JAN 05

In December 2001, I wrote a newspaper article about a mysterious invention by Dean Kamen that was about to be revealed the next day. The hype was intense and articles in anticipation of Kamen's announcement made front page news all over the world. The news all focused on the same thing: his device was going to change the world or so reporters were told by the few who had seen the invention.

Fast forward a few years and the Segway hasn't changed the world. In fact, it's likely that the Segway will be little more than a footnote when we look back one day at the evolution of vehicles. So anything that promises to be a revolutionary new kind of car deserves some skepticism. Still, Gordon Murray is known in driving circles for having had extraordinary success. He's the guy behind the McLaren F1 and he has now designed a new type of car that is decidedly different than his super sports car.

The T25 is a tightly-guarded secret, but what has been publicly known is that the four-seater will be smaller than a Mini and has a capability of 80 mpg. It will not be a hybrid nor use an electric motor.

In an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail, Murray has given more hints about what the T25—so named because it's Murray's 25th car design--could look like and why he thinks it will be a success. For starters, Professor Murray is using regular fuel and every day materials to make his car. He won't be relying on hybrids or biofuels.

Murray thinks the problems with today's vehicles are simple and these problems can easily be reconstructed to make cars more efficient. Modern cars are too heavy and that's why they use up too much fuel. Car companies that insist their models need to be big and heavy in order to satisfy safety concerns and comfort are just guilty of what Murray considers lazy engineering.

“Car design is driven entirely by styling and marketing. If the marketing people say we need more legroom, instead of being clever, they just make the car longer.”

Most of today's cars weigh at least a ton and Murray's T25 will be half that weight. It will be capable of being carried by four strong people but will have lost none of the safety standards in regular vehicles, according to him. Shaving the weight will also lighten the cost. The T25 will cost an estimated $8,000 USD.

Some of the other features Murray told the Daily Mail are that two of the T25s can travel side-by-side on a single lane and three could fit in a standard parking space. It will be about the size of the Smart Car, less than eight feet long, and cost one-fifth of what other car costs to manufacture.

The body will be made from plastic, reinforced with fibre and produced from recycled materials that can be bolted together and taken apart like slices in a loaf of bread.

A small factory with a handful of workers is all it takes to produce the car, which will have a gasoline or diesel engine but be capable of being modified with an electric engine. Over the T25's lifetime, it will emit one less ton of carbon dioxide each year.

Murray is operating on the premise that lighter means greener. Shaving just 10 per cent off the weight of every car in the UK could result in more emission reductions, he believes, than adopting hybrid and fuel cell technologies, which he dismisses as a “waste of space” and “too complicated.”

Murray isn't keen on hybrids like the Toyota Prius. “Who wants to be sitting on top of a high-amperage battery in a crash?”

So how did he do it? The key, he hinted at, is in the seating plan. “It all depends on how you sit.” That clue is particularly intriguing given this is the man who designed a three-seater sports car with the driver in the front and passengers behind and to the sides. I'm putting myself on the line right now by predicting that the T25 will be diamond-shaped with the fourth passenger in the back.

The car is set to be unveiled within a year, and UK drivers might be driving around in them in time for the London Olympics in 2012.

Via Daily Mail and Car Magazine

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by Clinch, January 05, 2009

The above picture doesn't look as good as some of the T25 concept sketches (which in my opinion, looked more aerodynamic and sleeker), but other than that, if it achieves everything that it claims to, then it may change the future of motoring.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

mpg
written by Ben, January 05, 2009

Just wondering, do US car companies state MPG in US Gallons (3.8L) or in standard 4.5 litre gallons?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Is this an HPV??
written by An Eco Geek..., January 05, 2009

If this is going to be a truly "green" car, is it one of those HPVs (Human Powered Vehicle)? Sort of the "Fred Flintstone" mode of transport, each passenger has pedals in front of their seat. The less people power you have, the more difficult this may be to operate. :-)

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Possible but improbable
written by Twist9, January 05, 2009

The problems I see confronting this vehicle are the same as the Smart car and all other ultra-compacts in the U.S.; consumers and the market have a co-dependency that is extremely difficult to break. The problem with the American car market is that because gas was cheap people demanded more luxury in their cars, and with that luxury came increased size. As the overall dimensions of automobiles increased on average the auto companies began to market the larger cars more heavily, and soon established a new social norm for car size. As gas prices have returned to the cheap side and show no signs of drastic increase in the near future (by tax legislation for instance) the market for small cars will remain extremely limited. Even changes in advertising practices with an emphasis on small cars as the new normal for the US (not likely to happen any time soon) would probably be ineffectual as the consumer side of the market has no incentive to change other than conscience which only drives the market-share that has already gone over to more efficient vehicles. This car looks like a nice affordable option, but I see no great initial success on the horizon.

To An Eco Geek...: I think we would all apreciate it if you actually read the entire post before commenting on it. It clearly states "the car, which will have a gasoline or diesel engine but be capable of being modified with an electric engine," so no, it will not be a HPV.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Possible and not improbable
written by Clinch, January 05, 2009

I thought the same at first, but it gain a similar reputation to cars like the prius (i.e. people buying it as more of a status symbol, or as a statement, than because they actually care about the planet [or you could just call it the bandwagon effect]), and I've also been surprised at the amount of G-wiz cars (tiny crappy electric cars) around London (i.e. some).

And future vehicle legislations (particularly with Obama's promises to green up) may further increase this car's appeal.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Seating Plan
written by Andrew, January 06, 2009

I'd suggest that the seating plan is reclined along the diagonal. This worked for Lotus when they made four seater cars and would allow a boot under the rear passengers.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Here's a Radical Solution
written by Carol, January 16, 2009

Let's take the plunge now and outlaw the internal combusion engine that runs on standard petroleum-based gasoline only. No NEW production of these engines in any car after 2010. Engines must be diesel, hybrid, pure electric, or fuel cell, or any combo of these, or something new and different, but no more 20th century IC engines. There are enough old ones on the road that they will continue to contribute to pollution until the oil runs out. By then, clever manufacturers will be able to retrofit all these old vehicles by then with an environmentally friendly propulsion source (EFPS), creating lots of jobs and starting up a whole new industry... people could choose any style of body for their car (from the past 120 years) and have it fitted with an EFPS. We could see people driving Auburn Boat-tail roadsters, Jaguar E-types, Nissan 240ZX, and other truly beautiful classic cars again, while helping the environment heal from a century of damage.
OK I said it was radical...

• 
• +0
• 
• 

This just in
written by Kyle White, January 18, 2009

This just in: Satisfying "Safety concerns" is considered lazy engineering!

For maximum efficiency, why take sidewalks and roads? Just walk in a straight line to your destination, over alligator swamps, and shark infested oceans. Why are you concerned with safety, it's more efficient, and therefore smarter to do. Safety is irrelevant.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment