Latest Vehicle Voice Poll 7/31/2008

[Derwin]

Well, it seems Venture Vehicles has launched yet another survey to get our opinoin of the vehicle they are building. I attached a few snapshots of the survey.

My question is....If you took the survey today, how did YOU answer the questions? And, if you did NOT take the survey, how WOULD you have answered the questions?

I know I was particularly interested in the question of "would you be willing to put a refundable deposit down 12-months prior to receiving the vehicle?" My answer was......YOU BET! 2thumb:up

Derwin

[AKP23]

D, where did you find this? I just went through the FTR web site and found nothing. Tho' it don't take much to get me lost! ;)

[Derwin]

How ya' doing, AK? Good to hear from you again!

Last year Venture Vehicles contracted with VehicleVoice.com to create some surveys for them in order to gauge public opinion. The survey is sent to everybody that "preregistered" for a V1, and it is also sent to many others outside the Venture Vehicle "community". If you signed up with Venture Vehicles, you should be getting these surveys in your email. Otherwise, you can go to www.VehicleVoice.com and sign up with them. But they are an OUTSIDE firm that has nothing to do with Venture Vehicles, and you will be getting surveys that deal with a wide range of subjects in the vehicle industry. On occasion you will receive one that is dedicated to Venture Vehicles. These are the ONLY ones that I actually participate in!

So, go to there website and sign up. Then go to the survey page and look for this survey:


A New Class of Vehicle Come take a look and tell us what you think. 07/31/08

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hope this helps!

Derwin

[Mark Tomlinson]

Some of us (like me) have taken the surveys in the past but didn't get an e-mail notification of this survey. Perhaps it went to my spam bucket and I didn't realize what it was. If you are in the same position, here's what you do.


Go to http://www.vehiclevoice.com/
Click on [My Surveys]
You should be asked for your e-mail address, enter it
If you've taken surveys there before, you should be presented with a list of surveys targeted at you. This one is called something like "A New Class of Vehicle" or some such.

I was a little thrown by the idea that they are contemplating making the driver's air bag optional. But what really knocked me for a loop was the suggestion that the plug-in hybrid was an option for $2,000 and would only take you 20 miles on pure electric. We need better batteries!

[Miracleman89]

Man I slept the day away and didn't check my email! I am going home after work and taking the survey! Two things that already concern me is that both MPG and 0-60 performance has dropped!!! MPG at 75 and 0-60 is now listed at 7.5 sec. It use to be 0-60 in under five and 100 mpg. Plus another thing I noticed was the top speed is now being listed at 100 mph instead of 120mph. If these numbers are true then most of what I loved about the V1 when I signed on is gone! It started out with in-wheel electric motors, not any more! Because of the in-wheel motors there would be no tranny so less to break down and go wrong. 0-60 as I said was to be under 5 sec., it has now jumped to a less impressive 7.5 sec.( that is still good but not impressive). Airbags were alway talked about as standard, now they are saying optional! Original price was suppose to be $18,000 and that figure has jumped to $23,000! 100MPG has now fallen to 75MPG !!! I'm just waiting for them to add a fourth wheel and remove the tilting technology and say the projected cost is now $28,000! So far, and I really hate to say this, the V1 is beginning to look like all HYPE to me! For the record, I am really disappointed with all the changes! Not a single projected thing has gotten better or been improved!=n:

[Derwin]

So far, and I really hate to say this, the V1 is beginning to look like all HYPE to me! For the record, I am really disappointed with all the changes! Not a single projected thing has gotten better or been improved!=n:

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you, MM89. It seems every "update" brings out new information that DOWNGRADES what the original proposal was. The mpg is what really knocked me for a loop....That was one of their biggest selling points 100 MILES PER GALLON! All I can see is that I hope future "updates" are more hopeful than what this latest survey signifies.

Derwin

[waboom]

I was disappointed with all the "downgrades" as well. I guess all the estimates made by calculations on paper have been brought up short by the reality of "real world testing" on the sandrail. Still hopeful they will find places to add in improvements though!

[RAN]

All I know is, on the question where they asked if I'd be willing to put down a deposit 12 months ahead of time, I said NO. The way these guys work, 12 months will end up being 24, and who knows how much further the performance will be downgraded?

[Derwin]

LOL! Actually, when I was taking the survey and came to that question, I thought of you, RAN! I kind of figured that you would give that answer! I actually said YES...in a heart beat. But considering thier track record so far, it might be a mistake.

Derwin

[Miracleman89]

That question actually gave me pause! For starters their track record and second the reduction to the performance numbers make me question it as well! In the end I did say I would be willing to put a deposit down. However, I will say if it the performance numbers drop off much more I will be gone! I won't sit back and watch as they destroy what could have been the greatest vehicle ever produced!
I am extremely disappointed at this point and I hope that Ian and Crew look at these comments and say we have to do better!

[rogwild]

I was disappointed with all the "downgrades" as well. I guess all the estimates made by calculations on paper have been brought up short by the reality of "real world testing" on the sandrail. Still hopeful they will find places to add in improvements though!

Well, they have had the 'sandrail' data for 6 months now, and it is larger/heavier; so any 'real world' adjustments should not come until AFTER the prototype (at least the ALPHA, but better the BETA) are BUILT and TESTED.

[waboom]

Well, they have had the 'sandrail' data for 6 months now, and it is larger/heavier; so any 'real world' adjustments should not come until AFTER the prototype (at least the ALPHA, but better the BETA) are BUILT and TESTED.

That's what I'm hoping - that the numbers they are showing now are based on the sandrail, and not "compensated" for any additional weight, wheels on the road, aerodynamics, &etc.

[rogwild]

That's what I'm hoping - that the numbers they are showing now are based on the sandrail, and not "compensated" for any additional weight, wheels on the road, aerodynamics, &etc.

o:o:p:s12 I just hope that they are SMART enough; NOT to base (and publish) any 'reduced performance' data, based upon 'un-compensated' data from a dissimilar 'propulsion theory testbed' like the sandrail mule. du:n:n:o(

[Rpeek2]

We must not forget that this was just a survey. These types of queries are usually done by an independant firm. However, by nature of the questions it appears the "suits" may be dangling some empty hooks into the pond just to gauge attitudes. Sure, several questions dealt with an apparent reduction of original concepts but I do see progress. I think...

