The Loremo: Never before has something German sipped so little
Filed under: Diesel, MPG, Carbon Offset
Simple, clever, fun. That's the philosophy behind the vehicle you see pictured above, the Loremo (pronounced lo-ray-mo which is short for Low Resistance Mobile). Of course, there's nothing simple about designing and building a car, but there has certainly been a large need for cleverness to meet our current standard of "fun".
Don't let the picture fool you. There's nothing really new here, aside from the impressive 50g/km CO2 figure. This car achieves its high level of fuel efficiency by taking current fuel-saving methods to a level almost beyond reason. A main part of this is weight saving. Every part of the car has been stripped down to its 'bare essentials', including the interior, chassis, wheels and tires, and engine (though oddly enough, it still possesses a navigation system). The designers have optimized its drag coefficient all the way to the width of the tires - wider tire = more friction. This is a good thing, since engine options are either a 2-cylinder 20hp turbodiesel, or a 3-cylinder 50hp turbodiesel. The former will get you to sixty miles per hour in a blistering 20 seconds, while the latter will get you there in 9. Fuel efficiency, however, is very impressive - 1.5L per 100 km (translated 188 mpg). Not too shabby.
The coupe is labeled as a 2+2 because the trunk boot is 'ergonomically shaped' so that two children can fit "comfortably" facing rearward - given, of course, that they don't get car sick. One enters the car by opening the front or rear 'gate' (see gallery). The front lifts the entire nose section from the A-pillar forward, taking the steering wheel with it. According to the website, it's as easy as getting in a bathtub. Uh-huh.
It'll be a while before we can test that out. Production versions of the Loremo won't be available until 2009. Weighing in at just over 990 lbs. to just under 1040 lbs., it might be fun to drive - but is it worth the pain to one's cornea? I mean, I like the headlights and taillights, and even the Tesla-esque nose, but really. The profile doesn't look as though it has evolved past the early sixties. Retro isn't that much back in.
Maybe if I saw one in person... nah.
Pics aplenty: 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid
Paris Preview: Chevy Cruze official pics released
ABG First Drive: 2009 Honda Fit Sport
New shots of the production Volt
Breaking: Franz von Holzhausen to Tesla Motors as design director!
______-miling the Jaguar XK-R
Fosh Automotive = Hoax (and an anti-Barack Obama one at that)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-04-2007 @ 9:20PM
an engineer said...
How can this site claim to be environmentally supportive, when a car that has clearly been shaped with aerodynamics as a main consideration gets attacked for it's style, that, even though it must be one of the most advanced low drag designs around is labelled unevolved.
lets be supportive of a design where form follows function, where new styles are based on efficient design ideals, not those of some hyped up californian style guru.
come on autobloggreen, show some love and try not to kick those trying to innovate from within our own ranks....
Reply
6-04-2007 @ 9:25PM
Joseph said...
It might be able to hold four-passengers in terms of volume, but can such a light car actually hold the weight of four people? Also, the 188mpg figure, is that for the two cyclinder, or the 3 cylinder?
It'd be awesome to beef up this car just a little, you know add better seats and a larger 3-cylinder engine, maybe from the Insight.
Reply
6-04-2007 @ 11:56PM
Peter said...
A 990lb car should have no problem holding four people. A 20lb bike can hold up one person!
The real issue with loading it full of people would be the detriment to performance and efficiency. With 4 200lb people, you've nearly doubled the weight of the car.
Of course, cars are very rarely filled to capacity. As long as it performs well with a single occupant, it will meet 99% of people's needs.
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 12:17AM
Jeff said...
Joseph,
188 is for the two cylinder. From their website it looked like it would get about 105 mpg for the 3 cylinder.
Also, if you put a bigger engine in the car it would negate the entire reason for building the car in the first place. If you want an Insight, just buy one. We don't need another Insight.
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 4:47AM
Tormod Henne said...
If you crash head on in this thing, will you be able to open the fron gate and get out?
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 6:05AM
Scatter said...
I love everything about this car. The styling is beautifully retro, harking back to a golden age of car design in the 30s and 40s. See the Tatra T-87 for an example:
http://www.vam.ac.uk/vastatic/microsites/1331_modernism/highlights_25.html
Now all we need is a LoremoEV and everything will be ok and it looks like they're considering it
too...
http://www.loremo.com/faq_en.php?f=1&aq=3
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 7:16AM
john riley said...
