Auto X Prize hits home stretch

Edison2

One of the Edison2 team's Very Light Cars registered fuel efficiency of 101.4 MPGe before penalties were assessed. Edison2 ranks among the front-runners to win a share of the $10 million Progressive Insurance Automotive X Prize purse.

A $10 million competition for ultra-efficient vehicles is rolling on toward next month's finals after eliminating about a dozen of the cars vying for the prize.

The Progressive Insurance Automotive X Prize competition is aimed at rewarding the development of marketable automobiles capable of getting of 100 miles per gallon of gasoline, or the equivalent for other energy sources (a measure known as MPGe). Almost half of the cars that came to the Michigan International Speedway for the contest's Knockout stage, conducted at the Michigan International Speedway in Brooklyn, Mich., had to go home with wounded hopes.

At the most, 15 cars are still in the running for a share of the X Prize purse. And until the organizers announce the official lineup for the on-track finals, due to take place July 19-30, there's a chance that additional cars could yet be eliminated.

But there are clear front-runners for the $10 million, based on this week's results:

• If anyone is going to win the $5 million set aside for four-seat mainstream cars this year, it will be the Edison2 team, led by Virginia real estate developer Oliver Kuttner. The only vehicles left in that competition category are two of the models entered by Edison2. One of the team's hybrid Very Light Cars achieved 101.4 MPGe before penalties were assessed. But after accounting for those penalties (deducted due to repairs, drive cycle violations or other no-nos), its score fell to 67.3, barely above the 67 MPGe requirement for this round. Edison2 also has a tandem two-seater vying for an alternative prize.

• Li-ion Motors' all-electric Wave II registered the highest fuel efficiency among side-by-side two-seaters, with a 182.3 MPGe performance. That's a front-running performance among "alternative" cars in the Knockout stage. But winning $2.5 million in the finals could require speed as well as efficiency. If multiple cars satisfy all the requirements during the finals, including the 100 MPGe standard, then the prize goes to the car with the lowest elapsed time during an on-track trial that's designed to test efficiency as well as range. The side-by-side class has eight entrants, so this is potentially the most competitive category.

• Switzerland's X-Tracer Team had not just one, but two tandem two-seaters entered in the Knockout stage, and both of them were passed through to the finals. The X-Tracer cars (which look more like glorified motorcycles) had the highest efficiency scores in their class, at 180 and 171.6 MPGe. That makes them the front-runners for the $2.5 million in the tandem alternative category. During the Knockout stage, they were the only cars in their class to achieve better than 100 MPGe efficiency.

There are also plenty of disappointments. Among the teams eliminated over the past week and a half are American HyPower, BITW Technologies, Enginer, FVT Racing, Global-E, Illuminati Motor Works, OptaMotive, Team EVX and West Philly Hybrid X. The Cornell 100+ MPG Team, K-Way MOTUS and Liberty Motors Group withdrew even before the Knockout trials got started last week.

The Knockout outcome was particularly disappointing for the West Philly team, a high-school group that garnered more and more attention as the contest progressed; and for the Illuminati gang, whose retro-looking electric car offered the only competition for the Edison2 team in the mainstream class. The Illuminati Seven vehicle posted an impressive 119.8 MPGe score in the efficiency trials.

"We're out," Illuminati announced in a Twitter tweet on Monday evening. "Despite amazing efficiency MPGe, we were knocked out when our transmission broke during the Consumer Reports 0-60 test."

West Philly's converted Ford Focus fell 3.5 points short of the required efficiency score of 67 MPGe, apparently due in part to a battery-charging snafu. Simon Hauger, the West Philadelphia High School teacher who led the team, was philosophical in his Monday-morning blog post:

"Our game plan was right on, our cars ran perfectly, and our kids amazed everyone who had the pleasure of meeting them. We proved to the world that a bunch of high school kids and their teachers can build a safe, affordable, American-made car that gets over 75 mpg (over 100 mpg on the highway). This is a real car that has a real business plan. It was built by real kids and what they have done has real significance."

That's the bottom line for the X Prize phenomenon. It's not about the $10 million. ... OK, maybe it's partly about the $10 million. But in the longer run, it's about bursts of innovation that will yield real payoffs in the years to come. I can hardly wait to see how the next burst plays out.

