Creator of McLaren F1 and really expensive SL-class shows off his next super-car.

[Tornado]

Guess how Murray's new car looks [SIZE=-1]

Last July AutoZine reported Gordon Murray established his own company to develop a revolutionary small city car called T25. Now the development program has passed the mid-point and Murray allowed some British motoring journalists to "see" the prototype, which is shown in these pictures. To keep its secrecy, the car was completely wrapped thus no one could see its real appearance. We can only guess how it looks from its profile, the sketches and information given by Murray.

From the pictures, we can see the T25 is obviously much taller than the classic Mini and New Mini parked aside. It is also extremely short, measuring only 2.4 meters according to Murray. In fact, this is even shorter than the original Smart Fortwo. The shortness allows it to park transversely in a regular parking space, thus one parking space can accommodate 3 T25s !

The car is also very narrow at 1.3 meters, but it will offer 4 seats. In my opinion, the only way to accommodate 4 seats within 2.4 x 1.3 m is to place the seats above the engine. If we observe the technical sketches below, we can see the car has a front-mounted radiator and a rear-mounted engine driving the rear wheels. Therefore the 2 rear seats are likely to be positioned right above the engine compartment. This also explain why the car needs to be so tall. The front passenger seat might be a small folding child seat in order to release elbow room for the driver and ease the access to the rear seats. Just my guesstimation.

According to Gordon Murry, the T25 has 4 body variants and 6 cabin layouts. All employ a separate body and chassis construction, with steel chassis and plastic bodywork like Smart. The 4-seat MPV mentioned above will weigh 550 kg. A 51 hp 3-cylinder petrol engine will pull the lightweight mini car happily and return 81 mpg and emit only 78 g/km of CO2. A revolutionary manufacturing process will reduce space and tooling costs significantly. It will enable a price of only £5500. No wonder Murray call it the biggest revolution in motor industry since Ford Model T and the biggest challenge in his life. To an engineering maestro with McLaren F1 road car and several F1 championship titles in his CV, you had better to take it seriously.

So far there are 3 companies expressed interest in the concept. Surprisingly, only one of them is established car maker. But remember the Smart concept was also overlooked by established car makers and only adopted by watch maker Swatch. In the following year the development team will build running prototypes and start testing. Eventually it will be licensed for production.[/SIZE]

Linky.

Pretty interesting. If they can sell these for the low prices Murray is projecting, I think it could be quite a successful thing (especially because they would have the viable option of pricing it against smart rather than the bargain basement Model T philosophy). Maybe even in America. That being said, I can only give this a 33% chance of success. Being hinged on a major new design philosophy has killed many innovative cars in the past (for example, think of how we would view the Pacer today if it ended up getting a rotary engine like it was designed for), and I think it is more likely than not to kill this one too.
Still, if it can avoid smart's mistakes Murray will have a real winner on his hands.

 

[Jim Prower]

That vehicle is, like, Sub-kei. I mean, it's TIN...err,TINY!!! I'm going to be interested in how this car moves, myself.

 

[niky]

Well, as long as it's not some "revolutionary" idea that's costly, unreliable and generally stupid, a car that's really different and that makes some sense can make its mark on the market. Note the Smart Fortwo, for example... or even the original Mini.... okay... it doesn't have to make a whole lot of sense (in the case of the Smart Fortwo), but people should be willing to give it a try if it's cheap enough and really economical.

 

[tehFAO]

My only concern is I don't think people, at least in America, have felt the gas crunch enough to sacrifice their big cars, and big engines. I think it's what prompted car makers such as Toyota to go from the Prius to vehicles like the Landcruiser. Gotta say, considering the Prius' head start in the market, I'm starting to see twice as many Landcruisers out on the road.

I can't help to think that they only made them for the North American market.

 

[Muzaffar]

I can't help to think that they only made them for the North American market.

