Project Titan, SixtyEight & SG5: Inside Apple's top-secret electric car project

123457

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 146
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    paul94544 wrote: »
    You guys are freaking hilarious. Apple is not making a car. The idea is laughable,
    It isn't laughable at all. Thise interest in this thread, in my mind anyways, reflects the desire of many to see Apple bring something entirely new to market hopefully at a decent price. The electric vehicle market is frankly stagnet right now and needs a kick in the pants so to speak with an advanced design and hopefully next generation battery technology.
    I bet the folks down in Cupertino read this thread everyday to have a good laugh, even adding comments to wind you up even more.
    I'm certian people at Apple do read these forums. I've seen evidence of this happening and even suggestions eventually being implemented into a design or two. Actually it would be silly for the management team at Apple to not be aware of what the community thinks and speculates about.
    They are testing out CarPlay and navigation , that is all folks rofl. The posters who are serious about this have a special room up in Napa reserved for ya

    Sadly you could be right. On the other hand Apple is the only company with the resources to deliver something truly new to the electrical vehicle marketplace.
  • Reply 122 of 146
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    wizard69 wrote: »
    This is perhaps the most asinine statement I've seen in years on this forum. Most of modern car design is about hitting government regulations dealing with fuel efficiency and driver surviability. This leads to a whole bunch of look a like designs because aerodynamics only leaves you with so many options especially when combined with designs that allow the driver to survive front end collisions.
    I wouldn't expect Apple to settle on anything until they can prove that it realistically meets the parameters they have to meet to sell a car in the USA. I'd honestly be interested in a van like vehicle more so than a sedan, however if Apple offered up something like you pictured I'd walk away mainly because I can see how such a vehicle would be safe to drive. The driver looks like he would have his feet on the bumper in that Fiat.

    Beyond that what is with the swoops and angles? Agian the issue with design cars today is fuel economy and that is reached with good aerodynamic design as a important element to a successful design. As such you don't throw a lot of swoops and angles into a design. Instead you have designs that blend surfaces to allow unimpedded air flow. Modern aerodynamic cars actually have a very appealing look to me.
    I have to agree with the idea that Porsche has some nice looking cars and still does frankly. However I don't see Apple competing with them. Rather I see them trying to build something with a far wider appeal, at least in the first vehicle shipped.

    In a nut shell I don't see your opinion of modern car design as having any weight at all. Form follows function and that has driven us to the current situation with the sedan marketplace. Even commercial vans have had to adopt aerodynamics into their designs. A commercial van use to be nothing more than a box on wheels, these days though rounded and flowing designs are an important design element to eek out all the fuel economy possible.

    Thanks for your opening compliment.

    Like I said to Mel, i agree about the aerodynamics. But he was posting obscene pictures of cars that offend every peace-loving soul who hasn't sold out emotionally to the James Bond-auto industrial complex. : )

    I exaggerate, but do you remember when BMW started their billboard campaign for their second Z-car model? The caption on the billboard was "Land Shark."

    Acura was recently selling that hideous wedgey thing as something like "controlled aggression."

    There's no way to explain a Dodge Ram pickup without referring to its pose of in-your-face phallic aggression.

    All I was saying to Mel was, don't expect Apple to follow the current depraved state of car design. This pandering to male insecurity or power lust will be as ridiculous as 50s tailfins in 10 years, max.

    As for that little Fiat minivan, I wasn't suggesting it as a real possibility, and i'm amazed you would understand it that way. I was just remarking on the humane design. This goes beyond the mere profile, but involves the skin treatment, the colors, the sensuousness of the radii of the curves, etc. the stuff Apple designers pay the most attention to, in other words. And like I say, just turn the thing around in your imagination, put the driver in the other end. Instant drag reduction.
  • Reply 123 of 146
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Not sure why the article mentions SixtyEight importing a 1957 Fiat Multipla 600 but doesn't include a picture of that model.
    They probably wanted to avoid comments about the van appearance. However the concept is not that bad at all if it was modernized for current world. That would mean making it safer complying with current regulations. The center of gravity needs to be lowered and more profiling done to address aerodynamics.
    This is probably why they are said to be working on a mini van, not because of the mapping project using Dodge Caravans.

