Re: Must See! Beautiful Pre-Production Tango!

[Glenn Wittrock <spamproof@pluggedin.ca>]

> . When the one who is
> driving on the left side of the left lane wants to exit the freeway to the
> right, the situation could become very dangerous. I'm really not sure it
> would very safe to allow this, and I'm pretty sure it won't be allowed.
>

Think micro-lanes, think two lanes in the space of one, think it's ok to pay
mega-taxes and drive an explorer in two lanes.
Think different !


>
> In other words, smaller or narrower cars don't mean less traffic congestion,
> and you don't buy your way out of a traffic jam with a narrower vehicle,
> unless you break traffic laws and drive dangerously.
>
> A. Hubert
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : owner-ev@listproc.sjsu.edu [mailto:owner-ev@listproc.sjsu.edu]De la
> part de Rick Woodbury
> Envoyé : dimanche 27 janvier 2002 17:18
> À : EV List List
> Objet : RE: Must See! Beautiful Pre-Production Tango!
>
> Chris Tromley wrote:
>
> > I split lanes for many years in CA.  I think that, properly executed,
> > it's a safe, efficient means to reduce traffic.  I certainly wouldn't do
> > it on a Gold Wing (yes, others do), and a Tango is nearly as wide.  I
> > also know that many CA drivers positively *despise* lane-splitters.
>
> Agreed. Pushing this could possibly get the right for motorcycles revoked as
> well. The logic is just that whatever is legal for a motorcycle should be
> legal for a vehicle that's narrower than some motorcycles, much safer, and
> is zero emission as well.
>
> > Extending the practice to cars, even special ones, will meet with some
> > resistance.
>
> Allowing EVs in the HOV lane met with resistance too. It still happened.
>
> > If you took it a step further and proposed it for other
> > states, they'd think you had truly lost your mind.  (I say that with
> > confidence, having lived in three states outside CA.)
>
> I agree with this too. I wouldn't expect Washington state, for example, to
> adopt a policy like this unless it really started making a huge difference
> in California. If it clearly solves more problems than it creates, why
> wouldn't other states follow suit?
>
> > My apologies.  I wasn't referring to your comments, but those on the
> > Commuter Cars site http://www.commutercars.com/.  On the home page is
> > this quote, "The Tango, the first vehicle produced by Commuter Cars, is
> > a glimpse into the future of commuting where we hope wasted time,
> > energy, and freeway real estate due to traffic jams will be things of
> > the past."  This is right under an artist's rendition of two Tangos
> > side-by-side in a single lane.
>
> This may be overly optimistic, but maybe not. Traffic seems to slow down
> exponentially as it reaches saturation. If a situation developed where
> people could commute in the 2 narrow left hand lanes at 70 mph or be stuck
> in a lane with full-sized cars and trucks at 0 to 10 mph and back to 0; and
> if the narrow cars were not too expensive, people might just buy them
> because there would now be a way to buy yourself out of a traffic jam. If
> this kept developing to the point that 80% of the worlds commuters drove
> narrow vehicles, it could virtually end traffic jams. If not end them, it
> would certainly make a huge improvement in traffic flow. If 80% of the
> commuters were driving zero emission cars, the world would also be changed
> for the better for cleaner air as well. Maybe it won't work, but it's the
> most promising idea I've had so far. While I'm dreaming, I'd love to see
> train ferries too for the longer commute. I hate driving long distances.
> With short cars like the Smart, Sparrow, and Tango, and all motorcycles, you
> could have ramps up to double decked train cars and park them all sideways.
> When you reached your destination you'd just drive off the other side. I
> love taking the ferry in the Seattle area. You have a half an hour to wander
> around the boat, have a Latte, read the paper, or sleep. It sure beats
> driving in a traffic jam. You'd have your own personal transportation and
> storage then at both ends. To me this is even better than a station car.
> Having my storage space travel with me is very useful. Those who require
> more space than a Tango, Sparrow, or Motorcycle, could use a Smart or
> possibly, for an additional fee, have their truck or SUV loaded
> longitudinally.
>
> > On the Safety page is this quote, "The Tango--being 6" narrower than
> > many motorcycles--takes less than half the space of the average car on
> > the freeway, thereby doubling the capacity of the existing freeway
> > system.
>
> This is an error. It should read "existing freeway lanes"
>
> > The Tango can fit in a future 6 foot lane easier than a truck
> > fits in a standard 12 foot lane."
> >
> > Think about it - how are you going to mark the lanes?  A simple lane
> > change for a normal car would then be a "double" lane change.  Can you
> > adequately see what's going on in two mini-lanes before moving over?
