If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   One wheel. Zero emissions. Seven years in development. Zero room for your beatch. WTF   (autos.yahoo.com) divider line 187
    More: Fail, emission factor  
•       •       •

23165 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jan 2014 at 10:14 PM (34 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



187 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-27 12:17:39 AM
Meh, if I'm going to ride electric, I want something fun and stylish.

d9bfq4efdl7s1.cloudfront.net
Mission Motorcycles 'R'
0-60 3 seconds
150mph top speed
163 bhp
140 mile range

And it doesn't look half bad.
 
2014-01-27 12:18:00 AM

real_headhoncho: So basically it is like a Segway you can sit on and look less like a douche riding it.



Make one of these Zero-Emission and you might have a winrar.


And drop tariffs on imported battery operated street legal mopeds.
 
2014-01-27 12:19:30 AM
Nope.
 
2014-01-27 12:22:27 AM

moike: Meh, if I'm going to ride electric, I want something fun and stylish.


Mission Motorcycles 'R'
0-60 3 seconds
150mph top speed
163 bhp
140 mile range

And it doesn't look half bad.


Sort of want
 
2014-01-27 12:22:34 AM
This guy built his own a while back, as well as a DIY Segway. Seems like a fun/dangerous hobby project.
 
2014-01-27 12:27:27 AM

moike: Meh, if I'm going to ride electric, I want something fun and stylish.

[d9bfq4efdl7s1.cloudfront.net image 555x420]
Mission Motorcycles 'R'
0-60 3 seconds
150mph top speed
163 bhp
140 mile range

And it doesn't look half bad.


How much?
 
2014-01-27 12:35:20 AM

RatMaster999: moike: Meh, if I'm going to ride electric, I want something fun and stylish.

[d9bfq4efdl7s1.cloudfront.net image 555x420]
Mission Motorcycles 'R'
0-60 3 seconds
150mph top speed
163 bhp
140 mile range

And it doesn't look half bad.

How much?


Way too much...  40 grand for the top end model with a quick charger.

If I ever roll into a big pile of fark you money I'll make sure it's checked off the list.
 
2014-01-27 12:38:16 AM

Ed Grubermann: Asa Phelps: displaced emissions is not zero emissios


2: Motorcycles produce far more dangerous emissions than cars do for the same miles travelled



Seriously?  Is it because of the lack of a catalytic converter or what?  Even then though...the bike holds like 2 gallons of fuel and moves MUCH further than a car does on the same amount.  I'm gonna have to pull a "citation needed" card on this one.
 
2014-01-27 12:47:10 AM

sethen320: Ed Grubermann: Asa Phelps: displaced emissions is not zero emissios


2: Motorcycles produce far more dangerous emissions than cars do for the same miles travelled


Seriously?  Is it because of the lack of a catalytic converter or what?  Even then though...the bike holds like 2 gallons of fuel and moves MUCH further than a car does on the same amount.  I'm gonna have to pull a "citation needed" card on this one.


The Mythbusters say:

"At best, it's a wash. Motorcycles are just as bad for the environment as cars, at worst, they're far worse."
 
2014-01-27 12:47:15 AM

Stone Meadow: madgonad: 20mph, 20-30 mile range, $2k, and you can pedal if you want.
[currentmoves.com image 850x566]

So much this. One of my employees spent $1300 to build an ebike (from all brand new parts) with a 60 mile range at 20 mph. He rides it 9+ miles each way to work every day, plus all over town for shopping, errands, etc., for less than a penny per mile in electricity.


Yes, ebikes.  I also want one.
 
2014-01-27 12:48:00 AM

sethen320: Ed Grubermann: Asa Phelps: displaced emissions is not zero emissios


2: Motorcycles produce far more dangerous emissions than cars do for the same miles travelled


Seriously?  Is it because of the lack of a catalytic converter or what?  Even then though...the bike holds like 2 gallons of fuel and moves MUCH further than a car does on the same amount.  I'm gonna have to pull a "citation needed" card on this one.


It's true...sort of...depends on your point of view.  http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/09/mythbusters-answers-a r e-motorcycles-greener-than-cars/index.htm
 
2014-01-27 12:52:45 AM

sethen320: Ed Grubermann: Asa Phelps: displaced emissions is not zero emissios


2: Motorcycles produce far more dangerous emissions than cars do for the same miles travelled


Seriously?  Is it because of the lack of a catalytic converter or what?  Even then though...the bike holds like 2 gallons of fuel and moves MUCH further than a car does on the same amount.  I'm gonna have to pull a "citation needed" card on this one.