I think its made more for Europe.
But wow, how tall is that car? The shape almost remind me of the Mitsubishi I except its in a kei car body. Also, who is going to take this car under its wing? Just have to wait and see to find out......

 

[Kent]

McLaren or not (btw, I'm a huge McLaren F1 fan), this car does not do it for me. Way too short, way too tall. I'd really like to see this designer work towards something between what's shown above and the F1. Something user friendly and excellent as a daily driver but still fast.
What's shown above looks no more interesting than any of the tiny Japanese cars or similar cars from the French. I'm simply not impressed and the name isn't enough for me to buy in at first glance.
I'll say the best this car can hope for is to do well (without beating) the competition from the above mentioned countries.

Simply put, I think this effort would have been better put into a sports car and not an economy car.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

McLaren or not (btw, I'm a huge McLaren F1 fan), this car does not do it for me. Way too short, way too tall. I'd really like to see this designer work towards something between what's shown above and the F1. Something user friendly and excellent as a daily driver but still fast.
What's shown above looks no more interesting than any of the tiny Japanese cars or similar cars from the French. I'm simply not impressed and the name isn't enough for me to buy in at first glance.
I'll say the best this car can hope for is to do well (without beating) the competition from the above mentioned countries.

Simply put, I think this effort would have been better put into a sports car and not an economy car.

If that's the case, then congrats for missing the point?

If there's any single person in the industry I trust with this idea, it's Murray. He's talked about it for years and the details are interesting (the ability to be flat-packed like an Ikea desk, one of the likely companies interested being Virgin). He's already done the sports car thing, and I definitely see what he means about this being the hardest job. Really, what limitations did he have with the F1? The man has nothing but praise for the Smart Roadster, so while I find it hard to believe this microcar will be able to make scorching laps around any track, I do think the man will try to inject at least a little bit of fun into the whole thing.

 

[mafia_boy]

This is going to be an interesting car when it comes out. Definitely a competitor to the Smart and a very different change from what he WAS designing with the F1. Considering the changes in the way we construct the cars with carbon fibre sheeting and such, this could be a very viable mass produced car.

Just have to wait and see for the pricing to come out.

 

[homeforsummer]

If that's the case, then congrats for missing the point?

If there's any single person in the industry I trust with this idea, it's Murray. He's talked about it for years and the details are interesting (the ability to be flat-packed like an Ikea desk, one of the likely companies interested being Virgin). He's already done the sports car thing, and I definitely see what he means about this being the hardest job. Really, what limitations did he have with the F1? The man has nothing but praise for the Smart Roadster, so while I find it hard to believe this microcar will be able to make scorching laps around any track, I do think the man will try to inject at least a little bit of fun into the whole thing.

+1. It annoys me when someone comes out with a clever concept for a vehicle along different lines from the motor industry as a whole (think Aptera or similar as an example) and then someone comes along and says "it looks slow" or "I'd prefer a sports car", whilst completely missing the point of it's existance.

I'll be really interested to see the finished car and what the press make of it - there's nothing like as clever as making a good small car - making a good luxury car or a good supercar is nothing in comparison.

 

[Kent]

You guys all act like I missed the point.
I didn't miss the point, I just didn't like the point.

Sorry to be the cold shower but ultra-tiny cars don't get me excited and that's especially true when hype comes from the name of the designer and not the finished product.

Like I said before, the competition in this segment from Japan and Europe already have my interest (for the segment) and until this car is on the road and proving its worth I will not drool over the idea.

I'm not going to talk about what I don't like about other members' replies so that's about it for me on this...

 

[Formula1Driver]

I'm with Kent, these tiny cars don't really do anything for me, maybe the Mini but I dont think I would buy it, just pass it on the road and think, "That's not bad." I would much rather have an average size/looking car than a tiny little car that I can barely fit into.

 

[Brett]

I have read a bit about this project by Gordon Murray before and I found it very interesting, mainly from an engineering stand point. With what Murray wanted to achieve with the vehicle, the design had to be very good and very efficient and knowing that, I found it interesting that he would want to undertake such a task. I am looking forward to what comes out of this endeavor.

