Find Reviews by Make:
38 Comments on “What’s Wrong With This Picture: Crazy ’bout Elvis Edition...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
What’s wrong is that the whole thing is Monday morning quarterbacking now.
These problems were all in the works for 5 – 10 -15 years now.
If you’ve been around these parts for awhile, Bluenoser, you’d know that RF has been extolling General Messup executive ranks (and the UAW) to pull their finger out (or head out of anal orafice?) and get it together, along with Dorf (“Ford spelled sideways = Dorf”) and Chrapster.
What’s wrong with this picture?
Well, to save this world class Hummer, the bailout needs to be bigger. ;}
Now for the non-2.375 answer, the whole thing should have gone crunch a while ago. Pull the stick out of the alligator’s mouth, please.
The gov’t will bail ’em out. Too many UAW votes there.
Whoever made this is a motherfucking idiot. First of all, the EV1 was DEFINITELY NOT the future. At most, with the NiMH batteries, not the golf-cart lead-acid battteries, it got 100 miles per charge, and it took eight hours to recharge. That is what is known as regression, you moron. And even the more conventional energy miser Insight didn’t sell because it had ONLY TWO SEATS. And while they were slow to adopt hybrids, I believe the Volt’s clever use of a gasoline engine as a range extender, running at low engine speeds to recharge an electric motor, is a very brilliant idea that is no longer vaporware. I believe once this is mass-produced, costs will eventually be down to the point where it is economically sensible versus a gas-electic hybrid. And the enlarged alternator mild hybrid route is a very clever approach to reduce the hybrid premium, even cheaper than Honda’s IMA. However, marketing it as a full-on competitor to fully hybridized gas-electrics was a mistake. The XFE moniker should have been but on those mild hybrids. Plus, no manufacturer prepared for the energy spikes. The Borrego, Genesis 4.6, Tundra, Land Cruiser, Sequoia, and V8 Pathfinder show that the Japanese and Koreans were just as shocked by $4/gal gas. Besides, Toyota hangs on to the halo of the Prius and Camry hybrid to mask that the FJ Cruiser, 4Runner, and Sequoia are still remaining despite lack of market interest. And as for the Hummer getting crushed (better it dies than a polar bear or a tree), your precious Japanese have made white elephant trucks too. Look at the QX56 and the LX570. Do you think their owners take those gas-guzzling beasts off road? Not a chance in hell. And, oh yeah, the Japanese consistently making better vehicles. BULL FUCKING SHIT! The Japanese worked hard to consistently improve their products, but they were never consistently supreme in every market segment. Yes, in compacts and midsize sedans, they did take most top spots. The Accord, Civic, Corolla, and Camry attest to that. But what about the plucky, cutesy little Neon, with a 150hp DOHC engine? What about the rip-snorting SRT4? How about the Cobalt SS? The original Ford Focus? Surely those were up to snuff to almighty Toyota? Some segments the Japanese could never take supremacy in. What about the sports coupe, the sports car, the comfortable cross-country cruising land yacht, the charismatic muscle car, the full-size sports sedan, the full-size pickup. I’m pretty sure the Japanese don’t have real class dominators there. And of course, Detroit never wants to change. Yes, if it wasn’t for the damn guv-mint, we’d still all be riding around in ’67 Chevelle hardtops with carbureted big-blocks and Powerglide transmissions. If it wasn’t for GM, we wouldn’t have the turbocharger, the electric starter, the automatic transmission (as much as I wish it wasn’t around), the head-up display, onboard night vision, magnetorheological shocks, synchromesh gearboxes, air suspensions, and myriad other inventions. Plus, GM didn’t resist airbags. The 1974 full-size Buicks, Cadillacs, and Oldsmobiles had optional dual-stage, dual front airbags. And for resisting seat belts, it wouldn’t matter if they didn’t, because buckling up wasn’t compulsory like it is now. The first seat belt law wasn’t passed until 1984, so why would they put something in their cars that people were most likely never going to use? And as for resisting catalytic converters, there is a better way to pass an emissions laws, Honda did it with their CVCC engine, and here’s the kicker, it could run on higher octane leaded gas! All it needed was a simple combustion prechamber, an extra intake valve, and a second carburetor. Simple. Being too focused on trucks? Well, if it’s making your company money and it is highly demanded, why would you not make it? All manufacturers are guilty of focusing on trucks for their USDM lineup, it wasn’t just a Detroit problem. All manufacturers are also guilty of having product overlaps, Honda had the Prelude in the same place as the Accord Coupe, Toyota has the Highlander and 4Runner in the same segment, BMW has the 1-series almost fighting the 3-series, Audi has the A4 Allroad against the Q5. GM may have done too much badge engineering, and tried to keep too many divisions alive for too long, but the company is finally learning the error of its ways and is beginning to change. Don’t forget that these rises and falls are cyclical, and in a couple of decades we’ll probably be goading Toyota to dive in to C11.