It looks to be exactly that. The Motocycles burn less fuel, but they burn it dirtier. Kind of like how burning styrofoam on a campfire makes toxic black smog while burning it in a heavy duty incinerator makes relatively harmless co2.
 
2014-01-27 12:59:37 AM

Tsar_Bomba1: I would have liked a Carver One.  Was just too expensive ($30,000) for what they were selling.  Someone has licensed the technology from them, but I have yet to see another version of it being manufactured.

[asset0.cbsistatic.com image 550x448]

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 640x395]


Related, Lit Motors C1, a two-wheeled gyroscopic electric motorcycle.  100 miles/charge claimed, enclosed cabin, wheel to steer, belts/airbags, passenger?  Their video
 
2014-01-27 01:00:46 AM
Motorcycles emissions have been phased in since circa 2001. Latest phase was 2010 IIRC. They are required to have catalytic converters from the factory. I think the difference is in either the makeup of the catalytic converter material (it's different from cars, they have to withstand much higher vibrations in motorcycles) or it's simply less effective due to limited size... my guess. A motorcycle's catalytic converter is like the size of a soda can.
 
2014-01-27 01:05:06 AM

sethen320: Seriously?  Is it because of the lack of a catalytic converter or what?  Even then though...the bike holds like 2 gallons of fuel and moves MUCH further than a car does on the same amount.  I'm gonna have to pull a "citation needed" card on this one.


Off the cuff as a chemical engineer by training, the catalytic converter being nonexistent or crippled for weight purposes changes the  kind of pollution emitted, what comes out the back of a car is basically carbon dioxide, some soot, and some fully-passivated additive chemicals.  What comes out the back of a motorbike is partially-oxidized carbon fragments and some nasty bits of nitrogen and sulfur chemistry.

Basically, car emissions are bad in the "global warming" sense, motorcycle emissions are bad in the "actually poisonous / acid rain" sense.  The typical metric used is CO, because CO is highly poisonous and fairly persistent (lasts a month or so before degrading and can build up in the local air-space of the city).  Motorcycles emit something like four orders of magnitude more CO than cars on average.

Your overall number of molecules emitted is lower if you're actually using the motorbike at its rated load, they run an average of 25% less fuel usage or so per mile than a small sedan, mostly because inefficiencies in engine design driven by down-scaling are balanced by severely reduced mass.

Here's a consumer reports summary with links:  http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/09/mythbusters-answers-a r e-motorcycles-greener-than-cars/index.htm

And yes, they use a product test done by Mythbusters (i.e. UC Riverside doing stuff for Mythbusters for free from curiosity as usual) so the scope of the product comparison is somewhat limited.


The short version here is that a motorcycle is about the same as a small gas-powered car as far as the capital-E Environment is concerned, and far, far worse than any car for the small-e environment (as in "the places you live and breathe and such").  It's close enough to a wash that other concerns can certainly outweigh this (*coughparkingcough*) but if you're looking to get an alternate vehicle that's more "green" or just more efficient/better in general, grab a hybrid.

// Not an electric- the US makes most of its electricity with coal, so that just moves the problem-- theoretically that could help, but in practical terms it doesn't, since coal plants aren't really doing any of the heavy cleaning necessary to take advantage of that economy of scale, unfortunately.  A hybrid, where the vehicle uses a battery for everything but acceleration and charges off of braking and so on.
 
2014-01-27 01:07:49 AM
I see that pretty much everyone grabbed the same citation, and I lose because I added exposition.

This is probably a good indicator that you shoulda just googled it instead of asking us to do it for you, heh.
 
Rat
2014-01-27 01:10:37 AM
img.fark.net

©
 
2014-01-27 01:10:47 AM

minuslars: I think the difference is in either the makeup of the catalytic converter material (it's different from cars, they have to withstand much higher vibrations in motorcycles) or it's simply less effective due to limited size...


It's the second one.  Catalytic converter chemistry hasn't changed since the early 1900s and even the substrates have been pretty close to universal since the '70s, there's not really a vibration issue with the fused pellet packing as such.

It's purely a matter of fluid residence time, which basically comes out to how big the damned thing is (and how fast you're pumping stuff through it, but that's not something they can really change).
 
2014-01-27 01:25:34 AM

RatMaster999: Deadite: I see a possible problem with the design.

[images.wrzko.eu image 850x456]

/also Japan did it in '89

[i19.photobucket.com image 680x425]

I preferred the armed ones.

[www.robotechcollections.fr image 640x427]
[www.robotechresearch.com image 640x480]

But, if I could have any anime motorcycle, it would have to be a Cyclone.

[media.windingroad.com image 640x480]

Though I wouldn't turn down one of these.