    Most likely the doge vans and the "car" project are completely separate.. The teams might not even know that the other exists. Well maybe not until all of this reporting.

    A Mini Van makes a lot of sense for an electric platform as it provides a way remain flexible about the power supply. The reality is the "battery" source can change drastically of the course of a models existence. Further a Mini van benefits from a low positioning of the battery.

    Beyond all of that nothing viable at all has come from other manufactures as far as an electric van goes.
  • Reply 124 of 146
    flaneur wrote: »
    wizard69 wrote: »
    This is perhaps the most asinine statement I've seen in years on this forum. Most of modern car design is about hitting government regulations dealing with fuel efficiency and driver surviability. This leads to a whole bunch of look a like designs because aerodynamics only leaves you with so many options especially when combined with designs that allow the driver to survive front end collisions.
    I wouldn't expect Apple to settle on anything until they can prove that it realistically meets the parameters they have to meet to sell a car in the USA. I'd honestly be interested in a van like vehicle more so than a sedan, however if Apple offered up something like you pictured I'd walk away mainly because I can see how such a vehicle would be safe to drive. The driver looks like he would have his feet on the bumper in that Fiat.

    Beyond that what is with the swoops and angles? Agian the issue with design cars today is fuel economy and that is reached with good aerodynamic design as a important element to a successful design. As such you don't throw a lot of swoops and angles into a design. Instead you have designs that blend surfaces to allow unimpedded air flow. Modern aerodynamic cars actually have a very appealing look to me.
    I have to agree with the idea that Porsche has some nice looking cars and still does frankly. However I don't see Apple competing with them. Rather I see them trying to build something with a far wider appeal, at least in the first vehicle shipped.

    In a nut shell I don't see your opinion of modern car design as having any weight at all. Form follows function and that has driven us to the current situation with the sedan marketplace. Even commercial vans have had to adopt aerodynamics into their designs. A commercial van use to be nothing more than a box on wheels, these days though rounded and flowing designs are an important design element to eek out all the fuel economy possible.

    Thanks for your opening compliment.

    Like I said to Mel, i agree about the aerodynamics. But he was posting obscene pictures of cars that offend every peace-loving soul who hasn't sold out emotionally to the James Bond-auto industrial complex. : )

    I exaggerate, but do you remember when BMW started their billboard campaign for their second Z-car model? The caption on the billboard was "Land Shark."

    Acura was recently selling that hideous wedgey thing as something like "controlled aggression."

    There's no way to explain a Dodge Ram pickup without referring to its pose of in-your-face phallic aggression.

    All I was saying to Mel was, don't expect Apple to follow the current depraved state of car design. This pandering to male insecurity or power lust will be as ridiculous as 50s tailfins in 10 years, max.

    As for that little Fiat minivan, I wasn't suggesting it as a real possibility, and i'm amazed you would understand it that way. I was just remarking on the humane design. This goes beyond the mere profile, but involves the skin treatment, the colors, the sensuousness of the radii of the curves, etc. the stuff Apple designers pay the most attention to, in other words. And like I say, just turn the thing around in your imagination, put the driver in the other end. Instant drag reduction.

    You can't beat the Ferrari Testarossa.

    It has power and elegance. Not many sports cars do.
  • Reply 125 of 146
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    flaneur wrote: »
    Thanks for your opening compliment.

    Like I said to Mel, i agree about the aerodynamics. But he was posting obscene pictures of cars that offend every peace-loving soul who hasn't sold out emotionally to the James Bond-auto industrial complex. : )
    For many those picture imply fun. Trying to link fun to obscenity isn't helping your argument.
    I exaggerate, but do you remember when BMW started their billboard campaign for their second Z-car model? The caption on the billboard was "Land Shark."

