Mr Angry wrote:Something more like the Durch Pereves

In the mcn tosser post on maxi chat the journalist describes a scooter space ship....its getting there

Yes, and who do you think was the first person to invite them over to the UK to attend a UK Bike Show..?

And the Carver...

But these vehicles are some way from the maxi scooter.
But I'm saving hard for a Monotracer... (cue: 633 Squadron music and machine gun fire)

I know irev.. just having a bit banter

Well, waddya know...

Just two days after I posted my suspicions
http://www.gizmag.com/lit-motors-c1-prototype/22808/

The rather steampunk-looking proof-of-concept prototype is electronically limited to a speed of about 10 mph (16 km/h), and its two scaled-down gyros generate only half of the approximately 1,300 foot-pounds (1,763 Nm) of torque planned for the production version. It turns out that that’s still enough, however, to keep it upright while being piloted around the local streets – or when being yanked sideways by a Land Rover, as you’ll see in our video.

Can it be coincidence, I wonder, that 10mph is about the threshold between wheel-steer and lean-steer...

And nice to see someone else in the comments poo-poos the gyros in favour of a tilt-control narrow-track three wheeler.
Tech which is here, now.

Use that and Lit have no excuse for not having it in the market by the beginning of 2013, much less 2014. Wow, we can all have that `125 mph` performance and `200 mile` range next year...

Gyros seem to be bonkers way of replacing the Mark 1. Leg

If it really has to be a completely enclosed floor then the narrow track 3 wheel solution already has the answers - so I'm with Irev on that. The slight increase in rolling resistence shouldn't be a problem. The increase frontal area and induced vortices from spinning would normally increase drag but this would be negligable with fully enclosing bodywork.

The crunch point of any electric vehicle at the moment is range, and for fossil burners it is mpg so conserving energy is critical. For that reason having an extra draw such as gyros doesn't make sense to me; save the electricity and use it for motive power.
The electrickery should be being used to recover energy from deceleration and the movement of the suspension etc.

It would help if the the oil/hydrogen companies stopped buying up and shelving new battery/motor technology as part of their battle to keep us dependent on their fuel stations and consumables.

Likewise if all the proponents of so-called `green` electrickery could be forced to admit they really know just how dirty, nasty, wasteful and environmentally unsound everything relating to current electrical generation actually is. And if they don't, removed from the scene as incompetent or jailed as fraudsters and charlatans.

They are all lying devious shits with only vested self-interest as a guiding principle.

For now (and `now` really mean the next 10-15 years at current [sic] progression of green, renewable, replenishable sources of electricity), the solution is to do what I've been harping on about for years - smaller engines, lighter maxis, better fuel efficiency derived from improved design and aerodynamics and focus on improving the volumetric efficiency NOT the specific output of a gallon of go-juice in an internal combustion engine.

All it would take (and I do mean all) is a recognition that most PTW's even maxis only spend a tiny proportion of their time actually seeking the top-end horsepower and instead finding more efficient tyres, bearings, suspension systems, ergonomics and yes, aerodynamics to reduce the drag factors. All of them, not a single one in isolation...

Then we'd see at least a threefold increase in fuel economy and 220mpg would mean cost-equivalency to current electrical motors and their batteries, with a massive reduction in the environmental effect.

Gyros on a scooter are simply a profligate waste of resources, a pure indicator that the cretins developing this notional transportation medium don't even understand the question, much less are equipped to suggest or provide the answer.

Fucking numpties, the lot of them.

Brushing aside the name calling....

The holistic approach of considering tyres, bearings etc is obviously a good one; I would add sump oil, gearbox oil and related consumables to the list too.

The bit I don't follow is how improvements in Cd, tyres, suspension and bearings etc closes the gap on electric vehicles?
Surely both vehicles types would have the same efficiency gain and the same improved mileage?

Bluebottle wrote:Brushing aside the name calling....

The holistic approach of considering tyres, bearings etc is obviously a good one; I would add sump oil, gearbox oil and related consumables to the list too.

The bit I don't follow is how improvements in Cd, tyres, suspension and bearings etc closes the gap on electric vehicles?
Surely both vehicles types would have the same efficiency gain and the same improved mileage?

Not when the limitation of electric motors and batteries are taken into account.

There are very few moving parts in an electrical motor, and fewer still in their power supply, so the marginal extra gains from the improvements in Cd are limited by the small number of opportunities inside the motive power unit unless you add a gearbox as it's power output is fixed to rotation speed and limited less by drag in the motive `system`. Even then the volumetric efficiency gains are limited by the specific storage capacity of the batteries - by that I mean if you do an `mpg equivalent` study on the battery. its limited total range reduces the actual mileage gains from percentage decrease in overall drag - a 70 mpg scooter can easily get to 210pg, but get a threefold increase in a 20mpg electric scooter you still only get to 60... The electric platform is as limited and constrained by todays tech, but it's overheads for gains are actually far smaller without breakthrough thinking.

With modern technology the `waste-generation cost`of extracting, processing and delivering the Kw/hl means the electrical equivalent is nowhere near as efficient and the waste is not only more profligate, but also of even nastier type. as mining for the rare materials is massively over-wasteful compared even to the extraction methods for oil & gas.

So the electric motor might be 95% efficient; a small turbo diesel in a microcar between 35-40% efficient, but if you choose to measure not the `output & conversion` of the fuel source into road miles as the electrical charlatans are wont to do (Doncha just love their `2.3pence per mile` lie...?) but instead the cost of presenting the equivalent energy in usable form to the vehicle in motion, electricity is the most wasteful resource on the planet, one of the least efficient - and in terms of transport infrastructure vastly more expensive when it comes to cost of delivery. The `leakage` in electrical production and distribution is in the order of 80% - the delivery is no more than 20% efficient.

Do we see those figures mentioned? No we don't. Your `2.3 pence mile` may have cost a million tonnes of shovelled earth to get it to the battery.

When you factor in those costs against the marginal extra gains for the increase in `productivity` for your kilowatt, the gains from making a maxi more efficient don't even register. So while the improvement in efficiency might also benefit the electric motorist, the gains in efficiency would be more in the order of 3 than 300%.

Electrical energy creation, storage and distribution is about 100 years behind the times.

And all this is before we consider the impact of more localised and sustainable sources of production of the next-generation of bio-fuels.

But I will happily agree that their would be benefits to electric vehicles from the same drag reduction approach.

The only way of making electrical vehicles in any way efficient is by removing the batteries and having an external power supply as is done with trolleybuses, trams and trains.