Aptera rebuts safety concerns of its three-wheeled 2e
We recently opined about the fact that the Department of Energy Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Incentive Program excludes vehicles not covered by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The subject specifically came up because Aptera is supporting a bill that would amend the rules of the program to allow alternative vehicles such as its three wheeled 2e to be eligible for support from the low interest loan program.
The problem arises because three wheelers are considered motorcycles and are exempt from U.S. safety regulations that govern cars and trucks. The concern is that many consumers may not be aware that just because a vehicle has a fully enclosed body, it doesn't necessarily meet the safety standards that other modern vehicles do. Aptera spoke with Green Fuels Forecast about the safety elements built into its design and emphasizes that even though it is not legally required to do so (because it only has three wheels), the 2e is being crash tested and built to automotive safety standards. We'll let the Feds and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety decide whether Aptera has succeeded in its safety quest.
As for the loan program, perhaps the it should be adjusted to allow vehicles that meet safety requirements to be eligible regardless of the number of wheels. Or perhaps it's time to revisit the safety rules and have them apply to vehicles capable of higher speeds even if they have three wheels.
Gallery: Aptera 2e at TED
[Source: Green Fuels Forecast]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Woodenbee 1:45PM (3/17/2009)
This is kind of a self correcting issue, the type of people who go on and on about safety are never going to stop driving SUV's anyway they just like to have company, there's always going to be various niches in society who are against everything, we should just realize this and simple yes we know you have problems now be quiet so society can move forward ( without you)
Reply
tony 2:49PM (3/17/2009)
Nice piece of wisdom.
Zeph 3:48PM (3/17/2009)
Anyone who has followed Aptera's development and knows what this viehicle is and how it's made will realise that it is likely safer than most others on the road today.
It has a full carbonfibre body shell for one thing, and now that it appears to have become front wheel drive even the dynamics should become more than acceptable.
The only possibly riskier aspect to it is the very low noise volume, but this could be corrected by engineering on the tires so that they have enough rolling noise to alert pedestrians to it's presence.
I find it amazing that people consider a 1000bhp Bugatti Veyron or a near 700hp Ferrari Enzo safe, especially since most of the time they are driven by couch potatos over 50...
If we want to be serious we must realise that a car is only really as safe as two things, one being it's structural performance and the second being the ability and civility of it's driver. Everything else is just socioeconomic masturbation imho.
Reply
Bill 4:26PM (3/17/2009)
Actual crash tests (not just computer simulations) were supposed to have taken place last summer.
Reply
AaronT 1:46AM (3/18/2009)
Maybe, instead of revamping who's required to abide by these safety rules, we should look at the rules themselves. Many were created by the car companies themselves in their heyday to keep competition and upstarts from horning in on their business while others were made specifically to keep foreign machines off American roads.
A lot of safety rules and regulations are bunk and force vehicles to be heavy and inefficient just to comply. Why not sell cars with OPTIONAL safety requirements and let consumers decide what they want in safety and efficiency instead?
Oh, wait, I forgot, in a nanny state, all people are considered too stupid to make up their own minds and only government is wise enough to do it for them.
Reply
Yikes 8:48AM (3/18/2009)
Aaron, I totally agree with you, and this nanny state mentality is getting worse by the day. Now the MY government is proposing a CZAR to dictate over Detroit.
Sad. Look at how successful that was for the Russian Czars.
Yikes 8:45AM (3/18/2009)
Why should tax payer's money be given to every Tom, Dick, and Harry that starts a company and comes up with yet another vehicle?
Reply
mycomya 1:38PM (3/18/2009)
Yale and George Mason Universities surveyed 2,164 Americans last fall and found: 85 percent supported tax rebates for people buying energy efficient vehicles or solar panels.
And now you're telling me the government won't support the most efficient vehicle ever made, that also exceeds current safety standards? Politically, adopting Aptera into the government-supported fold is a no-brainer and a winner. Financially, its also wise since the money will give legs to new, strong domestic markets for the future (and not cede these industries to foreign competitors, ala the PV industry). Aptera deserves it; its not a fly-by-night operation.
Reply
Letsgetphysical 4:54PM (3/18/2009)
They don't need to spend 1 million dollars on crash tests. Just crash one into a fusion or corolla.
They wont because this Aptera will stay perfectly intact but will rollover 3 times causing the DUMMY inside to lose its BRAINS.
I love the aptera but they need more crumple zone or it is toast.
Reply