171–180 of 198 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can't lean into corners, can't split lanes, can't exceed 80mph, can't do wheelies, can't make it fall over, and can't go over the handlebars in a crash, I strongly suspect this will have better safety statistics than a motorcycle.
This is the comment of someone that knows very little about motorcycles. Half the things you mention are not negatives, but positives.
These three-wheeled vehicles always make me think the same thing, "all the risk of a motorcycle, with none of the fun." They don't exactly have good cargo space, so storage isn't the focus - is the whole point space savings and fuel efficiency? A novel idea, I guess it comes down to price in this case. EDIT: I say "fuel efficiency" referring to the fact that there are gasoline-fueled versions of this same type of veh…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Leaning into corners is a good safety feature of motorcycles compared to tricycles. It makes motorcycles much more stable.
I think their point was that leaning allows you to corner at high speeds, and that not being able to do so would discourage dangerous driving behavior. I'm not sure I agree with that, but there is some logic that to thinking that a larger, slower, clunkier vehicle might lead to fewer fatal accidents.
A vehicle that can take the same corner at higher speeds can also take more difficult corners at lower speeds and is a lot more forgiving.
This is awesome. But nobody’s going to buy it if they have to drive it sharing the road with hulking SUVs. It’s nearly as dangerous as a motorcycle simply because it is so small and light. The only advantage is protection from the weather.
Theoretically, I don't see why this couldn't be like the cockpit of a racecar which is capable of protecting drivers from high speed accidents. Realistically, however, one of the reasons they are making it have 3 wheels is so they don't have to be as safe so it will probably not do well in crashes.
I mean to me the price needs to go down by half or more from $17k or whatever. At which point I might be interested.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there's between 100 and 1000 people in a train, getting rid of the driver saves between 1% and 0.1% of an hourly salary by ticket. The economic pressure to do so is very low, compared to the difficulty and legal liabilities. Automating out a taxi/Über driver saves 50× to 1000× more money per traveler. And the infrastructure for a car ride cost way less than train + track + catenary lines + stations + antiquated ti…
Roads cost $2 million per mile. Tracks are half that. Maybe we should make car users pay for their own roads, and see how the economics work out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most Americans will choose the subscription service over ownership. Subscribers will have instant access to any type of vehicle at any time. The subscription cost will be lower than the cost of ownership. The whole fleet will always be new and incorporate the latest technology. Robotocized cleaning centers and user ratings will mitigate “tragedy of the commons.” I think even at the high end people will use lu…
I don't believe that for a second. Free market will always do what it does best, which means that whoever can get away with running their robo taxis cheapest will win. So the most common ones will rarely if ever be cleaned inside(cleaning costs money after all, even if it's automatic). Once the technology is common, they will run the cheapest version of it, just like regular taxis today don't all drive Mercedes S cla…
The airline industry doesn’t work very well as an analogy. It’s not a completely free market, and costs are so high that it’s genuinely hard for airlines to provide a better experience without charging a lot.
Looks like he tried again about 8 years ago and then failed again :/
The problem with tricycles is that they are less stable than both motorcycles and cars. Unlike motorcycles, tricycles can't bank on turns, or are very limited in that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the comment of someone that knows very little about motorcycles. Half the things you mention are not negatives, but positives.
Yeah, but showing off aholes perform them a lot, so we need to ban those moves.
Bikes a) take up less space, b) don't cause traffic jams, c) are only more unsafe than cars because of people in cars not paying attention. Funnily enough, bad behavior on a bike is regarded as 10x worse than bad behavior in a car, despite the fact that a distracted driver in a car can easily cause 10x the damage, and that no one on a motorcycle is scrolling through their Instagram feed while riding. Let's be realistic - more people are distracted in cars than on motorcycles because you need all of your limbs to operate a bike.
You say you've seen someone pulling a wheelie and it "needs to be banned" (it already is illegal, so I don't know what your plan is here), well I have seen easily hundreds of distracted drivers of cars who can actually end my life because of their actions. No one in a car is going to get killed by a motorcycle, but the exact opposite happens all the time.