Really......Back to the Future music.... I guess it's fitting, cause this ugly thing belongs in the past.

Stretch it a little more and send one to me to test in San Diego.

Derek Howe - Completely agree. What a pointless, ugly, almost unusable and definitely non-practical, complexity-overburdened brand new museum's piece. Waiting to 2018 to get one of these will get me...what? There are no numbers here, but I'm not holding my breath to see any kind of a business case that a serious investor would put money behind. Nice engineering project still, passing grades for all of that.

If they want to get the hydrogen economy going they need to make a conversion kit for real cars on the market.

The list of failed green car startups go on and on and the reason for failure is the same:
1. The car is made to be maximally green. 2. Everything else is crap: acceleration, interior space, ease of use, design, safety, convenience of charging/fueling, serviceability, fit and finish and overall coolness.
Surely lots of us would choose a greener car if we didn't have to sacrifice everything else, but very few would buy a green car just because it's green.
And even if a car is priced for the masses doesn't mean it's actually for the masses. Electricity is available in the home of people while hydrogen stations are almost nowhere to be found. Range anxiety is not just a matter of the raw numbers of range but far more about how charging/fueling is available.
And for those of you hydrogen fans, never forget that a hydrogen powered car is nothing much more than an EV with smaller battery but a hydrogen tank and fuel cells added. And also remember that when you produce and compress hydrogen, there is a significant energy efficiency loss. It takes approx. 10,000 liters of hydrogen gas at atmospheric pressure to generate the energy of one gallon of gas. And also the fuel cells are not all that efficient. This particular car is efficient not because of using hydrogen but because it's designed aerodynamically with low mass and regenerative braking. There is no reason why an EV or even a gas powered car could have those exact same benefits. In fact, this same car using pure electricity would be more efficient.

"Styled by Chris Reitz"
haahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
And it's 10mph too slow for motorway use. I wouldn't drive this as a daily drive if it was given to me for free.
Possibly the worst designed, worst looking piece of automotive engineering since the Sinclair C5. In fact this kind of reminds me of the C5. i.e Too small, too slow and it was designed for a niche segment that doesn't exist.
If it's more than £100 a month all in, forget it.

Good idea but unfortunately its going to fail with such an UGLY design. Why did they not make it look good? would have be soooo easy to make it look something like a Lotus Elise perhaps. Shame! Who the hell designed that? SSangYong perhaps or maybe a 5 year old kid?

> should still make it a fun little car to drive around town.
A bicycle is a lot of fun, too.
And it's actually faster (traffic, time lost getting to the car + finding a parking spot at the end), muuuuuuuuuch cheaper, and better for your health.

Specification suitable for a clean, affordable city car. About as practical as a smart fortwo, but with much greater eco credentials. As for the styling: when I first saw the photo there were certain design elements reminiscent of the Honda Insight - and of extremely aerodynammic concept cars that never made it to production. Is it ugly? That's a subjective issue, and imho there are worse looking cars on the road.

Isn't the fuel tank placed like the Ford Pinto? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Fuel_tank_controversy