    Acura was recently selling that hideous wedgey thing as something like "controlled aggression."
    Actually I pay little attention to marketing for sedans of any type these days. As such I don't link anyone design with agression or any other characteristics your fantasies attach to them. Let's face it you can use sex to market anything from a crowbar to a bull dozer. That doesn't imply that the actual machine is all about agression. Yes I know the examples of a crowbar or a bull dozer may not be good here but even a bull dozer can be used to build something beautiful.
    There's no way to explain a Dodge Ram pickup without referring to its pose of in-your-face phallic aggression.
    Actually I'm driving the cheapest Chevy pickup I could find with a rather anemic engine. It is the opposite of agression. I drive it not because of its size but because I can fit in it and drive it while wearing size 16 winter boots. By design a pickup is a better choice for winters around here than a low slung sedan. Sometimes people buy things due to them being practical choices.

    On the other hand a good portion of the pickup market goes to people that use them intensively and do need a tough reliable vehicle. It would be foolish to market a truck without appealing to the people that use them in their businesses. Having grown up in farm country I've seen how these vehicles are used, powder puff marketing would be a complete failure.

    Frankly this is much different that the marketing of tractors. They need to be seen as capable or masculine. A machine that breaks down generates an almost instant reputation as farmers talk.
    All I was saying to Mel was, don't expect Apple to follow the current depraved state of car design. This pandering to male insecurity or power lust will be as ridiculous as 50s tailfins in 10 years, max.
    This is frankly baloney, have you never end an afternoon on a snowmobile having fun? Spent a weekend on a lake with a canoe? Or maybe traveled through the mountains just to enjoy the beauty? These sorts of things are what these masculine vehicles where designed for, to get out there and enjoy life.
    As for that little Fiat minivan, I wasn't suggesting it as a real possibility, and i'm amazed you would understand it that way. I was just remarking on the humane design.
    Maybe you misunderstood me, there is nothing humane about that design. In some ways it looks like the result of a ten year old with an erector set. Further a humane design takes into account the driver of that machine and his safety which that design fails at.

    My point is that a Mini van is a good concept for Apple to go after. Take some of the concepts seen in that van and modernize them for the current world and you might have a successful product.
    This goes beyond the mere profile, but involves the skin treatment, the colors, the sensuousness of the radii of the curves, etc. the stuff Apple designers pay the most attention to, in other words.
    Maybe the net broke down and I'm looking at a different picture but there is nothing sensuous about that design. Pretty revolting actually.
    And like I say, just turn the thing around in your imagination, put the driver in the other end. Instant drag reduction.

    You don't need to turn the design around. Adjust the nose a bit and repositioning the driver would do wonders. Address the center of gravity issue and you are on your way to something acceptable.
  • Reply 126 of 146
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,513moderator
    flaneur wrote: »
    This pandering to male insecurity or power lust will be as ridiculous as 50s tailfins in 10 years, max.

    Pandering to male insecurity is timeless even for boring cars:

    1000

    The problem is they keep making new men and these men reach an age when they have to attract women and there's no training on how to do that. Women don't say what it is they want so men just have to try and judge their vague reactions to things by trial and error. If you skip to 1:35, I'd say that reaction is quite conclusive:


    [VIDEO]


    If you up the age though, you get a different reaction, you can't please everybody:


    [VIDEO]
  • Reply 127 of 146
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    ^ Marvin, if it isn't obvious to you that the new Camero, say, or the Ford Raptor pickup, embody male aggression, and that they are extreme examples of a general style in car design that's been working for decades, then I give up. All i'm saying is that Apple isn't going to go that route, in my opinion, and they're likely to avoid that look as toxic.
  • Reply 128 of 146
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    Boobies!
  • Reply 129 of 146
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,513moderator
    flaneur wrote: »
    ^ Marvin, if it isn't obvious to you that the new Camero, say, or the Ford Raptor pickup, embody male aggression, and that they are extreme examples of a general style in car design that's been working for decades, then I give up. All i'm saying is that Apple isn't going to go that route, in my opinion, and they're likely to avoid that look as toxic.