[johnhead]

I just was "surveyed" and answered YES to the "putting money down" question..AND I already have my own VV in my Driveway.. (See cardboard model submitted today) and enjoy..
John Head

[MVRacing]

Just completed my survey ... yes, disappointed in some of the downgrades. Airbag should be standard, maybe sidecurtains optional. Yes, I'd pay for extra EV range.

Sure, I'll put down $1K ... and thank all those who won't for moving me up on the list =y:

[Mark Tomlinson]

I put down Yes on the $1000 because I want to demonstrate my enthusiasm for the vehicle. It did, of course, say "refundable", so I can always back out if there are the inevitable delays. I think when they say a deposit is refundable they are required to put the money in a trust to protect the consumer in case the business fails.

[Miracleman89]

I have to agree the fact that they did say it was refundable did make a difference!

[Donald1800]

Those of you here that also read/post on the 'Official' forum already know my feelings about this most recent survey. The only remark I want to make here is a warning to anyone willing to put down a 'security deposit' years before release/availability of any product not yet available/produced. REMEMBER THE TUCKER!

I remember my dad took everything he had saved as a young auto mechanic with two kids and made a 'security deposit' on his dream car, the Tucker. When Tucker went bankrupt, all he got from his 'security deposit' was a set of luggage. That was and is the last 'security deposit' my family will ever make on a preproduction product.

If Venture Vehicles views our enthusiasm and support by spreading by word of mouth the value of the VV1 insufficient to qualify for a spot in the line to buy one of the early unproven production units, and requires potential customers to 'Pay' in advance for the privilege, that in itself shows something about their perspective and value of us.

I have to say that the questions presented in this survey has personally disappointed me and insulted my support and participation in this venture. The exposure of the Venture Vehicle management thinking really has shaken my confidence and support in this project. I can now thoroughly understand WHY we have not had a substantial update, as a direct exposure of what is being developed would be exposed to be NOT what we were expecting.

Remember, by 2010-2012 (2-4 yrs. away), there is going to be several vehicles being offered superior to what the VV1 is proposed to be.

What a disappointment.

Donald1800

[Derwin]

Remember, by 2010-2012 (2-4 yrs. away), there is going to be several vehicles being offered superior to what the VV1 is proposed to be.

What a disappointment.

Donald1800

Well, I don't really think there will be ANY vehicle on the market in 2 to 4 years that is even comparable to the V1. Sure, there will be a few hybrids and maybe even a few EV's, but I don't see any 3 wheeled TILTING vehicles like the V1 on the horizon. The "FUN FACTOR" alone with this vehicle would cause me to buy it, even with the downgrade in specs.

As to the Tucker, I feel sorry for your family. As you know, Tucker acquired the factory right over here where I live. It's actually now the Tootsie Roll factory! But Tucker was not a crook. He was falsely accused of fraud, and was really railroaded out of business by the "big 3". It's a different world now, and I just don't see this happening to Ian, Howard, and the Venture Vehicle team.

Heck, I put a $1,000 deposit down way last December for a CanAm Spyder. I'm not worried about losing the deposit. If Venture Vehicles asks for a deposit, they will have my money the next day! I mean, c'mon, a $500 or even a $1,000 deposit is NOT a big deal considering the vehicle that they are coming out with. And, if Venture Vehicles disappears for some weird reason (Which is not going to happen!), it's not the end of the world. I've lost far more than $500 or $1,000 in other investments that I've made, and the risks were much higher than putting a down payment on a vehicle!

Derwin

[beeson]

I don't design surveys for a living, but this one seems to follow a form. Ask some question we would like to know mixed in with some REALLY important question (to them). To me the REALLY IMPORTANT questions were "how much more are you willing to pay".

Maybe as the rubber begins to meet the road, a few realities are starting to become clear to VV. The original estimates of price, performance and economy were just way too optimistic. The real world may be creeping in to this picture. It isn't going to be as fast or quick, will not get as good MPG's, and will cost more to do less.

The original numbers are what drew me in. Yes I like a fun vehicle to drive. But I'm not buying it at any price and no matter what the MPG's. Yes I want a vehicle that is very stingy on gas, but not at any price. When it comes to putting my money down, I will look at $ and the economy of the vehicle. $20K for 100+MPG = yes, $25K for 100MPG= probably, $25-30K for 75MPG=no. The price, per this survey, is already at 25K+ and I'm sure will be higher when it comes to purchase time.

I'm not wealthy. I can't afford to buy really expensive toys. I will spend that kind of money on something that will give me a BIG bang for my buck, be fun and practical (for me). The original numbers were all of that. Now they are approaching the edge of my envelope. Go a little further and I'll be back to looking very seriously at the Aptera. Not as much fun or speed, but much better MPG and LOTS more space. And they just look so cool. Plus, in the next couple of years, some really neat stuff should be coming out. And I will be watching and weighing in on all of them.

[RAN]

Donald, welcome, and glad you started posting here.
With this company's history of failed commitments there's no way I'm going to commit to them with a deposit months (or years) before they deliver. In fact, I wouldn't buy a V-1 now until I can see and test drive a production model for myself. They should've stuck with the in wheel motors. They'd probably be on to the beta prototypes by now if they had, without having to drop their performance figures. The V-1 they're trying to make now is not the V-1 we all fell in love with months ago. With delays now putting back availability outside of CA into 2011 (and quite possibly beyond), I just can't stay excited about this vehicle. I will certainly have an EV before then, and the V-1 is going to have to be done right in every way to get me to add one to my garage.

[Derwin]

Wow! You guys are starting to get ME depressed about everything, and that is not easy to do! Quite frankly, I really don't know why you guys are all having panic attacks. I will agree with RAN, though, that VV has indeed broken many promises that they have made over the past 2 years, but I'm willing to cut them some slack.

Where I do disagree with many is in the vehicle itself. Even if Ian came out tomorrow and stated that they have COMPLETED all testing, and are ready to go into production, and the specs were..... 0 to 60 in 9.5 seconds..... 70 mpg..... and it cost $25,000 for the Hybrid, and $30,000 for the EV, I WOULD STILL GET IT. Actually, I would get it even if it only got 50 miles per gallon. The ONLY thing that would keep me from ordering this vehicle would be the price. They initially stated that it would sell for $18,000, but that number has been slowly creeping up over the past several months. If they keep going up with their projected price, I will not be buying it....unless I win the lottery or something!

