[Velomobile] Affordable velomobiles

Thu Jan 5 14:08:52 EST 2012

Nick - breakdown (including depreciation for different original purchase price cars and for different annual mileages) in the link I included.
Some of the costs are frightening and make velos - even the most expensive ones - look like bargains!

Rob

On 5 Jan 2012, at 18:56, Nickolas Hein wrote:

> Rob, et al,
> I was just about to comment on that.  The objection isn't really to the
> cost of the velomobile but to the value since most prospective buyers don't
> know the cost.  You may buy a car for $10K USD, but you'll spend about the
> same amount every year to fuel, maintain, insure it (and then there's
> depreciation - the biggest cost and something you don't even get anything
> for).  A few years ago I remember someone sharing a study that showed all
> the costs for comparison.  Does anyone still have a link to it?
> Thanks,
> Nick Hein
> Morgantown, WV
> 
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Rob Hague <rob at wrhpv.com> wrote:
> 
>> And the response to "I could buy a car for that" is "... and what is the
>> total cost of ownership for that car?" - how much per year does it *really*
>> cost you?
>> 
>> The Automobile Association here in the UK claim that an average car costs
>> 45p (92.5 US cents) per mile all in. Note that these figures do not include
>> the additional cost of gym membership that may then be necessary to address
>> the sedentary lifestyle of the car driver.
>> (http://www.theaa.com/allaboutcars/advice/advice_rcosts_petrol_table.jsp)
>> 
>> That is looking almost break-even on a new 'standard' velomobile each year
>> :)
>> 
>> Rob
>> 
>> 
>> On 5 Jan 2012, at 15:43, Terry Rouse wrote:
>> 
>>> I agree with most of what John says. I have gotten a lot of favorable
>> responses
>>> from motorists as I cruise about in my homemade velomobile. And a lot of
>>> questions from interested persons. The biggest hurdle for many folks and
>> the
>>> reason I made my own is cost. When I tell people what a commercial
>> velomobile
>>> would cost the typical response is, "I could buy a car for that". The
>> cost has
>>> to come down for these to become practical transportation. For several
>> years I
>>> rode a Catrike Speed to which I added a body. My main objections to it
>> were the
>>> harsh ride and lack of good road hazard vision due to the body and
>> reclined
>>> position. There has been a resurgence of single speed bikes around here
>> and I
>>> suspect that is mostly due to the simplicity of the design. It is very
>> hilly
>>> here and I can't imagine why anyone would want to pedal up some of our
>> hills,
>>> but they are doing it. So in short I think the KISS principle applies
>> here. Keep
>>> it simple stupid. My current homemade velomobile has a small amount of
>>> suspension to dampen the jarring effects of bad roads and I plan to add
>> Schwalbe
>>> Big Apples when my current tires wear out to see how that affects the
>> ride and
>>> handling. I think the big challenge will be coming up with a design that
>> can be
>>> economically produced on a big scale. Sort of a Model T version of the
>>> velomobile. Making them one at a time is never going to be cost
>> effective.  I
>>> see some major design challenges making them light enough to be
>> practical, while
>>> relatively easy to manufacture. To me the Rotovelo is step in the right
>>> direction.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: JOHN TETZ <jgtetz at msn.com>
>>> To: velomobile at hupi.org
>>> Sent: Wed, January 4, 2012 8:09:57 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Velomobile] Intellectual Property
>>> 
>>> David Eggleston
>>> 
>>> Thank you for giving your experienced and wide ranging overview on
>> various VM
>>> issues. Very valuable information.
>>> 
>>> I agree we have a lot yet to learn but we have accomplished a lot in
>> these last
>>> 10 years of VM development.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> An all-around velo has a better chance of commercial success than one
>> that is
>>>> only good for a few things.
>>> ......Too much of a range is asking a lot of a design, given the power
>> source is
>>> so weak. Seems to me that honing a design for a specific area of need is
>> more
>>> apt to be accomplished. Cars range from small to large with few to many
>> features
>>> to accomplish various needs.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> What I have set my sights on is a practical suburban human powered
>> alternate
>>> transportation vehicle to be  used by average folks to do their shopping
>> and
>>> running errands in the 2 to 5 mile radius. Average speed 14 mph. These
>> design
>>> limits give the opportunity to come up with a viable vehicle.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> You can fairly easily put an aero body on an existing unsuspended
>> trike, but
>>>> you are likely to end up with many difficulties, including body
>> attachments to
>>>> the trike, noise of thin shells vibrating, and many others.
>>>> 
>>> ........How true this is. But I look at the fact that the bare trike
>> business is
>>> booming. Although adding a shell of some kind may not be ideal it does
>> change a
>>> trike into a vehicle, a vehicle that is first of all not seasonably
>> limited, has
>>> weather protection, some crash protection, more visible to cars  etc.
>> This will
>>> change the consciousness of the trike rider into using the vehicle more
>> as local
>>> alternate transportation rather than just recreation.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Second, by being seen by the public these vehicles will affect their
>> awareness.
>>> I see and hear a change in the publics response to my VM over a 7 year
>> period.
>>> They more often comment now - it doesn't use gas, its good for the
>> environment,
>>> and its good for the health of the rider, etc.
>>> 
>>> I am hearing more and more happy - I like what you are doing horn honks
>> -  from
>>> drivers.
>>> 
>>> The publics environmental awareness is changing. We need a viable
>> practical
>>> vehicle.
>>> 
>>> It doesn't need all the wish list of advanced features.
>>> 
>>> I designed my present VM 8 years ago coming from a long background with
>>> streamliners and the thrill of speed.
>>> What's important to me now is weather protection (head in), light
>> weight, quiet,
>>> ease of access to decent cargo space, some amount of suspension, small
>> physical
>>> size for parking reasons. Aerodynamics is there but further down the
>> list.
>>> 
>>> This is accomplishable given what we know.
>>> In another 10 years more viable vehicles will be developed.
>>> 
>>>> I guess we will have to rely on our own ideas and resources for
>> low-budget
>>>> design and development paths.
>>>> 
>>> .....Yes, but some method of sharing ideas is very important. Look at the
>>> advancements made after the birth of the IHPVA in 1975   - which
>> eventually lead
>>> to present day Velomobiles.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> In some ways its less a technology issue than a change in consciousness
>> as to
>>> why and how we use these vehicles. Requiring the wish list of advanced
>> features
>>> hints of 19th and 20th century thinking where the Earths energy and
>> resources
>>> were thought to be limitless. Efficiency - doing more with less - is the
>> 21st
>>> century password. HPVs are up with the efficiency of railroad trains and
>> super
>>> tankers.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Notice for one how I have skirted the issue of funding.
>>> 
>>> John Tetz
>>> --
>>> This message comes to you via the Velomobile at hupi.org mailing list.
>>> Visit http://hupi.org/mailman/listinfo/velomobile to manage your
>> subscription.
>>> --
>>> This message comes to you via the Velomobile at hupi.org mailing list.
>>> Visit http://hupi.org/mailman/listinfo/velomobile to manage your
>> subscription.
>> 
>> --
>> This message comes to you via the Velomobile at hupi.org mailing list.
>> Visit http://hupi.org/mailman/listinfo/velomobile to manage your
>> subscription.
>> 
> --
> This message comes to you via the Velomobile at hupi.org mailing list.
> Visit http://hupi.org/mailman/listinfo/velomobile to manage your subscription.