 

[tehFAO]

Something like this doesn't strike me to be truly revolutionary. It's a Mini Cooper with a beefed up lawn-mower engine in it. It's been done before, several times, and none significantly successful. It looks like some comical Jestons vehicle if anything...

I would argue that the Tesla Roadster is more revolutionary because it pioneers into the potentials and capability of alternative fuels - which is what the world needs right now, not another gas sucker (and I don't care for the "81mpg" rating). The Tesla traveled 220 miles on one charge, and gets to 60mph in less than 4 seconds (at least the later models). They've figured out how to make that electrical engine perform in both aspects of economy and sports applications, while also still being practical enough to produce... maybe not mass produce yet, but that will come in time.

Once a big company finally sees what Tesla Motors research is doing and finds a way to take advantage of their electrical motors and starts to implement them in standard vehicles that fit the every day, practical needs of a full fledge family (full sized sedans, full sized SUV's, trucks, mini-vans) that'll then be a revolution. It's still very prehistoric right now, but car companies have proven to simplify and condense and significantly up technology if it means marginal profit gains.

We've come a long way as it is from the Model T, and it's only been 100 years. The next revolution, whatever it is, has already been seeded. It just needs to be recognized and properly, honestly funded.

.... But this? This isn't revolutionary, not even close.

 

[niky]

Tesla innovative? Basically when they did the exact same thing Venturi did with the Fetish, only cheaper (since they based it off a Lotus Elise instead of building their own car from scratch) or what the tzero also did in America... only prettier?

The Tesla is just a more modern take on something that several inventors are working towards. Murray is doing something slightly different (but he's not really alone there... still, this IS Murray.), he's looking at maximizing the utility of small footprint vehicles. Kei cars have been a market option for years, now, but it's very hard to translate that Japanese formula into something fit for the very crash-conscious US market.

From what we can see, Murray's design seems to be just a slightly different take on the Kei car formula, but we haven't actually seen the car yet. I'd hold my judgement until the wraps come off... because if that's shorter than an original Mini, that's sub-Kei territory. I'd like to know how he does the packaging.

The nice thing about ultra-light space maximizing products is that powertrain flexibility is possible. It doesn't matter whether it's gas or electric. Smallness and lightness will benefit the vehicle, either way.

With electric sports cars like the Tesla, they don't move the technology forward. They're still dependent on really heavy battery packs that they have to work around with ultra-light bodies. Now if the Tesla had on-board generation with ultra-capacitors, or some of the newer Lithium-Ion packs (like THIS), then that'd be more than just a more affordable Fetish.

 

[Joey D]

It's a Mini Cooper with a beefed up lawn-mower engine in it.

Except it's half the size and probably several times cheaper.

I'm interested to see what the cars all about, I wait till I see the finished product to make judgment on it. I love small cars but they have to be good in order for me to appreciate them. The Chevy Aveo is an awful little car (although it's getting better with the redesign).

 

[GilesGuthrie]

This car isn't particularly interesting until you read about the weight, and the economy. Murray has been saying that the real engineering difficulty is in taking away: anyone can go faster, add power, add kit etc, but the difficulty is in making a viable vehicle that can manage with the bare minimum.

You see a real Atlantic divide in reaction to ultra-small cars. Europeans are all over them like a rash, but only cosmopolitan Americans & Canadians can see the point. And that's understandable. For all that Americans are whingeing about the cost of petrol, as a populace they're still a mile away from where the cost is in Europe. Plus European roads are overcrowded and the streets in towns are a joke. Europe needs small, safe, economical cars that are cheap to buy, run, and fix. None of these are market drivers on the other side of the Atlantic. And why should they be? My experience of road travel in the US and Canada is one of vast straight roads, which - while busy - still offer the road user plenty of space to move around in. Of course, you're constantly surrounded by megalithic 4x4s, "trucks", and trucks, but it's pretty rare to find yourself driving a 3m-wide car, towards an oncoming 3m-wide car, with 3m-wide cars parked on either side of a 13m-wide road. This is a daily occurrence in Europe.