I just LOVE THIS VEHICLE. Period. I love the Carver. If ANY company comes out with a vehicle like the Carver, and it is selling for a reasonable price, I will definitely buy it. I am different than most enthusiasts here, though, in that my interest in this vehicle is in the pure enjoyment of driving it, and not in the mpg's or speed.....Those are just bonuses to me. But, again, I know I am in the minority with this opinion.

Derwin

[miraclewoman89]

This survey disturbs me for a number of reasons. Now, before anyone tells me that this is 'just a survey', it's been my experience that surveys like this are gauges to see what public reaction is going to be, so they can do damage control after they go ahead and do it. How many times have we seen a survey of what "may not be", yet months later that is exactly what happens? Call me a cynic if you will.

My biggest disappointment in this whole thing is the price. I thought I could get an environmentally friendly vehicle with everything I would want for around $20,000. I was excited about this. Now, according to this survey, it's a possibility that I would have to pay $5000 more to get exactly what I want. An optional driver's side airbag? I might have to pay more money to be safer?

I really couldn't care less about 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. That's one of my husband's big issues, but the MPG dropping by 25 gallons is another concern I have. Don't get me wrong, 75 MPG is still fantastic, but still, it's not the proposed number.

As it is I can take my $25,000 and I can buy a Prius. I may not get cool tilting ability or the MPG of a V1, but I would have room for the kids and I wouldn't have to buy the trailer thing to go to the store.

Now, all that being said, I think that the major problem here is that this survey was not accompanied by anything from Ian. There is no explanation of what the purpose of the survey is, which leads to wild speculation. People are left to wonder what's going to be delivered after they pay their down payment. Is it going to be the model the company is showing on the web site now, the one from the survey or one that has even less.

[beeson]

Derwin, I'm not panicked in the slightest. I just know that surveys are not taken for NO reason. Especially when NO information is coming out from other sources. If we aren't looking at where the real numbers have moved to, then Ian needs to respond NOW!! Not a month from now. Today. He has to be aware of these discussions and to say nothing is to admit these new numbers are right on the money. If he comes out today and says those numbers are not correct, GREAT. But I'll still ask why he used those numbers.

I'm happy for you on your ability to buy this vehicle no matter (almost) what. No sarcasm intended. I am not in that position. I can live with slower and not as quick, but I'm with Miraclewoman, the price has to correspond to a good MPG number. Mess with either of those two very much and I will find a less exciting drive that gets superb MPG's and keep my BMW motorcycle for the fun rides.

[EdVB]

Hi all

I just came back from the airshow at EAA and talked to the manufacture who was making the ICE for the mule. I was told that the current prototype was too expensive to produce so they had to go back to the drawing board. It would of cost over 30K. They thought the best idea was to go with the 65HP rotary engine only and get some units on the road. After they got some sold they could then concentrate on the hybrid or pure electric. I thought that would be great as all I really want is a lower cost Carver anyway. They also have a Carver for testing purposes as shown here.

Everyone what is your input? Would you still want a Venture One even if it only had a Ice unit but at a lower cost? At 20K I sure would buy one and my wife approves. Above that it would not be worth it to me as it still would only be a summer vehicle here in Oshkosh,WI. My wife and I both sat in the front and back together and found both seats comfortable with plenty of room at least for us.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/Venture%20One/Picture001.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/Venture%20One/Picture004.jpg


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/Venture%20One/Picture005.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/Venture%20One/Picture006.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/Venture%20One/Picture007.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/Venture%20One/Picture008.jpg

[Donald1800]

I can understand your position - the 'Tilting/Fun Factor' is your primary criteria for purchase, with the factors of economy in a $5-10/gal. gas market, carbon footprint and 0-60 acceleration secondary - even to risking your own money to get one of the early production units for the 'Flash' factor.

I, unfortunately, am not in that 'sporty' group. On a low, fixed S.S. income, my primary purchase factor is gas mileage in a $5-10/gal. gas market - I'll buy the lowest cost vehicle with the highest gas mileage. My secondary factors are carbon footprint and 0-60 acceleration. My last, least important factors are the 'Tilting/Fun' and 'Flash' Factors. They are enough to switch me to the VV1 if the VV1 was third on the list of other combined factors and the top two did not have these 'Tilting/Fun' and 'Flash' factors.

When I first found the VV1, it was promoted to be EXACTLY what wanted. Now it is beginning to look like old tech. with mediocre performance in a new package and a 'gimmick' to sell/justify it. If this is what will be produced, it will have to be at least in third place out of the economy field available in two-four years. As such, it has lost the 'Mr. Excitement' aspect.

Donald1800

[rogwild]

edVB;
Now that makes sense! A 65hp ICE would account for the decreased performance, lower mpg, and the lower top speed. I really would like the PHEV, but if they can keep it UNDER $20,000, get 75 mpg, and even drop the airbag.......I'd probably go with an ICE-only.....If they could get it out....QUICKLY!

Thank you VERY MUCH for the information.......now we wait another two weeks, for Ian to tell us the same thing.

[RAN]

EdVB, your 1st post was a doozie! Great pics! thu:mbs:up:22

Rog, I see where you're coming from, and it makes sense except for the fact that VV supposedly can't market a gas-only model here. It would certainly solve many of their problems and let them get something on the market quickly that would bring in enough money to keep working on the hybrid/EV models.

Also, in the survey, the extra $2000 was what it would cost to make the standard non plug-in hybrid into a plug-in hybrid with a (whopping) 20 mile electric-only range. Of course, no word from Ian. And so the confusion continues.....

[EdVB]

Thanks Rog.

I have been following all the posts on both sites since they were started. But after all the posts and taking in the account the cost of just the Ice Carver and doing the math it just did not make sense they could produce a vehicle at that cost. Even with just the Ice it would be remarkable if they could produce them at 20K a copy. I think we just need to get back to the basics and get these on the road throughout the US. Otherwise I do not think this project will fly and end up as another dream that went belly up. Looking at the latest survey should support what I am saying at least costwise. JMTCW

Ran

I am sure anything is possible if Carver saw a company that could mass produce their product. At 20k they would be selling like hotcakes even in this economy.

