce with it !
Reply
Jim 1:39PM (10/03/2008)
If only Aptera woul quit the hype and get to production already! At this rate everyone will have a 100+ MPG pug in hybrid by the time they do!
Reply
Jim Alger 1:55PM (10/03/2008)
Anyone else notice the radio antenna on the roof?
Reply
Frank Erickson 1:02PM (10/16/2008)
I have come late to this party so my apologies in advance for bringing up already discussed topics.
Was there any discussion on need for side 'curtain' airbags? - there is an obvious vulnerability to side impacts. The roll bar may be adequate to limit crushing.
Reply