So, while I as a European fail to see the point of the latest Ford Journey-to-the-centre-of-the-Earth, with its 25' x 10' dimensions and its 17-litre V8, it's not really of any surprise that those from the other side of the pond don't 'get' Murray's latest creation.

 

[superberkut]

I think I understand it... Gordon Murray is certainly being brave for entering this automotive field without previous experience; just inspiration. Who knows, he may just have gotten tired of building such extravagant cars.

A super-car indeed, in being super-small. It could do with a couple more centimetres added to the wheelbase, unless the design is also integral to proposals for lowering speed limits to save fuel. An interesting story is behind that... but on topic, the Tesla was not entirely innovative in its concept, it was more innovative in its success in bringing such a project to successful low-volume production, which may become mass production.

 

[Jim Prower]

It's funny how an ocean can divide people.

You're absolutely right: Europe's roads were designed in the era of the cart and horse, more often than not, while America's roads were mostly designed after 1900, especially in the west. Cars for the shorter distances between cities and locations in Europe means they're smaller in general.

I find it a bit interesting how railroads developed in Britain and the U.S., too. Initially, the systems were almost identical, but the short distance between cities comes into factor: British engineers made a smaller loading gauge for their trains to save money, since they didn't need to haul as much as far. In the '20s and '30s, The major express trains were often only six cars. Compare this to the U.S., which had major named trains that were almost 20 cars, sometimes even longer. This was often due to the major expanse between cities, requiring dining cars, sleeping cars, and others equipment. European freight equipment is smaller too: Many of today's freight is containerized, and while Euro container cars can only carry one level of containers, U.S. cars can carry one container stacked atop another. Rails tend to be heavier, runs longer...you're getting the picture. It's distance that the reason our cars are bigger.

I'd challenge someone to cross the U.S. in a smart fortwo. I doubt it's too terribly comfortable on long trips. Granted, it's still a great little city car, but I'm out here in Suburbia...actually a little burg in the middle of a cornfield...and it's not exactly ideal to walk or bicycle everywhere.

 

[TheCracker]

I'd challenge someone to cross the U.S. in a smart fortwo. I doubt it's too terribly comfortable on long trips. Granted, it's still a great little city car, but I'm out here in Suburbia...actually a little burg in the middle of a cornfield...and it's not exactly ideal to walk or bicycle everywhere.

That's why a lot of europeans would seriously consider one of these as a second car, i know i would. If you live in a city and have to commute across town or even try to park in town, with the price of fuel and the amount of congestion we have people are looking into ways they can stop using their (normal) car so much. Public transport is a joke and the roads are dangerous for cyclists. Give people a viable option where they can still have their own safe, private transport that doesn't cost a fortune to buy or run and can be parked more easily in our crowded city centres and people will be very interested. However, they'll probably want to keep something bigger for those longer motorway journeys when visiting Aunt Flo.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I'd challenge someone to cross the U.S. in a smart fortwo. I doubt it's too terribly comfortable on long trips. Granted, it's still a great little city car, but I'm out here in Suburbia...actually a little burg in the middle of a cornfield...and it's not exactly ideal to walk or bicycle everywhere.

CAR Magazine did it a few years ago, said it actually wasn't too bad given how low speed limits are. This is two people and a full week's worth of clothes, and camera supplies. I definitely don't believe it'd be as comfortable as a regular hatch, but if you can put up with the drone on the highway, I don't think it'd be too bad.

 

[Jim Prower]

I probably could live with it...Has around the same PWR as my Nova would. That car's not exactly a highway star, by any means, but it could be done.

 

[ExigeEvan]

There's some Epic fail going on in this thread.