[Donald1800]

EdVB:
No, this is NOT what I would buy into in 2010-2012. It is just old tech. repackaged with some flash and a 'gimmick' without any future upgrade potential. Nice, but "No Cigar". It is now very clear WHY we haven't heard from Ian for months (?).

Donald1800

[rogwild]

RAN, I know where you are coming from, but someone mentioned earlier that there was a 'loophole' in the agreement that allowed Vv to do 'flex-fuel' ICEs (think the rotary was able to run that way), but anyway, since according to the NYT article, Carver owns a portion of Vv and royalties, I'm sure the initial agreement is 'negotiable'.

[RAN]

RAN, I know where you are coming from, but someone mentioned earlier that there was a 'loophole' in the agreement that allowed Vv to do 'flex-fuel' ICEs (think the rotary was able to run that way), but anyway, since according to the NYT article, Carver owns a portion of Vv and royalties, I'm sure the initial agreement is 'negotiable'.

I would think it would be, given Carver's financial situation. They'd be better off sitting back and taking a little bit on the thousands of V-1's VV could sell than they would be trying to bring the Carver over here, and VV needs to have something to sell this decade in order to keep going.

Since I'm mostly interested in an all electric model, I have even less reason to buy a gas-only V-1, but having said that, if you guys who get one rave loudly enough about how great it is to drive, and if the price without the hybrid/electric drivetrain is around $23,000 or so, and if it can really get @75 MPG I might have to break down and get one.

[RichDC]

Really disappointing to hear that we may just be looking at an ICE with a fully enclosed body and an optional airbag. My enthusiasm is starting to waver a bit. I'd still consider buying one, but in 2010-2012 there's bound to be some other 4 wheelers that I'll be looking at as a comparison. And with those features, the Venture becomes cool, but not groundbreaking.

[rogwild]

I just posted this over on the FTR Forum:


Back in Feb '08, I posted; "I really LOVE the V-1, but would be 'happy' with a 1+ fully enclosed 'Cabin Scooter' that got 75-80 mpg, could cruise at 55 mph, for around $10,000 plus. It would be used for daily 'chores' and light shopping (even if it didn't 'tilt'). Maybe (to cut battery cost) the rotary ICE could be the primary power with a CVT (if it could get the mpg goal). Perhaps a future model will target this market, although for 'highway' use/speeds, I believe 'tilting' would be required.

Perhaps they were actually listening (except for the PRICE)!

I am a bit concerned about the performance/economy of a 1,500 vehicle with a 65hp rotary engine. Since it will no longer only be running at 'optimal' rpm settings, I'm sure the mileage will suffer. I know that my ultralight (less than 1,000lbs) with a 64hp Rotax 582cc 2-stroke, flying at 55 mph couldn't obtain 75-100mpg. But the V~1 LAND 'tilting' vehicle is more 'aerodynamic' than my FLYING Inflatable Boat.
http://www.flyingboatadventures.com/images/g3_02.jpghttp://www.flyingboatadventures.com/images/g2_02.jpg

[rogwild]

Sorry, double post.

[EdVB]

Remember guys this is just my opinion. I could be wrong but looking at all the information to date I just do not see a hybrid for 20K possible at this time. 25-30k is closer to the truth the way I see it. I wish I am wrong but we will see.

[rogwild]

Heck, EdVB,wel;co;m;e101)) I know it is just a 'rumor', but since it sounds 'logical' (for a change) let us have some FUN with it.sc:oo:t:e:r4

Besides, it might help to 'smoke' Ian out of hiding.wh;aa;aa;t1

[TazmanianKoala]

If the Carver were any cheaper, then I would buy one immediately. Even though I do not like the design, it is just the kind of vehicle I want.
I still hope Ian will produce a better looking vehicle with a great price. And that it may be exported to Europe.

[RichDC]

I've been giving this a lot of thought this morning. Is it safe to say that the fountain of information from Ian has basically dried up since the Announcement of the X Prize competition and the trip to New York? Just looking at the trail of information, and the recently pulled update, that seems like a fair assessment. And you would think that since they seemed to be at the point where frequent updates on the test progression would be coming fast and furious that we'd be deluged with updates...but still we've got nothing. Then Ian responds with a tease of an update, then leaves us hanging, and then suggests full disclosure has become a cause for concern.

Folks, I think we may have shifted focus from a fledgling project with communal support, to a full fledged top secret program to win or at least dominate the X Prize. It just seems logical. Ian seems to have a good head start on some of the competition, and the Venture Vehicle seems to more closely fit the spirit of the competition "To inspire a new generation of viable, super-efficient vehicles that help break our addiction to oil and stem the effects of climate change." With an alternative category, and criteria for performance results, but no restrictions on which technology needs to be used (ie it doesn't have to be electric), Venture seems to be at the right point to be able to modify the design to get a vehicle to win the competition. Combine that with the media coverage and public interest, and any serious competitor, win place or show, is bound to be attracting financing, favorable legislation, and public demand. Look at what's been happening with Scaled Composites and Virgin Galatic!

The first round of stage races is scheduled for September 2009 in NYC. I think we're in for a year of very little information, and possibly some mis-information. There's no reason at this point to lay the cards on the table and give the competition more info than is already available on the website. If you look at the draft competition guidelines, the Venture Vehicle is a definite contender in the Alternative Class. And I suppose it's possible that in order to meet the deadlines, and to be able to compete and possibly win, we will see the first models come out as an super efficient, low emissions, ICE. But that may not be so bad. But again, if you look at the guidelines, the product they describe is exactly what most of us are looking for. Efficient, low emissions, 100+ mpg, cost competitive, safe, and desirable. Hmmm, sounds like something I've seen recently, ;o).

I think we may all need to reign in our expectations a little bit, and wait and see what happens in the next 6 months or so. If Ian is moving full speed ahead to go for the competition, an open stream of information is likely to be the first casualty to keep the competition off the scent of what may be developing. The Carver platform is proven, but the power plant is the key to competing and winning. That's a good reason why the latest survey indicates that the Drivers airbag might be optional - weight. As a motorcycle, an airbag isn't required. Shave some pounds by offering airbags as an option and the base model gets a little closer to that magic 100 MPG number. The business plan is already in the works and has been designed for efficiency and speed to market. Seems like the pieces are in place and with some ingenuity and teamwork, the Venture could have a real shot at winning the Alternative Class X Prize. I think it's possible that we could be in for a frustrating year, with some quite possibly exceptional results at the end!