Both the Cyclone and the Akira's motorcycle are the coolest vehicles in anime, ever.

/Although Kaneda's bike is more realistic
//Wish I had one
 
2014-01-27 01:34:44 AM

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Lsherm: I can't see it catching on because, just like the Segway, it's too heavy.  It's not totally revolutionary, it's just a one-wheeled motorcycle.  But at 5 grand, you could get a motorcycle, which is marginally safer.  It's not like people are looking at motorcycle parking spaces and saying "those are too big."

2wolves: Big sticky tires cost large dollars.

The big Japanese three all came out with sub $6k bikes this year.  Nice bikes.

baka-san: Top speed?
Range?
Plus, how the hell can it lean on that square tire

Plus, no wind protection

I'll stick with my Honda if its all the same to you

This thing is not a motorcycle alternative. It's a Segway-type walking/biking/mobility-scooter alternative. Inside, sidewalks, bike lane, etc.

It goes 10* mph and has a range of 10* miles. It is not trying to compete with your Honda.

*Not a typo. TEN. ONE ZERO.


Heyyyyyy, you know what goes more than 10 miles, and does so in less than one hour, and is zero emissions - not displaced, really zero? A bicycle, that's what. You know what's better overall for getting around a city if you're willing to be exposed to the elements and want to minimize emissions, but not arrive at work drenched in sweat? A Vespa.

This thing would block normal movement of bike lanes, and be a danger to pedestrians on sidewalks. Also, it's a unicycle. FAIL.
 
2014-01-27 01:38:37 AM

madgonad: 20mph, 20-30 mile range, $2k, and you can pedal if you want.
[currentmoves.com image 850x566]




bumblebeebolton.com
$324.95 + bike.
 
2014-01-27 01:40:37 AM

lunging_man_ass: The whole point for getting a motorcycle is that you can get at least some speed, this has NONE.


Really? I always thought it was fuel efficiency.
 
2014-01-27 01:51:21 AM
Nope. Gonna fail or be reduced to the status of a moped.

(1) No big, shiny engine down between the legs.
(2) No big shiny tail pipes to extend in manly designs.
(3) Not heavy enough to be manly.
(4) Limited customization space.
(5) And the biggest reason of all -- not noisy enough.

I've enough bikers blasting by my home to know that serious riders need serious noise. Mufflers are for wimps.
 
2014-01-27 01:56:10 AM
Why?
 
2014-01-27 01:59:23 AM

Rik01: Nope. Gonna fail or be reduced to the status of a moped.

(1) No big, shiny engine down between the legs.
(2) No big shiny tail pipes to extend in manly designs.
(3) Not heavy enough to be manly.
(4) Limited customization space.
(5) And the biggest reason of all -- not noisy enough.

I've enough bikers blasting by my home to know that serious riders need serious noise. Mufflers are for wimps.


Or in the real world
1. Too slow to be worth a shiat since you can go faster on a bicycle
2. More expensive than a moped yet less speed and less distance per fueling/charging
3. Balancing on a single wheel isn't for many people.

Show me on the dolly where the bad biker touched you.
 
2014-01-27 02:42:54 AM
I think Fred was riding one of these around on an episode of Portlandia.
 
2014-01-27 02:50:16 AM
But can it do a wheelie?
 
2014-01-27 03:00:53 AM

Dingleberry Dickwad: Deadite: I see a possible problem with the design.

[images.wrzko.eu image 850x456]

/also Japan did it in '89

US did it in 85
[boulder-hill.net image 512x384]


Britain did it in 1978.

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-01-27 03:04:07 AM
Zero emissions? Not likely. If like a Segway, you're using ELECTRICITY... and we all know where 40% of our electricity comes from...

/yes even the "green" companies, unless they own the lines.
 
2014-01-27 03:13:11 AM

StoPPeRmobile: madgonad: 20mph, 20-30 mile range, $2k, and you can pedal if you want.
[currentmoves.com image 850x566]

[bumblebeebolton.com image 800x532]
$324.95 + bike.


That looks like it would leave you smelling like 2stroke exhaust.
 
2014-01-27 03:14:28 AM

Gordon Bennett: Dingleberry Dickwad: Deadite: I see a possible problem with the design.

[images.wrzko.eu image 850x456]

/also Japan did it in '89

US did it in 85
[boulder-hill.net image 512x384]

Britain did it in 1978.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 595x842]


static2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-01-27 04:08:03 AM

El Pachuco: Gordon Bennett: Dingleberry Dickwad: Deadite: I see a possible problem with the design.