I don’t see anything wrong. I think it soums ir up pretty well. Somebody needs to kick that stick out of place.
Would the artificially low yen have any business being in the external factors area? OR, has that been overplayed?
What’s wrong is there’s a typo in it and the crusher’s gears would not work with the way they’re set up.
What’s wrong is there’s a typo in it and the crusher’s gears would not work with the way they’re set up.
Ditch the crusher and just have the internal factors all on a platform that’s crushing GM flat, with only a couple of shattering BAILOUT pegs holding them up (but not for long). The designer probably got lazy and called it a day at some point, but I don’t necessarily fault him. Much.
One problem is, of course, the repeated accusation that the EV1 was the future and GM killed it. No, the thing never hit the market or even had the potential of turning a profit as it was. Much as with any true electric car today, range and infrastructure are an issue. A tiny car with no range will not appeal to most people, and if something can’t turn a profit… Well, as you’re all saying here, it should die.
CARB also killed it by agreeing with GM that it needed to be a zero-emissions vehicle and then not backing off that position at all. GM realized that in order for the EV1 to be an actual success, it needed to address some of its shortcomings. such as, y’know, range. How would they do this? Put it an engine alongside the batteries! Yes, GM actually had the concept for the modern Volt over a decade ago. But CARB would not relent.
Unable to address the EV1’s shortcomings well enough to hold the promise of mass-market success, GM killed the project.
A few critical members of the original EV1 team ARE, however, on the modern Volt team.
Quote: ” Crazy ’bout Elvis“…somebody sure is a Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers fan as GM finds itself ‘Freefalling‘…
EidolWays :
April 11th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Much as with any true electric car today, range and infrastructure are an issue. A tiny car with no range will not appeal to most people, and if something can’t turn a profit… Well, as you’re all saying here, it should die.
Put it an engine alongside the batteries!
Um,,,,WRONG!
When GM finally ditched the crappy Delco batteries in the EV1 the range jumped enough to cover even the longest daily commutes(see ECD/Ovonic). With more “at work” charging stations the range issue fades away.
Infrastructure? Since when did that stop the sale of Hot Tubs, swimming pool pumps, 2nd freezers or plasma TV’s! I built a home brew EV for about 9k and the only infrastructure I needed was a 20 amp 120 volt wall outlet. I went really crazy and added a 240 volt 50 amp outlet for quick recharge (whew, that was some tough “infrastructure”,lol). Most the cars would re-charge at night when the grid load is reduced anyway.
Oh ya, add an IC “engine alongside the batteries”? What a great way to add more weight, consume space(that could be used for more batteries), add complexity, and a layer of more maintanence costs(air filter, fuel filter, antifreeze, starter, exhaust system, oil changes, oil filters, etc.)
I own 3 cars, the home built EV has a range of only 40 miles and it reduces my yearly gas consumption by 50 to 90 percent.
My EV maintenance? Check tire pressure and battery water every 6 weeks. Oh ya, and use $6 per week (max) in electricity (unless I plug in someware else). ;o)
GM could have refined the EV1 and eventually perfected it and turned a profit with it. They blew it!
