musings on transportation

For something we enjoy for maybe an hour (if you’re lucky) or perhaps 3-4, per day, if things are not so good, we spend a lot of time choosing and researching, and then paying for what we decide on. When you consider how many people drive, for their commutes or errands, in congested areas and often with only one person in the car, the performance we pay for, that the ads tell us we have to have, will never be used.

…In this region, given the constrictions created by increasingly crowded bridges over waterways, I wish all cars were controlled by a central management system from the approaches at each end, to avoid the ricks as people try to cut in line and as drive operate their vehicles at different speeds while on the bridges.

Who needs more than this?

t500_01.jpgThe T500 used the same engine as the famous S500 roadster, cranking out a whopping 38HP and 31 lb-ft of torque, yet that was still enough to get it to highway speeds (barely) with a fuel economy of around 50MPG. There is nothing about this truck I don’t love. I really wish vehicles like this were the default choice for today’s driver. Sure, it could only haul around 880 pounds of stuff, but how often does the average person need to move around more than that? [From Vintage Brochure for 1964 Honda T500 Truck – Boing Boing Gadgets ]

Had occasion to hit my local IKEA today, and noted that it is more than 50 miles round trip — 2 gallons of gas @ US$3.29, so almost $7.00. And it struck me that for some things, it might make more sense to order them and have them shipped that it will make to go get them yourself. So many places offer free shipping, if you can wait/afford to let them maximize the logistical benefits.

The car, as we know it, all luxurious, with its elegant appointments, hot-and-cold running mp3 player, four-speed windshield wipers, and full-race floormats, might be pricing itself out of our lives.

Look at the little Honda truck, ca. 1964. How does it differ, functionally, from the SMART car of today? 2 seats, limited carrying capacity, extremely tight design/space usage, and exceptional economic value. I suspect few people who take the plunge on a SMART or something similar suddenly wish they had a bigger car with more stuff.

The amount of money people allocate to cars has always baffled me. Where with most things people buy, the argument seems to be to buy the smallest that makes sense, in housing or appliances, etc. but in cars, it always seem to be, buy the most you can afford. For something we enjoy for maybe an hour (if you’re lucky) or perhaps 3-4, per day, if things are not so good, we spend a lot of time choosing and researching, and then paying for what we decide on.

When you consider how many people drive, for their commutes or errands, in congested areas and often with only one person in the car, the performance we pay for, that the ads tell us we have to have, will never be used. Hundreds of horsepower, idling, inaccessible and unused in one traffic jam after another.

So what if we all had smaller cars, 2 passengers for most daily drivers, and maybe similarly designed mini (micro?) vans for those who need them? Better fuel economy and congestion relief due to the smaller, lighter vehicles might be an immediate reward. Perhaps lighter cars might stimulate development of alternative power systems or make the ones in existence more feasible to use (pushing a 1500 lb car is different from a 3000 pounder, after all).

What about the technology available today that would make a smaller car like that more useful? From new materials to mechanical improvements, and new finishes, to more comfort and greater safety.

I picked up an old Polaroid camera the other week with a sonar-based focusing device. Now if Polaroid can put one of those in a camera that sold for well under $100 20 years ago, what could be done with them in cars? Imagine a collision detection system that could alert the driver to an accident, or perhaps even help prevent it, by applying the brakes. People feel like they are in control of their cars — and we see what that gets us — but an onboard monitoring system that kept an eye on surrounding traffic and could do everything but drive the car might be a good thing. In this region, given the constrictions created by increasingly crowded bridges over waterways, I wish all cars were controlled by a central management system from the approaches at each end, to avoid the risks as people try to cut in line and as drive operate their vehicles at different speeds while on the bridges.

OK, so that last bit was pie in the sky, but I think there is room for improvement: let the old T500 be our guide.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *