Then there is no actual address of the company provided, not even in the press release. No trademarks as stated are actually registered, the “patent” isn’t registered either. Maybe I’m too stupid to use the US Patent & TM search properly…
They say the car is “half finished” (on wired.com as one of the comments)
Maybe the chassis is (judging from the images they provide)…
And an appearantly earlier “rendering” can be found on steve fambros’ (forgotten?) website http://www.fambro.com (he’s one of the engineers claiming to have developed this thing)
Don’t think they used any advanced shapefinding methods for that!
Reminds me of this car I posted over in the transportation forum this week:
It is a VW 1 liter (for 1 L/100km or 200mpg). This car is the real deal though. It is a development from VWs 2 liter car, which was based on their supermini Lupo. It used a tiny diesel engine to get 100 mpg, and in fact circled the world using the least amount of fuel for a land based car doing so.
The 1 liter takes the efficient diesel engine, but packages it in a much more slippery two seat design.
Looking at their design, it is clearly a pie in the sky project. Right away, the thing wouldn’t pass bumper testing. There is a huge blind spot because of the A-pilar. It looks so thin as to be a single seater. They mention composites and a cost of $20,000? Come on. Composites require alot of skilled hand work, that isn’t cheap. Beyond those everyday issues, looking at their powertrain and weight figures, I doubt that it would get better fuel economy than the VW 1L, maybe worse.
If I were an investor, I would buy VW stock before looking at this. They appear to have no proprietary technology, just a pretty render.