People act as if “Peak Oil” is just a crazy theory. Its not! Last time I checked Mexico’s oil production is in a state of freefall, Aramco is pumping sea water underground like crazy just to keep the oil output were it’s at. Rumor has it that Russia’s oil output is in decline, and we rely on crappy oil from Alberta that needs twice more energy to steam clean out of the tar sands than we get out of the original barrel!
Let’s see, it’s $2.11 per gallon were I live and the world economy is in the toilet. What will pump prices be when the world economy starts to re-bound again? Consumers will beg for EV cars!
Would the artificially low yen have any business being in the external factors area? OR, has that been overplayed?
The yen was over valued until about 1980 when it sat fixed at 360 to the dollar. However it’s been at about 120 -100 to the dollar at least the past decade and actually longer, I think. Currently it runs about 85 yen to the dollar.
The Japanese worked hard to consistently improve their products, but they were never consistently supreme in every market segment. Yes, in compacts and midsize sedans, they did take most top spots. The Accord, Civic, Corolla, and Camry attest to that. But what about the plucky, cutesy little Neon, with a 150hp DOHC engine? What about the rip-snorting SRT4? How about the Cobalt SS? The original Ford Focus? Surely those were up to snuff to almighty Toyota?
Let me answer that with some quotes from the net:
“The Neon has a reputation for headgasket failure, and it has affected many Neon owners. Since the blocks are identical, both the SOHC and the DOHC are affected…People usually think that the Neon has an excessive number of these bulletins[TSB’s], until they get a chance to see the list for a Ford product. And that’s not even counting safety recalls”
http://faq.neons.org/faq/FAQ_X.html
The Focus set new recall records since its introduction.
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/recalls04/2005/ford_focus.html
2005 Cheverolet Cobalt
CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES NOT EQUIPPED WITH OPTIONAL ROOF-MOUNTED SIDE IMPACT AIR BAGS FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 201, ‘OCCUPANT PROTECTION IN INTERIOR IMPACT.’
Consequence:
IN A CRASH, HEAD IMPACT PROTECTION MAY BE INADEQUATE.
Remedy:
DEALERS WILL INSTALL ENERGY ABSORBING PLASTIC TO THE HEADLINER TRIM TO REDUCE THE SEVERITY OF HEAD IMPACTS IN A CRASH.
Potential Units Affected:
98707
http://www.automobilemag.com/am/2005/chevrolet/cobalt/recalls.html
Oh and the 2009 Cobalt managed to have its own recall (well a shared one)
http://www.automotive.com/2009/49/chevrolet/cobalt/recalls/35968.html
Tell me again how great those particular D3 cars are – and how these models are going to make buyers drop their Japanese cars and coming running to Detroit
The new guy had better be better at Tetris than Wagoner.
Rev Junkie: Easy there. The EV1 was the future, because electric cars are the only viable long-term solution. Do you have another solution? Does it rely on hydrogen? Not going to work. Sorry, you can’t fight the laws of physics. CNG? Works fine on a small scale, but you’ll eventually hit the same problems as petroleum. Biofuels? Waste of time and energy, ethically questionable, rooted in corn lobbying, etc. etc.
The point they were trying to make in the infographic is that continued progress on the EV1 would have set up an electric-based design & engineering infrastructure that would make time-to-market for hybrids way shorter. If they had well-developed in-house EV technology, it would have been much easier to make a true hybrid that could have competed against Toyota. They’d have had economies of scale on their side to bear the brunt of initial investments into a more mainstream product. But they didn’t. Good riddance to idiotic companies.
And no one is saying the Japanese were perfect. But they’re still churning out decent cars and some (Subaru, for instance) are doing well. You can’t say the same about GM or Chrysler.
Ford, as opposed to the two miserable failures, did things right, and they will survive. They have their own bespoke hybrid system and cars (Escape, Fusion) to prove it. If anything, Ford is demonstrating how to run a domestic car company instead of just looking for scapegoats by blaming unions or whatever. The plain fact is that GM and Chrysler are run by incompetent middle and upper management.
What’s wrong with the picture.. hm…
Why is the “Internal factor” on the outside of the squasher and the “External factor” on the inside? Nothing detrimental, but just bothers me a little, lol. Besides, gas prices fell again if I’m not mistaken.