And just who is the EdVB with the insider knowledge anyway? I wonder, VV plant? Hmmmm?

[rogwild]

RichDC, I hope you are correct as to the 'reason' for the lack of information, and NOT that a major 'roadblock' has hindered progress. But I fail to see how basic vague progress reports will be of ANY aide to Automotive X-Prize competitors (other than perhaps making them work 'harder'). If Vv wants to keep 'exact' performance data 'confidential', that is understandable, and perhaps prudent. But complete 'secrecy' only hinders promoting the vehicle (when they should be working on getting and holding a future customer base). If they can get 'future buyers' to hold off their purchase until the 'Revolutionary Tilting V~1' arrives (instead of getting a Smart, Prius, or Aptera) Vv's customer base can only INCREASE.

I think your basic premise may be valid, but does not account for the very little information that has been coming from Vv lately. I know if Vv does not release any more information on their progress until the first X-Prize race next Sept. "I WILL NO LONGER BE A FAITHFUL FOLLOWER".

[Derwin]

I know if Vv does not release any more information on their progress until the first X-Prize race next Sept. "I WILL NO LONGER BE A FAITHFUL FOLLOWER".

C'mon, rog....Your a "founding member"....you can't jump ship on us!

I'm like you in that I also want Venture Vehicles to release information and keep us "updated" on their progress. But I'll ALWAYS be a "faithful follower" even if they DON'T decide to let us "in" on what they are doing. I guess I just ABSOLUTELY LOVE this vehicle way to much to toss it aside. I, for one, and going to follow Venture Vehicles until they either get this vehicle into production, or they collapse...which, by the way, I don't think will happen! I really believe they will get this thing into production, but unfortunately, I think it will be later rather than sooner. If they decide to throw some information our way in the process, I consider that a bonus!

Derwin

[rogwild]

Hey, MVRacing, if Vv does come out with a 'bio-fuel' ICE only, the RotaMax 650 (115lbs and 65HP) may be a bit 'timid' for you. But there is always the RotaMax 1300, twin (+30lbs = 120HP) or the 1300 Turbo (+80lbs = 180HP).

[RAN]

Probably, if I had a chance to drive a Carver, I'd be back in line frothing at the mouth, but considering their cost and scarcity, that's not likely to happen. Fortunately, I have plenty to keep me busy the next couple of years, and if I find that I can build a Boxster with 4 in-wheel motors and over 400 hp, well, that may just do it for me too. :-)

[rogwild]

Derwin;
I said,
I know if Vv does not release any more information on their progress until the first X-Prize race next Sept. "I WILL NO LONGER BE A FAITHFUL FOLLOWER".no:wor:thy1

I seriously doubt that this WILL happen, but if there is No Word from Vv for the next 13 months, I'd bet most of the 'faithful' will believe that Vv does not have a chance......or even still exists.du:n:n:o(

[MVRacing]

Hey, MVRacing, if Vv does come out with a 'bio-fuel' ICE only, the RotaMax 650 (115lbs and 65HP) may be a bit 'timid' for you. But there is always the RotaMax 1300, twin (+30lbs = 120HP) or the 1300 Turbo (+80lbs = 180HP).

Hi Rog,
Yea, timid. Just finished a race weekend in my Formula Mazda ... 1350Lbs with driver at the finish & 180 hp.

If they go ICE, at 1500 lbs, I would hope for 200hp =y:

[Miracleman89]

Hi Rog,
Yea, timid. Just finished a race weekend in my Formula Mazda ... 1350Lbs with driver at the finish & 180 hp.

If they go ICE, at 1500 lbs, I would hope for 200hp =y:

dr:ive1)dr:ive1)dr:ive1)I Like The Way You Think!!! Maybe 250 hp!!!fir:st:pl:ace))1

[EdVB]

RichDC

If you looked at my pictures you would see who the company was and where I got the information. They are just one of the suppliers but had more info then we do. I just passed along what they said about the latest mule. This also would explain why Ian did not want the video posted. Just another thought. Hope I am wrong. Remember also that the Carver only has a 68HP engine.

[RichDC]

Just having some fun ED. You've gotta admit, Carver photos and an interview with the engine manufacturer revealing some as yet unknown info is a bit of a coup for your first post on the club forum.

Perhaps you should stop by LA before the summer is over. Who knows? Maybe you'll get som spy photos and an interview with Ian ;o)

[rogwild]

I'll bet the people at Roush Industries are doing 'backflips', if they just finished a hybrid 'running' Power Pod, and now have to 'start over' on a 'flex-fuel ICE' one. Should be much simpler, and they can always save the 'first' one for LATER.

Hope they are planning to make the ICE PP (if the rumor is true) to easily 'upgrade' to the 'twin rotor' and 'turbo' engines.

I wonder if the ICE only will knock them out of the Auto X-Prize (100mpgE), or if they will use the 'hybrid' PP for their entry?

[RichDC]

I'll bet the people at Roush
I wonder if the ICE only will knock them out of the Auto X-Prize (100mpgE), or if they will use the 'hybrid' PP for their entry?

I don't think so. The guidelines are still being developed, but the rules don't seem to eliminate an ICE by definition. Race provided fuels will be gas, diesel, bio, electric, and ethanol, so it looks like they expect ICE's to be competitive. The results are what matter. Efficiency, MPG, performance, and environmental impact.

The kicker is that the alternative class calls for a side-by-side 2 seater or better. But since the Venture was included in the press for the contest, I assume that rule is being revised.

[RAN]

RichDC, I think they either have or will amend the requirements for that class; the Alé was sitting near the V-1 and it's a tandem-seater too.

[rogwild]

Yes, according to what I read a while back on the X-Prize Forum the initial side-by-side seating (didn't want to give 'unfair' advantage to tandem) rule was not going to be a factor, revision would allow any seating arrangement.

'RichDC', I know the fuel 'type' is not a factor, BUT Vv's latest mpg figure of "-75-" will not allow them to meet the "-100mpgE-" figure required to qualify for the race phase. So for the initial 'qualifying phase', the Vv entry (if ICE-only will have to improve the 75mpg->100mpg) will have to meet the minimums, or they will not be allowed to enter the race phase, Sept 2009.

