Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Driving in the city is a mess. Especially if that city happens to be somewhere in densely populated Asia or if one of the of the huge Western mega-cities like London, New York or Los Angeles.
Many, but but not all, big cities are already served by mass transit systems but even the best transit systems lack the inherent flexibility of cars. Unfortunately, that flexibility comes at a high cost, both to the car owner and to the environment.
I don't think tiny cars will ever go over very well in the states, even in large U.S. cities with parking problems. The Smart car sure didn't do well here. If they had kept its original gas engine (rather than replace it with the Mitsubishi engine) and imported the higher mileage diesel engine it would have done better I think. Ever heard of Kei cars? Cool little cars that have been popular in Japan for many years. I doubt even if modified and imported they would go over well here. They would have to get incredible mpg to develop a following. The old Chevy Sprint, Metro XFI, Honda HF and Ford Festiva all got very good mileage. Much cheaper commuter cars and more functional too.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,486,476 times
Reputation: 12187
The "colonies" (USA, Canada, Austraia, & New Zealand) have different driving conditions and thus different taste in cars than Old World countries. A midsize sedan can get mid 30s mpg on an interstate while a tiny car in Europe would get the same on their medeival street plans.
Only in the densest America cities (the city- cities, not suburbs) will Euro style micro cars be practical here.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,243,006 times
Reputation: 57825
Don't count on it. Despite the options for so many small cars, hybrids and electrics available today, what is the best selling vehicle? Ford F150 FULL SIZE pickup. Number 2? Chevy Silverado FULL SIZE pickup.
There will always be plenty of buyers for big vehicles and the manufacturers will happily sell them. The talk of these tiny little deathtraps is strictly to offset the big ones in order to try and meet federal mileage standards.
Future cars will be commuter cars where you get in and tell it where you want to go and it'll safely take you to your destination. All you'll do is sit back read your paper, text, do crossword puzzles, check the stock tickers or whatever, the vehicles will do all the work automatically.
They'd make a lot of sense as city cars. Think ZipCar model, which already for many people makes sense. I used ZipCar infrequently when I lived in Seattle as I rarely needed a car since I lived and worked in the downtown area. Seattle's downtown is small and walkable. Either feet or public transit beat the hell out of paying $450 a month for parking ($300 downtown, $150 in a lot on Capitol Hill near my apartment) plus another $5/hour anytime you go anywhere.
Problem is they make no sense as cars as we Americans use cars. If you're talking a typical suburb to city commute you're basically using the car for 10-12 hours a day. Yes, it's just sitting there in a parking lot most of the day (with little demand) but it needs to go back to the suburbs in the evening to sit in the garage (with little demand). Even if you figure suburban house to commuter rail, all those shared cars are just going to be sitting in a parking lot from 7-8 am to 5-6 p.m. at a location no one is going to want it. Taxis make sense for that, not car shares.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,243,006 times
Reputation: 57825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric
Problem is they make no sense as cars as we Americans use cars. If you're talking a typical suburb to city commute you're basically using the car for 10-12 hours a day. Yes, it's just sitting there in a parking lot most of the day (with little demand) but it needs to go back to the suburbs in the evening to sit in the garage (with little demand). Even if you figure suburban house to commuter rail, all those shared cars are just going to be sitting in a parking lot from 7-8 am to 5-6 p.m. at a location no one is going to want it. Taxis make sense for that, not car shares.
That's why I have a little beater that gets 30 mpg, to go to the park & ride to catch the bus to work. At a cost of $950 and minimal insurance I don't mind that it sits all day. In our small suburban city there are no cabs, no zip cars, and no bus except for the a few at commute time that stick to the main arterial.
My 4x4 truck also sits all day at home, but when I need it for snow days, hauling or road trips it's ready to go. Zip cars and cabs are useless for a several day/week or two on the road even if you are in the city downtown.
I suppose one could rent a car for that and still come out ahead financially though, when you factor in the parking cost.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