    I didn't use those examples. I used examples of cars Jony Ive and Steve Jobs owned themselves. Why wouldn't they design a car like the cars they owned and drove? Mercedes SL, Aston Martin Vanquish, Porsche. Tim Cook drives a BMW and he used to own a Porsche Boxster:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2819514/Multimillionaire-Apple-CEO-Tim-Cooks-spends-54th-birthday-getting-groceries-car-wash-sitting-bench-read-iPad.html



    1000

    Phil Schiller drives an Audi R8. Jeff Williams drives an old Toyota Camry but we can ignore that.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-considered-making-a-camera-or-even-a-car-before-the-iphone-2012-8

    Are you getting it? Mercedes, Porsche, Bentley, Aston Martin, Audi, BMW. Not a Fiat in sight. You honestly think that these guys would give up their awesome cars to drive around in some little bubble car their mothers would drive? They can make more than one model of course like Tesla does. Some people want a minivan, some people want a city car, some people want a family car, some people want a supercar. The top price wouldn't need to exceed $100k because it's really just the body that changes from one model to the next, except the solid gold one - that one will cost millions.
  • Reply 130 of 146
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    [B]^[/B] Ok, the Aston Martin will do for an example. Why do they call it the Vanquish? That's a little better than the Raptor or the Avenger, maybe, but the same idea.

    It's possible that Jony Ive, having wrecked his Aston Martin on the freeway at 80 mph or whatever, now has a different idea about the whole thrust of the aggresso-car use case. I know I do, after seeing what goes on with the Ferraris and Carreras, not to mention the BMWs, on the LA freeways. It's deeply disturbing, testosterone madness. I used to see it in the Bay Area as well.

    On the other hand, I know they're not going to do some stupid soccer mom minivan. With an electric, it seems it's possible to anchor the thing to the road with all the heavy stuff down low, so essentially this gives the designer a fresh start. Job one is to throw out the long front hood if it's not going to be doing any work.

    By the way, I never warmed up to Fiats at all. No mechanic really ever does, unless he's Italian. German cars, that's another story. Old German cars. New internal combustion engine cars are unworkable. The only way forward is electric.
  • Reply 131 of 146
    528491528491 Posts: 1member
    Steve was a big fan of The Beatles right? What year did they found their record label? What was it called again?
  • Reply 132 of 146
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

     


    Artist's (poor) rendering of an Apple garage.



     

     






     








     


    Well, with these pictures above, it is positive & definitive proof that Apple is building a car!

  • Reply 133 of 146
    lee493lee493 Posts: 22member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rick Sterner View Post



    Sixty Eight sounds like a reference to the 68000 processor in the original Macs. They might consider this to be another "Pirate" project like Steve Jobs lead.



    That's what I assumed "68" was a reference to also.,

  • Reply 134 of 146
    flaneur wrote: »
    ^ Ok, the Aston Martin will do for an example. Why do they call it the Vanquish? That's a little better than the Raptor or the Avenger, maybe, but the same idea.

    It's possible that Jony Ive, having wrecked his Aston Martin on the freeway at 80 mph or whatever, now has a different idea about the whole thrust of the aggresso-car use case. I know I do, after seeing what goes on with the Ferraris and Carreras, not to mention the BMWs, on the LA freeways. It's deeply disturbing, testosterone madness. I used to see it in the Bay Area as well.

    On the other hand, I know they're not going to do some stupid soccer mom minivan. With an electric, it seems it's possible to anchor the thing to the road with all the heavy stuff down low, so essentially this gives the designer a fresh start. Job one is to throw out the long front hood if it's not going to be doing any work.