Seems to be shaped like an airplane wing, meaning if it went fast enough, it would generate lift. Note the various devices Porches have employed over the years to deal with this.
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 8:32AM
Tony Belding said...
I have to agree with "an engineer" above. I don't buy this idea that aerodynamics and attractive styling are mutually exclusive. This car may not be exactly what I would call beautiful, but it looks okay -- and I have seen uglier things coming out of GM and Toyota in recent years.
For example, consider the Chevy Volt and Toyota FT-HS! If those are examples of what that Big Auto's vaunted styling departments can come up with, then I would suggest turning design over to the aerodynamics engineers. It's not like they can make the cars any *less* attractive.
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 8:52AM
jeffinToronto said...
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about, because clearly this thing will never see the light of production. Kids in the back facing rearwards? Where did they hope to sell this thing? Funny things happen when certification a.k.a. crash testing, comes up - more structural memebers go in, horsepower gets bumped and low and behold - you have an Insight type of car.
Don't get me wrong, pushing the envelope and trying are always helpful in shaping what actually gets into production, but this will never be.
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 10:02AM
Nils said...
Looks a bit like a Porsche, doesn't it?
Reply
6-05-2007 @ 2:40PM
George Krpan said...
Car like this have been done before.
They can be done again.
http://www.microcarmuseum.com/
Reply
6-12-2007 @ 1:21PM
Katrina said...
I have to agree with "jeffin Toronto", what exactly are they thinking putting kids in the back seat, and rear-facing at that? Granted, it's adorable (sorry Shane and any other guy that is, at this moment having a coronary at my describing a car as adorable) and I'm all for it's "green-ishness". But, personally I place safety a bit higher on the totem pole, not just for kids, but adults too. Seriously now, it's a Matchbox toy. An adorable Matchbox toy, but a toy nonetheless.
Reply
8-26-2007 @ 11:36AM
James said...
Wow Like ideal. But question is could they ever bring to America on cars market? Just how much power dose have to climb mountain in Pennsylavnia state? You need power to climb hill top.
What top speed? Can feel comfortable on long hours driving?
Hey Please tell me more!
Reply
10-13-2007 @ 10:52PM
Ralph Dreifus said...
An interesting design but they do not think outside the box that has stagnated the automotive industry for at least ten years. We need true inovation
http://www.sssoa.com
Reply
1-02-2008 @ 5:43PM
ecoangel said...
Come on America wake up to fuel efficient cars! Even your Prius lovin buddies only get 45mpg average. That Toymota weighs over 1.3 tonnes! This Loremo is Low Resistance Motion. better than insight, better than EV1. No heavy batteries to tow around. Just at Urea injection, particuate filter and even the EPA will agree this thing will run on bio fuel and be a real option for carbon neutrality.
Reply
1-06-2008 @ 6:42PM
Frank said...
BAck in Aug. James wanted to know about climbing hills. Old farts like me remember the early Volkswagens had only 30-36 hp and they did just fine. (excepts for brakes)
Reply
2-23-2008 @ 10:40PM
Greg said...
Such judgementalism by so many commentators here, and on a "green" site. Ugly? How a about a Hummer? Toy? How about monster SUV, or a sports car? Crashworthy? How about a motorcycle?
Slow? Try walking, or a bicycle again.
This is fully modern motorized transportation that makes the smallest carbon foot print possible for an enclosed 4-wheel 4 seat machine. It will travel from point A to B just as fast any other vehicle, granted it will go up hills slower, and acclerate slower, but changing one's frame of mind takes care of that "problem". And those lucky Germans can drive it at 100 mph as well! Austere? yes, and that is charming to me as well. Elegant, functional and effective minimalistic engineering in an age where vehicles have become overwhemingly, impractically, and unnecessarily overweight and complex is quite refreshing.
I'd buy this thing now if I could, and make mine the 2-cyl. >150mpg? YES! please!.
Reply
5-21-2008 @ 7:21AM
Max O. Jonas said...
Loremo originally touted the car at an affordable 13K for the LS and 18K for the GT back in '06 when this was first unveiled. Now they smell mega profit. The price I have been reading lately is 18K and 30K respectively. Great car, but may be out of my reach now.
Reply
7-10-2008 @ 8:54AM
rohan said...
It is such a small car. Can it really take four people.
online forex
Reply
7-10-2008 @ 8:56AM
rohan said...
It is such a small car. Can it really take four people.
[url=http://www.forexfloor.com/]online forex[/url]
Reply