Oh and it’s funny how the chart says “Japanese AND Asian”, because I’m assuming that the “Asian” part is mentioning the Koreans (not Daewoo). If it was several years ago they would’ve only mentioned the Japanese.
Another irony: Hummer getting destroyed, ruining their “tough” image. lol
Shogun: Even though gas prices fell long ago, it was the nail in the coffin for SUVs’ heyday. Even with $2 gas now, Americans finally realize they can’t afford a Tahoe – whether it’s gas, loans, your the fact that the average Joe has about a 1 in 10 chance at not having a job.
EidolWays :
April 11th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
One problem is, of course, the repeated accusation that the EV1 was the future and GM killed it. No, the thing never hit the market or even had the potential of turning a profit as it was. Much as with any true electric car today, range and infrastructure are an issue. A tiny car with no range will not appeal to most people, and if something can’t turn a profit… Well, as you’re all saying here, it should die.
CARB also killed it by agreeing with GM that it needed to be a zero-emissions vehicle and then not backing off that position at all. GM realized that in order for the EV1 to be an actual success, it needed to address some of its shortcomings. such as, y’know, range. How would they do this? Put it an engine alongside the batteries! Yes, GM actually had the concept for the modern Volt over a decade ago. But CARB would not relent.
Unable to address the EV1’s shortcomings well enough to hold the promise of mass-market success, GM killed the project.
A few critical members of the original EV1 team ARE, however, on the modern Volt team.
I agree the Volt isn’t vaporware – hell, the EV1 was solid. What skeptics are right in pointing out, though, is that there is NO possible way that GM can use the Volt as a case study for Congress to show how they’ll survive. Even if they get costs under control, I find it impossible to profit heavily off the car. Keep in mind that their estimated price is in the $30k-$40k range depending on who you talk to. With the economy the way it is now, I can’t imagine many being sold. They’ll get orders, sure, but the profit margins on this won’t counteract the billions they’re burning through. When youre focused on results, profitability, and solvency (as Congress and the President should), one forward-thinking car is a drop in the bucket.
And with 4-5 year product development cycles, where is the model line revamp Obama is (half-heartedly) asking for to guarantee a turnaround? When will the revamped “GM” hit showrooms – in 2014? Have they cut loose a single redundant brand? Have they stopped producing Cobalts and Lucernes? Please – the Volt is the one somewhat bright kid in a classroom full of idiots. The whole company is on its way to flunking.
You people are all looking way too deep into the situation. What’s wrong with this picture is that the three gears on the left side of image could not possibly turn.
# pariah :
April 12th, 2009 at 12:52 am
You people are all looking way too deep into the situation. What’s wrong with this picture is that the three gears on the left side of image could not possibly turn.
And given their positional lock, the bailouts wouldn’t work.
Btw – WSJ should know how to spell consistently.
@derm81
Would the artificially low yen have any business being in the external factors area? OR, has that been overplayed?
WHAT artificially low yen? I just love it when people regurgitate tired phrases without checking facts, or in this case, currency tables, freely available on the net.
I invite you to travel to Tokyo, convert your dollar to the supposedly artificially low yen and suffer a massive stroke as you see how much that buys you. The taxi trip from the airport alone will bankrupt you ($350) If you recover from your heart attack, try renting an apartment with your artificially low yen. Make me the recipient of your life insurance first. You’ll die when you hear the cost.
The yen is too high against the $ at the 100 yen rate (Lokki, the 85 yen times are thankfully over.)
Even at 110 yen to the greenback it’s too expensive. You won’t see Tokyo as a cheap tourist destination anytime soon.
Please, check your facts before typing. Or avoid topics alien to many Americans, such as foreign exchange rates.
I think this is a pretty accurate depiction of the situation and its underlying causes, except for the remarks about slow adoption of hybrid/electric technology. Why not blame the slow adoption of tail fins and turbine engines? These are all temporary fads, not meaningful technologies.
Hyundai and Subaru have been growing their market share throughout the oil price bubble and the economic meltdown, and they did it without any goofy golf carts.