    By the way, I never warmed up to Fiats at all. No mechanic really ever does, unless he's Italian. German cars, that's another story. Old German cars. New internal combustion engine cars are unworkable. The only way forward is electric.

    Are you a woman?
  • Reply 135 of 146
    lee493lee493 Posts: 22member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 528491 View Post



    Steve was a big fan of The Beatles right? What year did they found their record label? What was it called again?



    But that Apple was a disaster, business-wise, even if Apple Records did sign some considerable talent.  The company was almost disolved in the mid-'70s, but John and Paul couldn't agree on anything including how do divvy up what was left of the company, and Apple Corps instead persists to this day.  Also, does Apple Inc. really want to pay tribute to a company that repeatedly sued them regarding their name?

     

    I've long wondered though if SJ subconciously thought of the Beatles' record company's name when naming his own company.

  • Reply 136 of 146
    lee493lee493 Posts: 22member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post





    Are you a woman?

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post





    Are you a woman?

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post



    ^ Ok, the Aston Martin will do for an example. Why do they call it the Vanquish? That's a little better than the Raptor or the Avenger, maybe, but the same idea.



    It's possible that Jony Ive, having wrecked his Aston Martin on the freeway at 80 mph or whatever, now has a different idea about the whole thrust of the aggresso-car use case. I know I do, after seeing what goes on with the Ferraris and Carreras, not to mention the BMWs, on the LA freeways. It's deeply disturbing, testosterone madness. I used to see it in the Bay Area as well.



    On the other hand, I know they're not going to do some stupid soccer mom minivan. With an electric, it seems it's possible to anchor the thing to the road with all the heavy stuff down low, so essentially this gives the designer a fresh start. Job one is to throw out the long front hood if it's not going to be doing any work.



    By the way, I never warmed up to Fiats at all. No mechanic really ever does, unless he's Italian. German cars, that's another story. Old German cars. New internal combustion engine cars are unworkable. The only way forward is electric.



    The long front hood goes a long way towards improving safety in a frontal collision - a major reason why mid- or rear-engined cars and vans are much less common today than in the 1960s.  You pretty much need space ahead of the driver's and front passenger's legs for the front wheels and steering components anyway, so you might as well put a hood over the whole thing.  In a Tesla (and several cars with internal-combustion engines in the rear), the front hood opens to a sizable luggage compartment.

  • Reply 137 of 146
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    lee493 wrote: »



    The long front hood goes a long way towards improving safety in a frontal collision - a major reason why mid- or rear-engined cars and vans are much less common today than in the 1960s.  You pretty much need space ahead of the driver's and front passenger's legs for the front wheels and steering components anyway, so you might as well put a hood over the whole thing.  In a Tesla (and several cars with internal-combustion engines in the rear), the front hood opens to a sizable luggage compartment.

    You can't compare a COE with anything modern. We have better materials and better designs that make even a Smart Car fair better than large cars of the 1970's.


    [VIDEO]
  • Reply 138 of 146
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    You can't compare a COE with anything modern. We have better materials and better designs that make even a Smart Car fair better than large cars of the 1970's.

    Thanks for wasting my bandwidth with that video!

    As noted modern design plays a big part in making a car safe. However on the smart car the driver is seated back pretty far. Also it doesn't diminish the value in a long nose being able to absorb more of that collision energy.

    The other thing is psychology here, I for one are more comfortable driving a vehicle with a bit of a nose on it. Maybe there is no justification for that feeling but it does exist.
  • Reply 139 of 146
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member
    No one has yet mentioned that Richard Branson is now talking about entering the electric car market? This is significant.
  • Reply 140 of 146
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post



    No one has yet mentioned that Richard Branson is now talking about entering the electric car market? This is significant.

    I believe the main difficulty/barrier to entry in the EV market is the ability to reliably mass produce complex objects. Apple has lots of experience in mass production, and Tesla has a head start on everyone else, but I'm not sure many of Branson's past ventures have involved mass production. He seems like more of a business/branding maestro.

Sign In or Register to comment.