BusinessWeek's David Kiley didn't take kindly to Holman Jenkins' "pretty tedious editorial" against the gas – electric plug-in Chevrolet Volt. To smack down Jenkins piece in yesterday's Wall Street Journal, Kiley hails the Volt as "a new lens through which the U.S. and world will view" GM. He defends GM's late-to-the-game [theoretical] game changer "because [GM] rightly saw that gas-electric hybrids were an inelegant engineering solution for higher fuel economy." (No comment on GM's eventual hybrid opt-in). Kool-Aid quaffed, Kiley turns on Honda. He lambastes the Japanese automaker for producing "the awkward looking Insight to answer the Prius, as well as the Ridgeline pickup and the Element." Huh? Mr. Kiley needs to get a grip; there are plenty of ways to defend the Volt and/or kneecap his critics. But, like GM, he needs to raise his game, quick.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
“a new lens through which the U.S. and world will view”
Anyone who would make a statement like this concerning the Chevy Joke er Volt must be on Clueless Motor’s payroll. If and when it ever shows up, it will be just one of many such vehicles and the most costly. I notice ‘ol Bobus Maximus has suddenly gone very quiet. Maybe his boss told him to keep it down.
So, vaporware is used to criticize cars that are actually on the road? Fun. GM should have gone whole hog, or hamster.
What about having steroid beefed-up hamsters, running inside the engine, providing motive force without any energy input besides a couple of leafs and nuts you pick up as you do your alternative GM motoring. Now that would have been a game-changer.
Plugging the car to the mains? Old hat! :-)
Gosh, looks like now Jenkins Jr.’s gonna have beef with Kiley. I don’t think I can take the excitement. Maybe someone will get shot.
Maybe GM should produce a dedicated ethanol concept and name it the Hydroxyl Group.
Inelegant solution my ass. Both Toyota and Honda’s solutions are far more elegant (and reliable) than conventional slushbox and alternator/starter combos, respectively.
Uhh, wasn’t the Insight FIRST in the US?
Also, the Prius wishes it could get 60+ MPG.
Yeah, the ridgeline is Meh. Honda doesn’t care TOO much, as that plant can, on a car by car basis, put out Odysses and Civics. So yeah, its a bit of a bummer, but Honda will live.
As for the Retirement, its a huge success. Just not in the intended market:
It has become one of, if not THE, leading “Small work van”. You can haul a LOT of shit, in high utility, low space, and good fuel economy. My uncle, who runs a contracting business (mostly high tech electronic locking systems), uses one as his primary work vehicle.
@alex
You can just imagine their quandary. They’ve been telling their board for years that Toyota’s Prius was a really, really, really dumb idea. Just wait and see, and you’ll see what a dumb idea it is.
Full blown hybrid systems like Toyota’s Synergy drive/GM’s 2-mode hybrid/etc. are not elegant solutions. If they were, they wouldn’t be so complex and expensive.
The next generation BAS system from GM will be a lot more ‘elegant’ than the current hybrid systems as it will be less complex and cheaper to implement (cheap enough to offer as standard?). Of course it won’t offer the fuel economy increase of the next gen full hybrids, but will be very comparable to current ones.
Nicholas Weaver
Uhh, wasn’t the Insight FIRST in the US?
Prius was the first hybrid on the market (1997, in Japan). But, yes, Insight was the first on the US market (1999).
He lambastes the Japanese automaker for producing “the awkward looking Insight to answer the Prius, as well as the Ridgeline pickup and the Element.”
Wha?
1) Didn’t the Insight arrive in the US before the Prius? And yeah, it might be awkward looking but it set the benchmark for Toyota to work towards.
2) The Ridgeline was developed for people who don’t want a traditional pickup, but need its utility. And from the looks of it, its design spawned other wannabes eg. the Toyota A-BAT and the GMC XT concept.
3) Honda is tagged as the world’s most fuel efficient company.
Kiley needs to take a step back and look at who’s influencing who before he opens his mouth again.
Good lord, when did Businessweek become Businessbuffbook? I thought it was supposed to be about business. As in making money. As in building things and selling them for a profit. Car geeks are supposed to complain about driving appliances and salivate over vaporware, not Businessweek….
it’s a game changer, just like the Chrysler Patriot.
BusinessWeek is a magazine for people who get too bored on an airplane to do toilet paper origami. You might as well comment on editorials in “SkyMall”.
I have a 2005 Insight that I grow to love more everyday (and not just because of the rising price of fuel). It is a tour-de-force of lightweight aerodynamic design that shows what is possible when you focus on a goal. Everything about this car is unique and innovative. You can be sure it influenced the somewhat more practical 4-door hybrids. Being a two-seater probably put a lot of people off, but I’d wager that there are a lot of people out there like me who use their back seat only once in a blue moon.
Awkward? To me the odd look is a badge of honor – that’s what a drag coefficient of 2.5 looks like.
Plus, it’s a Honda! Reliable, super clean (SULEV), fun to drive and 64 mpg with two big guys and a bunch of luggage in the back. And that’s with the CVT! What more do you want? OK, OK, what more do you need?
Wish it was still on the market, and I’ll bet, so does Honda until their next hybrid comes out.
Always loved the look of the Insight.
Slippery cool.
Bunter
Sorry, the Cd of the Insight stated in my above post should be .25, not 2.5.
According to Wikipedia even a smooth brick is more aerodynamic than that with a coefficient of 2.1.
Who cares when the Prius was introduced to the US market? Worldwide, the Prius came out almost 2 years before the Insight, so it was Toyota, NOT Honda, that set the benchmark for others to follow.
All these North American journalists need to start giving credit where credit is due.
I figured I’d respond.
I haven’t imbibed any kool-aid about the Volt. It is technology, though, that I find terribly smart and usable. Will GM get it done at a cost we can live with? It remains to be seen. But my point is that criticizing them for shooting for it seems nuts.
It is true that Honda Insight debuted in the U.S. before the Prius. Not sure, as I write, which one hit the Japanese market first. But I think we know that the two companies knew what the other was up to, and we also know which one was more successful.
A gas-electric hybrid drivetrain, in my opiinion, is not a good engineering solution. The Prius is, more than anything else, a huge marketing success, especially in the U.S. But if you look at how successful other hybrids have been, you have to wonder just how good an engineering and value proposition it is.
I blogged about the WSJ piece because I found it nuts to chase after GM for pushing to get a plug-in car to market before the competition. Yes, it’s the company that killed the EV. History has punished them for that. But it seems like piling on at this point to lampoon them for trying to make the Volt a reality.
Davidkiley:
Welcome to TTAC Mr. Kiley. Thank you for posting.
I will let Frank and our resident alt. propulsion people (including some VERY savvy commentators) deal with some of the points you’ve raised.
As publisher, I would simply like to say that TTAC doesn’t lampoon simply for lampooning’s sake. GM has consistently and deliberately mislead the media about the Volt. Either that or they’ve done it unintentionally– which is even scarier.
We pride ourselves on seeing through the BS, calling a spade a triangular digging implement, and putting our hands up when we’re wrong.
In any case, we’d love you to stick around and engage in a conversation with our informed, passionate and (mostly) accurate community. Maybe even BEFORE you write an article.
Isn’t GM making a plug-in Hybrid Saturn Vue before the Volt?
@Davidkiley :
May 1st, 2008 at 11:12 am
David,
Please explain why you find the Volt technology is so terribly smart and usable. As you may be aware, TTAC’s Paul Niedermeyer found the Volt’s potential competitiveness underwhelming. Please feel free to comment, or correct, as necessary. As we all know, a serious debate on these issues is long overdue.
A gas-electric hybrid drivetrain, in my opiinion, is not a good engineering solution.
I have to disagree with that one. The hybrid is a good compromise between economy (electric) and convenience (gas). PHEV, such as the Volt, will ultimately be based on hybrid technology. EVs have, so far, failed to provide sufficient convience to make a serious impact on the market.
But if you look at how successful other hybrids have been, you have to wonder just how good an engineering and value proposition it is.
The success, or failure, of each hybrid model is a business case in its own, that requires individual analysis. The Prius has obviously won the race to be the halo car of choice.
Honda made a couple of notable mistakes in the hybrid race. The Insight, while great i.t.o. economy, was just too odd for major market penetration. The Accord hybrid was a performance hybrid, and might have been successful if gas remained below $2/gal. It did not, and buyers never bought into the performance hybrid idea.
We can go on and on. Some hybrids offer negligible mileage improvement over ICE (GMC Sierra comes to mind). That obviously doesn’t help.
Toyota also seem to be doing fairly well with their hybrids, even if you exclude the Prius: In March, 12% of all Camrys sold were hybrids, as were 18% of Highlanders. 17% of Lexus Rx’s were hybrids. Percentage-wise that beats any other maker. Your thoughts on that?