[RichDC]

Rog,

I think that actually goes along with my original premise. If Vv's focus has indeed shifted to competing/winning the X Prize, and if they have in fact decided to go with an ICE first to get the product on the roads quickly, then the primary mission has to be to get the MPG on the ICE to 100 or better. Which also jives with something like the airbag being offered as an option rather than standard to cut down on weight. Can't say for sure what the 75MPG is based on (mule tests, engine mfg estimate, carver comparison...) but it's probably not based on Alpha tests yet or on engineering tweaks. I'm betting that the mantra at Vv right now is "Increase MPG, Increase MPG, Increase MPG......"

[rogwild]

Their mantra SHOULD be; "Finish the ALPHA!"du:n:n:o(

Without it, they have NOTHING to test, evaluate, and improve the MPG with!:confused:

Right now; they are getting ZERO MPG!!!:(

[RAN]

I can understand that they think they have a better chance of getting an ICE-only model to market faster, and maybe (probably) that's the way they should go, but I don't see any way they're going to be able to enter it in the X-Prize competition. It might be possible to get the mileage into the 60-75MPG range, which would work great from a marketing standpoint, but isn't going to even get them in the door at the X-Prize, unless they plan on using a 35HP version to compete with.

It seems that dropping the in-wheel motors was a fateful decision.

[waboom]

I'm hoping when the V1 finally ships and the dust settles, Ian would be willing to answer candidly a few questions for us, like "why did you drop the in-wheel motors?" and "Why didn't you get somebody, even a volunteer, to manage the forums?" Speculation abounds, and I'm sure we could get a marketing-style answer, but it would be nice to know the real scoop.

And I think the mantra is, "Please let us ship before we run out of money!"

[RAN]

And I think the mantra is, "Please let us ship before we run out of money!"

Indeed.

[rogwild]

'waboom'; probably more accurately put, "Please let us finish the ALPHA, before we run out of money!"o:o:p:s12

Since the $6 mil of Series A funding was just to get them through prototype development.=y: Vv then has to obtain Series B to get them a BETA (near production vehicle)du:n:n:o(; AND then more funding to finance building/staffing of a production/assembly facility and materials to actually BUILD the vehicles.:o 2010 is a 'ways' away, but VERY MUCH still to be done :cry:before V~1 #00001 rolls off the line!dr:ive1)

The recent 'Blackout' of information does not increase my confidence in Vv's ability to accomplish these tasks in a timely manner. m:a:d:(:11r:a:n:t:2:101

[RAN]

It may be indelicate of me to point this out, but 2 years ago, PML Flightlink and Synergy Innovations built their hybrid Mini. It has, and I quote, "...four of our electric wheels, a lithium polymer battery, a large ultra capacitor, a very small ICE with generator (so small it almost fits alongside the spare wheel), an energy management system and a sexy in-car display module."

That ICE, BTW, only weighs 30 lbs. The Mini has a city range of about 150-200 miles. The genset can provide continuous 60-70 MPH cruising without depleting the battery (meaning, it can keep up with the demands of a 3000 lb vehicle with 640HP cruising at that speed).

Ahem.......... VV decided to trash all of that? And replace it with................ ??????????

[Miracleman89]

It may be indelicate of me to point this out, but 2 years ago, PML Flightlink and Synergy Innovations built their hybrid Mini. It has, and I quote, "...four of our electric wheels, a lithium polymer battery, a large ultra capacitor, a very small ICE with generator (so small it almost fits alongside the spare wheel), an energy management system and a sexy in-car display module."

That ICE, BTW, only weighs 30 lbs. The Mini has a city range of about 150-200 miles. The genset can provide continuous 60-70 MPH cruising without depleting the battery (meaning, it can keep up with the demands of a 3000 lb vehicle with 640HP cruising at that speed).

Ahem.......... VV decided to trash all of that? And replace it with................ ??????????

My thoughts exactly!!!! Read this thread: http://www.flytheroadclub.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=548

[waltbscott]

Sure, I'll be putting a deposit down. I'll want a test drive before I buy one, and they'll need a way to separate the serious from the curious. As far as mileage goes, my mileage may vary.
Airbag? I don't think this vehicle gets on a federal highway without one (or something just as effective), so I'm not worrying about that.
Price? That one is where I get worked up. If this ends up costing $15K more than a 35 mpg Scion, well I can buy a lot of fossil fuel for $15K. It's gotta be more than an accessory for the well to do. This is the one high-miler that's priced for the rest of us. Everything else (Aptera, Volt, Tesla, Fisker, etc.) is beyond my price range.
I really need that $20K (+/- a little). I'd rather have a well-built, dependable vehicle with less gizmology than a fully loaded, high-priced model of scientific and mechanical endeavor. (that's more than 2 cents worth, sorry)

[Mark Tomlinson]

It may be indelicate of me to point this out, but 2 years ago, PML Flightlink and Synergy Innovations built their hybrid Mini. It has, and I quote, "...four of our electric wheels, a lithium polymer battery, a large ultra capacitor, a very small ICE with generator (so small it almost fits alongside the spare wheel), an energy management system and a sexy in-car display module."

That ICE, BTW, only weighs 30 lbs. The Mini has a city range of about 150-200 miles. The genset can provide continuous 60-70 MPH cruising without depleting the battery (meaning, it can keep up with the demands of a 3000 lb vehicle with 640HP cruising at that speed).

Ahem.......... VV decided to trash all of that? And replace it with................ ??????????
Sorry, RAN, but the only response I can come up with is that you should go ahead and buy the Mini QED. But you may have noticed they introduced the prototype two years ago and there still aren't any on the road. Why? I don't know. I do know that Mini was a straight conversion with stock parts and cost $350,000. I also know that it wasn't street legal because they couldn't engineer in friction brakes.

I, too, am upset with VV's shifting specifications and Ian's lack of meaningful communication. And I'm considering jumping off the band wagon as well. But I realize that no one - no one - has actually produced an affordable vehicle that gets anywhere 75 or 100 MPGe. (Maybe Aptera is close, but they haven't shipped any yet either).

I'm not going to second guess the engineering because a lot smarter people than me are stumped by this puzzle. I'm not upset that VV has had to shift the specs again. But I am upset at the abysml way VV handles the PR.