[images.wrzko.eu image 850x456]

/also Japan did it in '89

US did it in 85
[boulder-hill.net image 512x384]

Britain did it in 1978.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 595x842]

[static2.wikia.nocookie.net image 400x286]



Children please.

www.technovelgy.com
 
2014-01-27 05:21:36 AM

Asa Phelps: displaced emissions is not zero emissios


Fair enough.

We can include emissions from electricity sources if you're willing to include emissions from all of the upstream petroleum extraction, refining, and transporting required to get the gasoline to your car.

(Spoiler: Electric vehicles come out even farther ahead)
=Smidge=
 
2014-01-27 05:42:52 AM
well, uh, it beats dealing with the airline companies, that's for sure
 
2014-01-27 05:43:56 AM

Jim_Callahan: sethen320: Seriously?  Is it because of the lack of a catalytic converter or what?  Even then though...the bike holds like 2 gallons of fuel and moves MUCH further than a car does on the same amount.  I'm gonna have to pull a "citation needed" card on this one.

Off the cuff as a chemical engineer by training, the catalytic converter being nonexistent or crippled for weight purposes changes the  kind of pollution emitted, what comes out the back of a car is basically carbon dioxide, some soot, and some fully-passivated additive chemicals.  What comes out the back of a motorbike is partially-oxidized carbon fragments and some nasty bits of nitrogen and sulfur chemistry.

Basically, car emissions are bad in the "global warming" sense, motorcycle emissions are bad in the "actually poisonous / acid rain" sense.  The typical metric used is CO, because CO is highly poisonous and fairly persistent (lasts a month or so before degrading and can build up in the local air-space of the city).  Motorcycles emit something like four orders of magnitude more CO than cars on average.

Your overall number of molecules emitted is lower if you're actually using the motorbike at its rated load, they run an average of 25% less fuel usage or so per mile than a small sedan, mostly because inefficiencies in engine design driven by down-scaling are balanced by severely reduced mass.

Here's a consumer reports summary with links:  http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/09/mythbusters-answers-a r e-motorcycles-greener-than-cars/index.htm

And yes, they use a product test done by Mythbusters (i.e. UC Riverside doing stuff for Mythbusters for free from curiosity as usual) so the scope of the product comparison is somewhat limited.


The short version here is that a motorcycle is about the same as a small gas-powered car as far as the capital-E Environment is concerned, and far, far worse than any car for the small-e environment (as in "the places you live and breathe and such").  It's clos ...


that would be true if cars all had new catalytic converter, and were only driven in the limits where the converter works. That means taking over one minute to go from 0 to 60 Mph.
In the real world, the great majority of cars on the road have converters that barely work at all, and are driven in a way where even a new converter couldn't handle the amount and quality of exhaust gasses.
Catalityc converter still are a big improvement, though, because cars spend so much time idling at red lighs and in trafic jam, where even a 10000 miles used converter do actualy work.
Also, they forced the industry to use electonic fuel injaction, wich made the average engine much better tuned-in -because most people, including professionals, aren't able to tune carburterors (and for realy acurate tuning, you need to redo it every time the weather change, like in racing).
 
2014-01-27 05:56:46 AM

skinink: "Where does he get those wonderful toys?"

[076dd0a50e0c1255009e-bd4b8aabaca29897bc751dfaf75b290c.r40.cf1.rackcd n .com image 320x176]


www.toonopedia.com
 
2014-01-27 06:23:10 AM
There needs to be video of it making a full on panic stop from 45mph or so.
 
2014-01-27 06:54:14 AM
surbrook.devermore.net
 
2014-01-27 07:11:45 AM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: There needs to be video of it making a full on panic stop from 45mph or so.


It would have to get going that fast in the first place considering it's top speed is 10mph.
 
2014-01-27 07:16:12 AM
I dunno, I think I prefer having TWO contact patches keeping me from sliding and wiping out.
 
2014-01-27 07:19:34 AM

madgonad: 20mph, 20-30 mile range, $2k, and you can pedal if you want.
[currentmoves.com image 850x566]


Did you find that in the basement of the Alamo?
 
2014-01-27 07:24:38 AM
a big drawback of this configuration -and from the Segway configuration too- is that, in order to get the same deceleration ("to brake as hard") as a bike, you would need to lean about 45 degree backward.
Wich take some time and wich both the Segway and this thing are not capable anyway.
The same goes for acceleration, leaning 45 degree forward.
 
2014-01-27 07:29:27 AM

MLWS: I dunno, I think I prefer having TWO contact patches keeping me from sliding and wiping out.


If you need more tire to not-wipe at 10mph, motorcycles are not for you.

Its an urban scooter. More stylish and portable than a segway but not a replacement for more brawny machines.
I think its kinda cool, in thatweird post apocalyptic sort of way.

/Seems like a fun way to get around in the next Burning Man.
 
2014-01-27 08:04:11 AM

lewismarktwo: StoPPeRmobile: madgonad: 20mph, 20-30 mile range, $2k, and you can pedal if you want.
[currentmoves.com image 850x566]

[bumblebeebolton.com image 800x532]
$324.95 + bike.

That looks like it would leave you smelling like 2stroke exhaust.




encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
Now those behind you.
 
2014-01-27 08:06:01 AM
Would the press *please* stop helping pull this old and will-never-work idea out of the garbage? Jeez, it's not revolutionary, and you can't stop quickly with it. Physics prevents that. Notice how "fast" it went. This is the *promotional* video; you'd think they'd pull all of its best tricks out of the hat for the vid, so keep that in mind as you see it barely put-put at slow bicycle speed around town. That's the *best* it can do. Slam on the brakes, and you'll face plant. Yes, they may have auto-balancing in place to prevent sudden stops, but that's the problem in a nutshell: you cannot stop suddenly. How this can be made street legal, I'll never know. Legal for sidewalks, maybe.
 
2014-01-27 08:08:44 AM

Shadowknight: C18H27NO3: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: I never would've thought Segway would still be in business by now, either.

I remember when the inventor said he created something that was going to absolutely revolutionize mankind and change the world forever.
That he came up with an invention unparalleled by anything in recent memory. Then the day came where he finally announced to the world that which was shrouded in mystery; the thing that would reshape the lives of everyone on Earth until the end of days.
Introducing, the Segway.

To be fair, if I remember correctly the original inventor saw his creation as more than a rich douchebag toy. He was seeing stand-up wheelchairs for people so they can be at eye level and have a normal person's reach. He even developed one that had a set of three wheels on either side that would turn on a spindle themselves, allowing the dang thing to climb stairs. Both things that would be huge for wheelchair bound folks and more easily allow them to live normal lives without having to redesign the environment as much as we do now.

It was the company's investors that wanted to market it as an expensive scooter. But I'm sure he didn't argue too much when they wrote the check.


Not exactly. The company that developed the Segway is DEKA. The segway was a really an attempt at commercialization on the technology developed for the iBot wheelchair you mentioned. A separate company was spun off for this commercial venture. I wouldnt classify this as investors wanting to market it as an expensive scooter, but rather as throwing the investors a bone for the R&D investments. DEKA gets their wheel chair, investors get their segway. Everyone wins.

The owner of DEKA is an interesting guy. I've crossed paths with him a few times and he seems genuinely passionate about fixing problems in the world and isn't afraid to commit resources to it. He has started middle school and  high school robotics competitions to get kids excited about science and technology, he has committed substantial resources towards R&D towards energy and clean water technologies for 3rd world countries and has done substantial work towards robotic prosthetic limbs.
 
2014-01-27 08:09:17 AM
Of course TFA doesn't mention max speed or battery range.  At $6000, I would probably buy one if it could do 50mph and get me 60 miles on a battery.

Seems to me that a standard-sized motorcycle frame would be a better option since it would create more space for more battery.  The unicycle gimmick is, well, a gimmick.  You're unlikely to go somewhere that has such limited parking facilities that a motorcycle won't fit but one of these things will.

Oh.  Oh.  I found their web site.  10 miles on a charge, up to 10mph.  Yeah, no thanks.  I could run almost that fast.
 
2014-01-27 08:12:30 AM

pippi longstocking: [a.fastcompany.net image 667x500]
Your fat lazy ass would benefit more from own of these.


Wait, that's real?  I thought they just made it up on Weeds.
 
2014-01-27 08:18:23 AM

Dingleberry Dickwad: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: There needs to be video of it making a full on panic stop from 45mph or so.

It would have to get going that fast in the first place considering it's top speed is 10mph.


Can it not be ridden downhill?

In San Francisco?

Towards a convenient oceanside cliff?

With huge, jagged rocks at the bottom?

And sharks?
 
2014-01-27 08:20:00 AM

Rik01: Nope. Gonna fail or be reduced to the status of a moped.

(1) No big, shiny engine down between the legs.
(2) No big shiny tail pipes to extend in manly designs.
(3) Not heavy enough to be manly.
(4) Limited customization space.
(5) And the biggest reason of all -- not noisy enough.

I've enough bikers blasting by my home to know that serious riders need serious noise. Mufflers are for wimps would result in a major increase in automobile/motorcycle collisions, along with the associated increase in injuries and fatalities.  A loud bike is a safer bike.


FTFY
 
Displayed 50 of 187 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report