Comments on: Affordable 150-MPG Plug-in Hybrid for the Disabled

By: estewart

estewart — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 09:24:24 +0000

ACAgal.... the handicap version of the biotrike would have been of big help to you
.
It uses an electric wheelchair ramp, you ride right on in, and the wheelchair clamps down in position. The driver uses hand controls to drive the vehicle. The "door" is also electrified. And there is remote control for all that.

There is a regular four passenger model, and it is this wider bodied one that is used to accommodate wheelchair users, for a driver and one passenger. Since the passenger's seat folds up, that allots good room for maneuvering the wheelchair.

A wheelchair version is also alternately available for one passenger that uses a wheelchair, instead of for the driver.

THE cost of 35k could seem steep, but an equally equipped van is double that price, unless you can find a cheap used one... which gives you 8 mph. Whew!

Personally, I don't think it looks any where as good as the company's cars that can be operated also as a boat. BUT the images are of the prototype, so the release model may be lots better.

By: mollytherealdeal

mollytherealdeal — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:36:29 +0000

Come on, enzo. Can you share at least one? And if you can not share, at least tell if you believe this vehicle is worth buying or the death trap that the skeptics on this page suspect that it is.

By: enzo

enzo — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:45:42 +0000

i worked for this guy. i have so many stories…

By: ACAgal

ACAgal — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:06:10 +0000

As a prior user of a wheelchair (now recovered), I wonder how one transfers from that car to a wheelchair? It does not look suitable to the needs of those with a lower extremity disability.

Having transported disabled, I need to see more than what is currently shown. I see no strong supports as needed to help in the transfer, the vehicle looks too fragile, close to the ground and with no consideration for actual physical limitations.

Making something cheap does not mean it fits the needs of those who are temporarily injured or with a life long disability.

By: AP

AP — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:50:01 +0000

Dobelover, you are exactly right. Somehow, its being electric makes it exempt. With the right aero design, something like this could get 100+ MPG on gasoline.

Anyway, Messerchmitt made something just like this from 1953 - 1964.

By: Calvin

Calvin — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 19:44:15 +0000

130 mpg means the electricity is free. There is not much technical innovation about electric vehicles – it is the energy storage/battery or capacitor that matters. You can do a 2-wheel, 3-wheel, 4-wheel, or whatever-wheel electric vehicle if the energy storage issue is solved. This electric “car” is actually a motorcycle alternative.

By: Dobelover

Dobelover — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:23:33 +0000

This looks like a death trap to me.

Why is it that the main stream media has hyperfocused on safety in regular cars and trucks for decades, yet manages to "forget" when they are looking at tiny cars and novelty vehicles?

By: JON

JON — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:50:42 +0000

It looks a lot like the Buckminster Fuller’s body shape and 3 wheel design. I hope poeple don’t become afraid of this car like they did Bucky’s!!

By: Dan L

Dan L — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:22:39 +0000

My first impression is that this guy is more of a cheat than an innovator.

The motivation for producing a three wheeled vehicle is purely artificial: A weaker set of safety regulations apply. Finding a motorcycle that gets 65mpg is not difficult.

He says that the diesel version gets 65mpg, but the plugin hybrid version will get between 130 and 150 mpg. It will use lead-acid batteries. That is extremely suspicious. Perhaps he is counting only the fuel in the tank in the mileage calculation, not the electricity in the batteries?

Finally, there is no such thing as a hidden patent. If this guy is claiming to have hidden patents, I suspect he doesn't know the difference between patents and trade secrets. In which case, he probably has neither.

Has anyone researched this guy?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:40:59 +0000

Direct price comparisons aren't always valid. $24,000 is a good (NOT great) price for a PHEV that REPLACES a general purpose gasoline vehicle, like a Camry, Focus, etc. The BioTrike, while an interesting looking piece of technology, might be able to replace some or even most of the functionality of a mid or compact sedan, but by no means all of that functionality.

That means that other than a novelty, except for a very few buyers this vehicle would have to be a supplemental vehicle to the average household "fleet". Thus, rather than just the difference between the target $24k price tag and the average $15k-$20k of a normal car, the premium on this vehicle (in most cases) is actually the full $24k price tag.

Not that I don't think it has it's place. I could see a two car family with a small SUV and a sedan replacing the sedan with one of these, perhaps -- although the tradeoff would be that some trips for which the sedan would have been suitable but the BioTrike would not would have to be handed off to the SUV.

Maybe also as part of a rental fleet. Speaking for myself, when I rent a car for business travel, it is always to shuttle me and my briefcase between airport, hotel, and work site. Partnering with a rental company could also help foster adoption, because a rental car is far more likely to be used for intracity use than intercity, meaning that you wouldn't depend on as extensive a charging infrastructure. IE the availability of charge points in, say, Tampa is far less important if you're renting an EV in Orlando than if you're buying one there.