[RAN]

Sorry, RAN, but the only response I can come up with is that you should go ahead and buy the Mini QED. But you may have noticed they introduced the prototype two years ago and there still aren't any on the road. Why? I don't know. I do know that Mini was a straight conversion with stock parts and cost $350,000. I also know that it wasn't street legal because they couldn't engineer in friction brakes.

Hi Mark. The "why" is, they never intended to produce these. THAT "why" is another question altogether. Why would they spend all that money to produce a prototype if they had no intention of mass producing them???

I do remember them saying that the Mini relied on 100% regenerative braking, which I wondered about. The Lightning GT is supposed to go into production soon with PML motors, so I assume that they have found a way to deal with that issue.


I, too, am upset with VV's shifting specifications and Ian's lack of meaningful communication. And I'm considering jumping off the band wagon as well. But I realize that no one - no one - has actually produced an affordable vehicle that gets anywhere 75 or 100 MPGe. (Maybe Aptera is close, but they haven't shipped any yet either).True... but since Aptera is concentrating on the EV model 1st, we still won't have one after it goes into production.
The reason no major automaker has brought one out is, they really don't want to make them. It's only the shifting demands of the marketplace that are forcing them to. GM lost $15 billion in a quarter. Maybe now they're on the same page.
Startups like VV and even Aptera and Tesla have such an uphill climb to produce revolutionary new vehicles, that it really will be a miracle if they all manage to do it.


I'm not upset that VV has had to shift the specs again. But I am upset at the abysmal way VV handles the PR.I'm with ya there buddy.....

[Mark Tomlinson]

I've been following this thread and giving it some thought. Ed posted photos showing RotoMax as the source of the rumor that Venture was going back to an ICE because a hybrid will cost too much. And we're all up in arms about the survey that suggested a plug-in hybrid would only get 20 miles of pure EV and cost an additional $2000.

Consider this. suppose Venture ran into the same obstacle that everyone else in the marketplace has run into - batteries. Even GM, who is throwing millions at three different battery suppliers, can't get past the cost/energy-density issue. Building a car with acceptable range and weight just costs too much. The kicker is that Toyota, GM, and just about everyone else who's trying to build a plug-in hybrid underestimated the battery cost (the Volt's estimated price is creeping up as well, and now GM is considering partnering with Ford to throw more resources at the problem).

Tesla Motors is about the only one who estimated the cost correctly. That's why the Roadster was built as a high end sports car - to bury the cost of the batteries. The Tesla Roadster with 224 mile EPA range is estimated to have at least $20,000 worth of batteries. Simple (and probably inaccurate) math suggests that a reasonable 40 mile EV range would cost more than $3500 for 200 lbs of lithium-ion batteries.

With that in mind, maybe Venture is weighing their options. They can't move forward with the Alpha until they figure out the drive train. Obviously they would be discussing it with Roush Engineering. Part of that discussion would include finding pricing for alternative engines from RotoMax. Hence, RotoMax would get at least part of the story, but not all of it. Another thing they would do is try to find the "deal breaker" price point through the Vehicle Voice survey.

Obviously I wish for something more than wild speculation. I can understand (although I don't agree with) that Ian has made claim after claim which he may have to back off from, and now doesn't want to say anything until he has a firm decision. I think an open dialog with Ian's fan base (us) would be the most appropriate thing.

Regardless of the outcome, I'm still "in". Even 75 mpg with reasonable passing power is attractive to me. Sure, at $25,000 it would take eight or ten years to recover the cost in fuel savings, but purchasing a V1 was never about payback.

[wa3wheels]

I located the survey as you have instructed.
Tried to join it comes back that name already in use.

Then I tried to straight log in and it kicks me out.

So there I will not take their survey and I will pick up all my toys and go home!

[AZEqualizer]

I'm with Mark on the rumors with Ed and RotoMax but mine is a slightly different slant.

First lets clarify some things. People are poor reporters of facts even more so when they do it from memory. Look at the typical Police Officer trying to get information from a crime scene. People see what they expect to see hear what they want to hear and it is all tainted by lots of things in their mind. It is not deliberate but you ask 5 people what they heard or observed and you get 5 totally different stories. And the stories vary so differently that one can't believe they were at the same place.

Next rumors. Most people in an introductory Psyc Class are asked to start a rumor and pass it around ... by the time it gets back to them it is hardly recognized. People embellish and focus on things that their minds finds more interesting and exciting.

These are not criticisms but facts on how the human mind works. Even when reporting something in writing that you just listened to ... if you don't go back and check the facts in your writing to say a recording the facts can change. As an example go back and look at the report of the interview from autoblog on the FTR site and see how some things were misrepresented until the person went back several times to confirm his facts all because other people pointed out that they heard x instead of y.

My whole take on the Rotomax report of the going back to a ICE only vehicle is a distortion of what is really going on. I'm basing this on some extrapolations for some things that we know.

My supposition is: VV is not dropping the whole hybrid concept and going back to a ICE only because the Hybrid was going to cost some 30K+. Instead VV decided to postpone the EV because it was going to cost some 30K+ based on cost and availability of batteries (we were even told this part prior to this post). This is also responsible for making the battery pack small enough to be cost effective in the Hybrid resulting in a small Electric only range.

For the questions in the PHEV (sport model) of 20miles for 2grand extra. Here Vv is looking questions " designed to help us better understand different perspectives and opinions from diverse groups of people" in this case cost and feature tolerance. Sometimes we also read too much into these survey questions - Another take on the 20miles for 2grand of batteries is merely "what is the cost point your willing to pay for a Plug in EV only range. The 75 in the 75+ could be a baseline of the vehicle not considering the battery pack with more than running the auxiliaries." It is also a lot easier to develop the hybrid and move forward to the EV when the costs and availability and technology are more available. A strict ICE with no electric drive would not only cause a full power pod design but the whole guts of the vehicle and the mind set behind the vehicle -because the computers electronics etc would be totally different... I don't thing Ian, Howard or any of the partners would go to this extent ( or for that matter be able to sell this as a means to a long term goal) ... it is going too far down a different road and too big of a compromise of a concept to be acceptable. I just don't believe it is going to happen... they had this option before forming this company and I don't think they are going to all of a sudden take this route now. I think lots of other compromises would occur. I may be wrong but I won't believe it until I see it.