Learn more about the teams still standing after the Knockout round:

Mainstream Class Teams:
Mainstream Class vehicles must carry four or more passengers, have four or more wheels, and offer a 200-mile range.

Edison2, Lynchburg, Virginia (E85, two cars)

Alternative Class Teams:
Alternative Class vehicles must carry two or more passengers and allow for a 100-mile range.

Side-by-side seating:

amp, Blue Ash, Ohio (Electric)
Aptera Motors, Vista, California (Electric)
Li-ion Motors at EV Innovations, Mooresville, North Carolina (Electric)
RaceAbout Association, Helsinki, Finland (Electric)
Tata Motors Limited, Coventry, United Kingdom (Electric)
TW4XP, Rosenthal, Germany (Electric)
Western Washington University, Bellingham, Washington (Gasoline)
ZAP, Santa Rosa, California (Electric)

Tandem seating:

Edison2, Lynchburg, Virginia (E85)
Spira, Banglamung, Chonburi, Thailand (Gasoline)
Tango (Commuter Cars), Spokane, Washington (Electric)
X-Tracer Team Switzerland, Uster, Switzerland (Electric, two cars)

Check out our slideshow of X Prize competitors from the earlier Shakedown stage of the competition. And for still more about Edison2, click through to Jason Fagone's report for Slate.

Update for 1:30 p.m. ET June 30: A new spreadsheet from the X Prize lays out what happened during the Knockout stage in further detail. Most of the eliminated cars failed to reach the minimum 67 MPGe requirement, with a smattering of cars that flunked the emissions test or the technical inspection, didn't achieve 0-to-60 acceleration or simply didn't show up in time for an on-track event.

"The Knockout was just that - a true knockout - which surprised some of the teams with its rigor," Cristin Lindsay, vice president of prize operations for the X Prize Foundation, told me.

The finals could bring similar surprises. As an example, Lindsay pointed to Illuminati's transmission failure during the acceleration trial. "I could see that type of thing happening at finals again," she said. So get ready for some even more serious chills and thrills in the weeks ahead.

On the correction front, meanwhile, TW4XP is in the side-by-side alternative class, rather than the tandem class where I initially listed it.


Join the Cosmic Log corps by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. And if you really want to be friendly, ask me about "The Case for Pluto."

Discuss this post

Well the MSNBC reply bunch is growing tired of this MPG hype! 100+ MPG is nothing. Any Master Mechanic can build a hundred MPG in his garage. From parts on the market now. HHO is a working idea now. Kits are on the market that work now. A HHO gasoline mixer really does work. Go on Ebay now and find hundreds of ready made kits to bolt on to your Dodge Colt or old VW. Big motorcycles with HHO kits get 150 MPG+ Want your car converted to use 50% HHO? I'm more then able to help you out. and install a working kit for you. Legal in every state!

    Reply#1 - Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:47 PM EDT

    The only "HHO" entry in the contest, American HyPower, was eliminated early on. It didn't meet the fuel economy requirement of 67 MPG, and the performance was unimpressive.

    Due to the bulky nature of "electrolysis gas", the modest improvement in fuel economy comes with a rather dramatic reduction in power and performance. One could get the same or better results with a smaller engine, or just going light on the accelerator and brake pedals.

    Fiddle around with that "HHO" fad if you want, but don't count on it to solve our petroleum problems.

      #1.1 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 5:46 PM EDT
      Reply

      Ten to one the winning car with be ugly as sin and a major turnoff to the public. Cant have a nice looking E car that we would want to buy and if it were nice looking would be very pricey. Oil lobbyists are not going to allow a inexpensive nice looking efficient electric car into the market. These contests are a smoke screen to give the impression that our government really cares about cheaper, cleaner transportation and any patents on new technology will end up in their hands lost forever.

        Reply#2 - Wed Jun 30, 2010 6:27 AM EDT

        Dont get your underwear in a bind, these are experimental vehicles, as such they are not designed for aesthetic beauty. Its what is inside that counts, be assured that if these were to make it into production it would look good and not ugly as sin.

          #2.1 - Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:47 AM EDT

          In case you didn't notice, this isn't a government run contest, it is run by the X Prize foundation and sponsored by Progressive Insurance.

          Granted, some of those vehicles are ugly, and they are all a bit unconventional, but that may be what's required to reach that fuel economy goal. I think "over 100 mpg equivalent" is darn beautiful!