Murray has written a few articles in Evo magazine about his plans for a small city car, with efficiency derived from losing weight and not some fancy engine. Sure, this isn't ground breaking, but it adds to a market which is being taken more and more seriously in Europe.

I would argue that the Tesla Roadster is more revolutionary because it pioneers into the potentials and capability of alternative fuels -

Wrong. Electricity is not a fuel. Electricity just allows us to store energy much more easily. Currently the western nations are struggling to meet current elecrical demand through re-newable sources without us all plugging in our electric cars at night. And lets not even start on the dependability of wind power, the future hope of fussion and the NIMBY that comes with fission and large scale re-newable.

which is what the world needs right now, not another gas sucker (and I don't care for the "81mpg" rating).

The you really, really need to come sample our fuel prices.

The Tesla traveled 220 miles on one charge, and gets to 60mph in less than 4 seconds (at least the later models). They've figured out how to make that electrical engine perform in both aspects of economy and sports applications, while also still being practical enough to produce... maybe not mass produce yet, but that will come in time.

220 miles on one charge for a sports car. Cool. So wait... what if you want to use it for anything more than the daily commute? A road trip? A track day? You have to a) ask someone if you can use their electricity, and agree a price b) wait while it recharges when you're in the middle of something.

Electricity is not the future for anything other than commuter cars, unless they can get recharged in reasonable time.

Once a big company finally sees what Tesla Motors research is doing and finds a way to take advantage of their electrical motors and starts to implement them in standard vehicles that fit the every day, practical needs of a full fledge family (full sized sedans, full sized SUV's, trucks, mini-vans) that'll then be a revolution. It's still very prehistoric right now, but car companies have proven to simplify and condense and significantly up technology if it means marginal profit gains.

I don't think many manufacturers will be researching into electric cars as anything more than commuter cars for the future. If you can show me different please do, but as highlighted by my point above, how can it be practical?

.... But this? This isn't revolutionary, not even close.

True, it's a stop-gap, an inbetweener, a temporary measure. But dammit, it'll be one of the best we get hopefully.

 

[Kent]

I'd say electricity is fuel. In fact, I'd say any source of energy used to fuel machinery of any kind could be called a fuel. True, it isn't the traditional gasoline fuel but none the less I'd say electricity (when powering a car) is a fuel.
Of course, it's really just a matter of semantics. Still not a good reason to jump on someone's case.

Likewise, by the definition wikipedia provides, electricity should be considered fuel.
"Fuel is any material that is burned or altered in order to obtain energy.[1] Fuel releases its energy either through a chemical reaction means, such as combustion, or nuclear means, such as nuclear fission or nuclear fusion. An important property of a useful fuel is that its energy can be stored to be released only when needed, and that the release is controlled in such a way that the energy can be harnessed to produce work."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel

 

[ExigeEvan]

Sure, you could refer to electricity as a fuel if renewable sources were used. But by using conventional sources such as fossil fuels and fission material it would be impractical see electricity as a fuel rather than just a means of converting energy to a more conveniant form.

When produced from renewable sources (wind, hydro, tidal) I'd call it a fundamental energy source and thus a fuel, but like I said before, if everyone was to go to electricity for their cars, or even just those for commuting, we'd have an extremely difficult time to produce energy outside of fossil fuel use as fission often meets the NIMBY argument and the rest are far off being reliable, efficient and dependable enough.

Still not a good reason to jump on someone's case.

Then my apoligies, but he was very strongly against the concept of this car, and put forward an alternative that I felt was very weak in comparison.

 

[niky]

Electricity is a medium for carrying energy... but the question is, and has always been, where you get the electricity from.

In the end, electric cars will probably be a part of our transport grid, but make no mistake... cars like the Tesla aren't really pushing any envelope... like I've said, the TZero and Fetish have already covered this ground before... Instead, what we are looking for is advances in electric storage that will make these vehicles practical and cheap to manufacture.

