Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 164 posts

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#81

Post by jack-r-abbit »

DanEdge wrote: post #77
jack-r-abbit wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, lane splitting is illegal in many U.S. states, but is considered lawful in California (though there is no law for or against it... it is simply "allowed"). I might be wrong but I thought the main justification for lane splitting was due to the air-cooled aspect of motorcycles and the harm that can come from sitting in stalled/slow traffic (although, where I live I see this get abused everyday by m…

The vast majority of motorcycles are water cooled and have been for some time. Incidentally, lane splitting isn't being abused when motorcyclists do it to go faster than cars; that's the whole point.

Since there is no law on the books that really defined the "rules" of lane splitting, back when I drove a classic Mini I often wondered what would happen if I just started driving in between cars that I knew I could fit between. I suspect I'd be getting tickets for that. So bikes are allowed to do it for what ever reason. I wonder what a biker would think if I just pulled up along side them on the freeway. I suspect they would not be keen on that. But I wasn't trying to debate the merits or legality of lane splitting... just that "not able to lane split" is not a very compelling argument against this vehicle (at least for me anyway).

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#82

Post by jack-r-abbit »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #80
ajross wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At-the-pump gasoline prices have been moving steadily, inexorably upward for the past 13 years. It's not even news any more when we hit new record prices; it happens every summer. You really think that trend is going to halt any time soon? A median car in the USA is now less expensive than the fuel it will consume (and outside the USA, of course, fuel is a much greater fraction). You think that constraint won't "dica…

"Inexorably". Yes. Now, if we believed that any consistent trend over a period of about a decade would last forever, where would we all be? Buying multi-million dollar 2-bedroom homes in Detroit with our pets.com investment proceeds, I'd imagine.

but... because pets can't drive... your argument is invalid. LOL

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#83

Post by InclinedPlane »

This is a non-starter. This fills the same niche as an electric moped at 6% or less of the cost. And people can drive electric mopeds on city streets legally today. For less than half the price someone could buy a used, low-mileage sedan (such as a Civic, Corolla, or Accent), with a trunk, seating for 5, seatbelts and airbags. And then use the other $8k to pay for gas at $5 a gallon for the next 48,000 miles. Or, they could buy 2x brand-new 150cc Honda motorcycles and use the extra money to pay for the gas (at $5 a gallon) for the next 50,000 miles for both vehicles (100k total).

Doesn't make economic sense. Doesn't make safety sense. Doesn't make logistical sense. Doesn't make practical sense. Doesn't make environmental sense.

What's the value add?

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#84

Post by excuse-me »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #79
TylerE wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to factor in the medical bills, though. With a loaded weight of under 1000lbs, in any sort of collision, this thing will lose . Doesn't really matter how strong the frame is, it's just simple physics. Similar situation with the "Smart" car. The passenger cell can take a 60mph impact into a barrier just fine. The passengers - not so much, the g-forces inflicted are much higher than a traditional vehicle. Even…

Unless the person you crash into is also driving one of these, in which case you both win , relatively speaking. Safety does remain a very important consideration here, and I'm also wondering how safe those heavy gyroscopes under your seat are in a collision. They had better be extremely well-shielded from the passenger compartment.

That's the arms race - on the road the more massive vehicle in a collision wins.

So if you care about your dear little children you have to buy the M1 Abrahams tank. A mere $4.3M for the peace of mind of knowing your little ones are protected in a collision with an Escalade.

(ps the 120mm cannon is also useful against Volvos)

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#85

Post by ajross »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #80
ajross wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At-the-pump gasoline prices have been moving steadily, inexorably upward for the past 13 years. It's not even news any more when we hit new record prices; it happens every summer. You really think that trend is going to halt any time soon? A median car in the USA is now less expensive than the fuel it will consume (and outside the USA, of course, fuel is a much greater fraction). You think that constraint won't "dica…

"Inexorably". Yes. Now, if we believed that any consistent trend over a period of about a decade would last forever, where would we all be? Buying multi-million dollar 2-bedroom homes in Detroit with our pets.com investment proceeds, I'd imagine.

Your point being what, that there's a speculative boom in petroleum prices?

It's a finite resource with a growing demand. Seems like my argument requires less in the way of elaborate justification.

I don't expect to convince you of anything. So: write it down. In 2012 you thought $4 gas was going to stop getting more expensive. In 2014 when it hits $5, you'll probably think similarly. At $10, maybe you're change your mind. And if you've written it down you'll hopefully avoid this kind of mistake in the future.

People like you have been predicting cheaper gas right around the corner since 2003. They haven't been right yet.

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#86

Post by TylerE »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #79
TylerE wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to factor in the medical bills, though. With a loaded weight of under 1000lbs, in any sort of collision, this thing will lose . Doesn't really matter how strong the frame is, it's just simple physics. Similar situation with the "Smart" car. The passenger cell can take a 60mph impact into a barrier just fine. The passengers - not so much, the g-forces inflicted are much higher than a traditional vehicle. Even…

Unless the person you crash into is also driving one of these, in which case you both win , relatively speaking. Safety does remain a very important consideration here, and I'm also wondering how safe those heavy gyroscopes under your seat are in a collision. They had better be extremely well-shielded from the passenger compartment.

Even hitting another one of these or a similar super-light vehicle, you both still lose. For survivability there is absolutely no replacement for deformable structure aka crumple zones.

Re: This Is the Gyro-Stabilized, Two-Wheeled Future of Transportation

#87

Post by TylerE »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #66
morsch wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you're still paying for fuel/energy unless you recharge at work. ;) Of course it's a much more efficient vehicle than a car, due to it's weight, the higher efficiency of electrical motors[1] and regenerative braking. One figure in the article is 220 miles on an 8kWh battery. I think I pay something like €0.25 per kWh, most of you probably spend less. So about 100 miles/€, and about €2 to recharge the whole batt…

Power plants operate at a much higher efficiency than internal combustion engines, on cheaper and more diversified fuel sources, including renewable. [Electric motors and batteries also have relatively little energy waste, making the system as a whole more efficient to operate, especially when you consider being able to leverage the superior distribution infrastructure of the electric grid versus the relatively spars…

On the other hand, they also require charging infrastructure, and there is some loss in transmission, so you don't get to keep all of that efficiency.
Post reply on HN