            #2.2 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 5:32 PM EDT
            Reply

            Many of the other vehicles were squealing and barely made it.

              Reply#3 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:43 AM EDT

              Question how can some of these super light cars ever be
              certified in the USA?.

                Reply#4 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:53 AM EDT

                They all needed to be tested and certified as street legal even before the road tests began. The contest started last year with over 140 entrants. Many dropped out because they couldn't meet "street legal" standards, or they didn't have a business plan for production, or they were not able to actually build a functioning vehicle in time. Several never got past the drawing board stage.

                Certification isn't based on weight, it is based on handling and braking and stability and other safety features. It is possible for an ultralight to get certified.

                BTW, not all the entrants were "ultra-light". Some were modifications of existing vehicles and had a similar or greater weight compared to the vehicles they were based on. IIRC, the Illuminati vehicle weighed about 1,700 lbs.

                  #4.1 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 5:57 PM EDT
                  Reply

                  I agree, it is extremely hard to make FMVSS for 4 wheels, that’s why
                  Some of the companies have only 3

                    Reply#5 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:55 AM EDT

                    It’s strange because the X-prize rules say must be production ready and meet all of the FMVSS rules.

                      Reply#6 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:56 AM EDT

                      I think of all the finalists, the car I would want to actually own is the Alias.

                        Reply#7 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 8:57 AM EDT

                        Personally, I think the Alias looks like the unholy mating of a corn harvester with a Harley., the front end is hideous. If I wanted a 3 wheeler, I'd much rather have the Aptera or the K-Way.

                          #7.1 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 6:24 PM EDT
                          Reply

                          Can you buy an Alias now?

                          Yes you can reserve one on the zapworld.com website

                            Reply#8 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 9:01 AM EDT

                            How in the world could the LION car ever survive a crash test? It’s impossible.
                            I think the same is true for the Edison 2 cars and the Tata mini car.

                              Reply#9 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 9:01 AM EDT

                              Tata is the only major auto manufacturer in the contest, it is based in India but is starting sales in Europe. They do know how to pass the crash testing.

                                #9.1 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 6:05 PM EDT
                                Reply

                                If Tesla Stock is taking off , maybe ZAAP will be next?

                                  Reply#10 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 9:02 AM EDT

                                  Speaking of stock, Zap has a long history of glowing press announcements for products that never make it to market - a deal with Obvio, plans to sell Smart cars (that Daimler never agreed to), and most notorious, the "Zap-X" with literally unbelievable specs based on a mock-up of a Lotus prototype SUV. None of those are or will be sold. That has lead to charges that Zap is running "pump and dump" stock manipulation for their own profits.

                                  The legitimate division of Zap sells the low speed short range 3 wheeled "Xebra" and a tiny short range "Zappy" scooter. Not all that impressive.

                                  The only thing remarkable about the Zap "Alias" is that they actually managed to build (or have someone else build for them) a fully functional prototype. One wonders if it will face the same fate as "Obvio" or "Zap-X".

                                    #10.1 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 6:18 PM EDT

                                    If none of the 'mainstream' entries 'makes it' perhaps it is time to start thinking of electric vehicles in a different way.

                                    There is no reason for every road user to have 'a car' is there? The E-tracer type of vehicle starts to make a lot of sense for most trips which are single occupant + light luggage driving to work in traffic, parking all day and then driving home. Why have a large vehicle clogging up the roads and parking spaces simply for that? And a large vehicle takes more energy to run, so a narrower, lighter and more aerodynamic two-seater EV will go further and/or faster.

                                    Of course we'll need larger to run our lives as we do now - but it might be time to consider that all vehicles do not need to be like that.

                                      #10.2 - Tue Jul 6, 2010 3:53 AM EDT
                                      Reply

                                      One obvious question is: What happens if none of the "Mainstream" entries makes it to the finals? That is entirely possible considering the problems the Edison2 design has reaching the desired fuel economy. Will they simply award that money to whomever comes closest, or will they hold onto the money and try the contest again next year?

                                      I'm hoping they won't settle for "almost good enough" and keep trying until someone meets their high standards.

                                        Reply#11 - Fri Jul 2, 2010 6:30 PM EDT
                                        You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                        As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.