> > We're talking about changing a lot of laws here, and reprogramming a lot
> > of drivers' reflexes.
>
> The left lane(s) would be reserved for narrow cars just like the HOV lane is
> reserved multiple occupants. When your not in a special lane, you just
> navigate traffic as if you were on a motorcycle--no better--no worse.
> The stripe down the center making the narrow lanes could be purple, and
> might be obeyed only during certain hours. Drivers of normal cars wouldn't
> have to program anything other than stay out of the lanes--just like
> everybody who drives solo has to stay out of the HOV lane, unless you're in
> an EV of course :^)
>
> > Someone at Commuter Cars thinks they can make major changes in the
> > highway system, if not "change the world" (I'm thinking there's not much
> > difference ;^).
>
> All of us at Commuter Cars, all 3 of us, Bryan, Michael, a mechanical
> engineering intern from Saarbrüken, Germany, and myself, believe that we can
> help others change the world. We're just trying to supply a product that
> people will like so that if people build and buy them, the world will be a
> better place because of it.
>
> > I truly admire the spirit, but realistically I have to
> > say it ain't gonna happen.  Prove me wrong, and no one will be happier
> > than me.
>
> I think it's gonna happen. I don't think it can be stopped. If we all drop
> dead, someone else will do it. I might just take longer.
>
> BTW, I've seen "change the world" which everybody does to some degree and
> "save the world" which is a whole different matter, used interchangeably.
> You've heard what I think about changing the world, now I want to slip in a
> few OT words about saving the world. I think that Sept. 11 was just a tip of
> the iceberg. What if Osama had been able to buy a hydrogen bomb. To save the
> world I think we need to stop ticking people off. If countries like the U.S.
> put as much energy into feeding and educating the less fortunate in the
> world as it does protecting its own interests, we might not have so many
> people so angry that they would do as much damage as was done.
>
> When I got back from Québec, next to our company's front door, I found an
> American Flag with the words United we Stand written under it. It struck me
> as exactly the kind of thinking that perpetuates the whole problem. I had
> the flag removed an replaced with a photo of the planet earth as seen from a
> satellite. It's not clear which countries are in view because of the cloud
> cover. So let's stand united against Klingons and Romulins and any other
> ruthless space aliens, unless they really exist--then we'll have to replace
> the photo of earth with a photo of our galaxy. As Shanti Deva a famous
> Buddhist once asked. "When to myself, as to my fellow beings, fear and pain
> are hateful, why do I protect it and not others. This attitude, I believe,
> will save the world.
>
> > I think your suggestion of a narrow vehicle classification is much more
> > achievable.  That's where Commuter Cars' advertising rhetoric should be
> > directed.  I believe it would give the company a more practical "here
> > and now" image than suggesting changes in how highways are laid out and
> > navigated.
>
> The above comment is referring to our long-term goal, not our marketing
> strategy. We have a waiting list of people who want to buy Tangos. We don't
> need to sell any now. We need to build them. The web page and our brochure
> is directed to potential investors, suppliers, and automotive companies that
> may help us toward the stated goal.
>
> Our marketing strategy is to try to beat any production gasoline cars,
> including Ferraris, Porsches, and Lamborghinis, around a road course like
> Laguna Seca or Sears point and have the automotive press witness it. It
> would hopefully be on the covers of the auto magazines. People would
> hopefully covet the exotic and expensive Tango until we could build enough
> of them to bring the price down to that of an affordable commuter car.
>
> There's no need to ever sell what we don't have--like narrow lanes, Li-Ion
> batteries, lane splitting and the like. We want the Tango to sell despite
> the fact that it's electric with its known drawbacks. We think we've come up
> with a winning package. A car that has more advantages than disadvantages
> for millions of people--and it's producible right now.
>
> I think I've written long enough. I hope I haven't ticked anyone off.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Rick Woodbury                                     Phone: (509) 624-0762
> President, Commuter Cars Corporation          Toll-free: (800) 468-0944
> Doubling the capacity of freeways                   Fax: (509) 624-1466
> Quadrupling the capacity of parking            Cellular: (509) 979-1815
> Zero to 60 in under 4 seconds
> 715 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 114             Email: rick@commutercars.com
> Spokane, WA 99202                      Web: http://www.commutercars.com

--

Glenn Wittrock

Linux: when you need to run like a greased weasel.