I think VV has figured out the drive train if you got to see the pulled video of the Alpha Power-pod you would see what I mean. I think Vv would have had seen the costs before actually putting this together and if they were going to change directions they would have known before this went so far. The details in this video were amazing and enough to give away part of the farm. Plus Roush had to do a lot of reconfiguring in a short amount of time to get to this point since it was a lot different than the cad picture of the guts of the pod we were shown prior.

So like most conspiracies (JK) we have 'the shooter on the mound'. In this case it is the' radio blackout'.

My thoughts are with the X prize people and all the other Big manufacturers (cars and motorcycle) looking at a green solution it is like Ian said

(the V1) ...is attracting much more attention from large, established companies. As this "competitive landscape" has changed, it's forced us to step back and consider how we're going to handle our communications going forward.
Our goal is to keep you informed in a timely manner, and continue to foster the debate and dialog on these pages -- while, at the same time, protecting our competitive edge in a world that's beginning to realize the many advantages of a vehicle like ours.

INGEN, other partners, strategic partners and alliances are trying to keep a lid on things. Ian has always tried to be open but he takes the bullet for the team along with the gag in his mouth. Not to mention the travel and other job tasks he is doing. (notice he hasn't even been logged into his YouTube for over a week and this is one of his forms of entertainment). If this helps get them funding and the correct people onboard to finish this project then so be it.

We will get what we can when we can.... but unfortunately I feel Ian is going to have his hands tied more rather than less as the discussion internally on what can be released to the public and when will continue until they have a viable product. And in the end run.... if keeping things close to the vest gives them what they need in the way of future funding and partnerships then it is to our benefit ... like it or not.... I want to be there to get mine and have it sooner not later even if it means I get treated like a mushroom.

[Derwin]

My supposition is: VV is not dropping the whole hybrid concept and going back to a ICE only because...

I was just wondering....Do we know for a FACT that Venture Vehicles plans on producing a ICE vehicle to start? Has anybody verified these rumors? Personally, I would LOVE to have this vehicle with an ICE....especially if it were at a low cost. Sure, I would RATHER have the hybrid or EV, but an ICE is fine with me!

But I have a problem with this in that if this were actually true, it would be a MAJOR departure from what Ian has been telling us all along. For that reason, I just won't really believe it until we here an "official" word.

Derwin

[Miracleman89]

Speaking of an official word from Ian.... He has had to have seen the comments being made on both sites by now! Can anyone explain why he has maintained radio silence! Is there any reason that anyone can't think of as to why he has maintain this silence, especially knowing what kind of reaction people were having to the survey?

[Derwin]

MM89... Iv'e given up on trying to figure out Ian and Venture Vehicles. It just seems to be too much of a drain on me lately. I think the best thing for all of us to do now is to just relax and be happy whenever he does happen to post anything. I'm just tired of the back and forth, to be honest with you. I'm going into my "spectator mode" now as it relates to all this. It's just not worth getting all worked-up about anymore in my opinion. When/If Venture Vehicles ever comes out with this thing, I'll be first in line. But I just don't want to fuss about Ian posting/not posting anymore. It's just not worth it to me.

That being said.... Please continue the dialog in this club forum. That's what it's for!

Derwin

By The Way.... If anybody is interested in the VogueOne vehicle, I'm offering them at a bargain price of only $2795 shipped directly to your door, as long as you live in the continental United States! Just let me know, and I'll get one out to you.

[EdVB]

Hey let's get this straight.

Rotomax thought it was a good idea to just make a ice model and have some units on the road before going the hybrid route. I said I thought that was a good idea as it would reduce the cost of a unit that I would want. This has blown out of control. Let's get to basics of what I said. Thanks

[AZEqualizer]

It's not that simple.... This is not a parallel hybrid here where it is just easier to drop out the hybrid part. When you have a serial hybrid the drive train is designed around the electric motor as well as the rest of the vehicles electronics and support system. The DVC , the roll cage and the shell are the simplest part of the entire machine but it is not just drop in a Rotomax engine and zoom your down the road. This would take a lot of time and investment to make another vehicle based upon a strict ICE technology and as it has been said before would probably violate the agreement with Carver and VV. In essence Vv would be flushing more money down the tubes to just get something on the road and it wouldn't bode well to any of their partners or potential investors because the product that would be initially released would be a covered motorcycle not a hybrid and eventual offshoot an electric vehicle.

[MVRacing]

AZE,
I completely agree with your post #67 ... nicely put. Nice to have you back in the loop.

[Mark Tomlinson]

Hey let's get this straight.

Rotomax thought it was a good idea to just make a ice model and have some units on the road before going the hybrid route. I said I thought that was a good idea as it would reduce the cost of a unit that I would want. This has blown out of control. Let's get to basics of what I said. Thanks
Sorry Ed, I guess I read it wrong.

While we're doing the "for the record" thing, I'm with AZE regarding what I believe are VV's intentions regarding the ICE. I didn't post it the first time because I was already a little wordy. But it seems to me that they have no intention of going from a serial hybrid to an ICE.

First off, if you want to read into the Vehicle Voice survey something that wasn't written, you can take the $2000 / 20 mile EV option as a sign that the serial hybrid is still "on". Adding a 20 mile plug-in hybrid (PHEV) range isn't an "option" for an internal combustion engine.

Bear in mind also that an ICE and an electric motor have entirely different torque curves. Therefor and ICE requires a complex transmission whereas an electric motor can get by with a single speed gearbox. In fact, an ICE can't run in reverse - that has to happen in the gearbox too. All this complexity has to be engineered in, plus now you have to add linkages to the passenger compartment to control it. Sure, it's been done in the Carver. But if Venture hasn't been designing it so far, converting to an ICE would amount to trashing the entire design so far and starting over. And that would spell death to the next round of funding.

[westonlgray]

In general, the more electrical components they include in the drive train, the easier it will be to upgrade later. If they build a vehicle with at least a manufacturer upgradeable propulstion control system, I would be happy to buy the VentureOne as soon as they come out. If I will be able to order an upgrade kit later for the in-wheel motors, that would just be a bonus.

It is kind of odd that they haven't even issued a short statement here or elsewhere, but if we don't keep the faith alive, who will?