Now look at this electric vehicle:

Doesn't look like much, huh? It's basically going to be a Ssangyong Actyon shell with an electric motor and battery packs in it.

But in many ways, this is a revolutionary electric car...

Phoenix claims that the "NanoSafe" battery packs will give it a 250 mile range... on a ten minute charge. Whether that's vaporware or not, only time will tell (and production is getting very close)... but if it's true... that means that you can drive 200 miles, stop, top off at a filling station in just a little more time than you would take to top off a gasoline vehicle, then drive back.

If that becomes a reality... then that's moved the game further forward than any electric "sports" car can.


EDIT: Of course, they've been claiming close to production for over a year now, so it might be vaporware... so, WTF. There's always RedLION... which is trying to develop cheaper LiIon packs.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Phoenix claims that the "NanoSafe" battery packs will give it a 250 mile range... on a ten minute charge.

That's pretty s***hot!

 

[superberkut]

Indeed revolutionary!

Is Ssangyong in any way involved with the coachwork?

 

[Jim Prower]

Ssangyong builds the entire vehicle sans drivetrain. Phoenix electrifies 'em...or so it's supposed to be.

I wonder if Ssangyong is having trouble getting up to crash standard.

 

[tehFAO]

There's some Epic fail going on in this thread.

... you know, I respect everyone's opinion. I at least expect everyone else to respect mine as well... and yes it's very obvious that when you say "fail" you're talking about my post.

Wrong. Electricity is not a fuel. Electricity just allows us to store energy much more easily. Currently the western nations are struggling to meet current elecrical demand through re-newable sources without us all plugging in our electric cars at night. And lets not even start on the dependability of wind power, the future hope of fussion and the NIMBY that comes with fission and large scale re-newable.

Electricity is not the future for anything other than commuter cars, unless they can get recharged in reasonable time.

Whether or not electricy, hydrogen, wind, solar, or foot pedals is destined to be out alternate fuel... I don't know. I never claimed to have known what is next.

All I know is that it's pretty damn obvious, and even you should see it, that gasoline isn't. It's done and over, and plenty of companies see it and are taking action and are bringing to the market different things... they're all moving towards (or are in the process of researching) alternative fuels. I already tried to explain the whole research and innovate, and condensing, and making practical enough to produce... I'm not going to re-quote myself. So I'd rather you just go back and re-read my last post because that's all I got to contribute.

I thought I made it pretty cut and dry, and I tried to explain what I meant, but I guess I'm talking crazy witchcraft tongues or something. Excuse my out of the box visions. I just don't have cavemen mentality like one other of our members here. Oh well...

 

[ExigeEvan]

... you know, I respect everyone's opinion. I at least expect everyone else to respect mine as well... and yes it's very obvious that when you say "fail" you're talking about my post.

I'm actually not, so sorry to disappoint. There was a reason it was placed before your quotes and not after.

Whether or not electricy, hydrogen, wind, solar, or foot pedals is destined to be out alternate fuel... I don't know. I never claimed to have known what is next.

Well you sounded quite definitive when you stated this.

Once a big company finally sees what Tesla Motors research is doing and finds a way to take advantage of their electrical motors and starts to implement them in standard vehicles that fit the every day, practical needs of a full fledge family (full sized sedans, full sized SUV's, trucks, mini-vans) that'll then be a revolution.

Now that's not to say you know its the future, but you are certainly very suportive of it, as I am against it.

I thought I made it pretty cut and dry, and I tried to explain what I meant, but I guess I'm talking crazy witchcraft tongues or something. Excuse my out of the box visions. I just don't have cavemen mentality like one other of our members here. Oh well...

You did make it cut and dry, in support of electric vehicles. I made it very cut and dry against electric vehicles. You're visions aren't out of the box, just opposite to how I see things, now if you want to counter what I said then go for it, hell you've had it handed on a plate to you with the "quick charge" article posted below. Sure it's not solid source, but it's something. It's a forum, discuss, don't cry foul cause I got a little strong on the topic.