No US carmaker has ever survived bankrupcy. GM is about to die.
pariah “You people are all looking way too deep into the situation. What’s wrong with this picture is that the three gears on the left side of image could not possibly turn.”
LOL – true!
Guess any bailout talk causes the B&B to take off their “mechanics hats” ;-)
the analysis misses the single biggest causality of GM’s decline, the worst marketing imaginable. that is the issue which will still drag sales down after the bankruptcy. until the marketing changes there is nothing that can save GM.
Would the artificially low yen have any business being in the external factors area?
The yen has almost quadrupled in value over the last 40 years against the dollar. If you don’t want to believe me, the Federal Reserve would be happy to confirm that: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/EXJPUS.txt
Sorry, but your point is just wrong on its face, and if pushed to do it, you couldn’t prove it without resorting to some bogus link from an economic ignoramus who probably works on an assembly line, and who knows as much about exchange rates as he does about brain surgery.
Also, last time that I checked, the Detroit domestics had a price advantage over the foreign competition. If a Lexus costs more than a Cadillac, than you can’t argue that the Lexus is competing on price, when the opposite is true. If you want the K Mart blue light special, you find it coming from Michigan factories, not Nagoya.
I invite you to travel to Tokyo, convert your dollar to the supposedly artificially low yen and suffer a massive stroke as you see how much that buys you.
Funny -I lived there for almost 10 years, I spend about 2 weeks a year there and have since the 80’s and I was just there from the 21 of February till the 20th of March….
Been grocery shopping in Tokyo lately? I have – last month.
Visited a Japanese hospital lately? I have – last month.
I have family there….
By the way, the preferred way to travel from Narita to Haneda is by shuttle. About 3,000 yen – a little more than what it costs to take a shuttle from DFW to my home. You can take a taxi from JFK to Long Island if you want to…..
Deflation, Bertel Schmitt , delfation. It’s been going on for a long, long time now. All that valuable currency and competition have driven prices down. When you import things and your currency is valuable, you buy them cheaply and it drives prices down. Deflation is a big problem for Japan. Oh, I apologize for not having checked the currency tables immediately before posting…. I have income in yen , and therefore don’t have to convert when traveling.
You might not want to make sweeping generalizations based on a single point of data.
http://www.exchange-rates.org/history/JPY/USD/G
Now…. I don’t want to get into a flame war with you so I won’t respond to you further on this subject… but …. living in China does not a Japan expert make…
What is wrong with this picture? Very Little.
A great graphic explaining how a few people in the wrong position can destroy tens of billions of dollars in value and millions of lives.
What’s wrong with this picture? Those little balloons don’t hold nearly enough helium to lift the weight of the internal factors they are lashed onto.
Oh, maybe that is the point. Great graphic.
Lokki: Hai, wakatta. Daijobu desu.
I use the taxi rate only to make a graphic point, only a complete moron would take a taxi from NRT to downtown. I personally use the Limousine Bus to TCAT or the Skyliner to Ueno.
I have family in Tokyo also and am a frequent patron of the O-Zeki supermarket in Kugahara. We maintain one of those two tatami mat sized apartments there, graciously provided by my wife’s dad.
Sure, you can quibble about the details, but it does a fairly good job of quickly highlighting all the factors at play in GM’s death-spiral.
I do agree that the EV1 gets too much attention. There’s no way an $30k (after subsidy), 2 seat, electric runabout was going to be economically viable in the early 2000’s. GM did completely botch hybrids. I agree that the mild-hybrid system was a good idea that should have been a place-holder marketed as XFE models while new drivetrains were being developed rather than being sent-up against the Prius.
Sumimasen deshita
Kinishinai de
Ok maniceightball, what the hell is ethically questionable about alcohol fuels? There are myriad ways of making high-octane rated alcohols out of carbon rich waste. If San Francisco can generate Methane from trash, then why not run it through an ionized liquid or a platinum catalyst to turn it into methanol? There is also a company that has certain strains of bacteria sweat ethanol, genetically modified algae can produce biodiesel with a much higher yield than soy. I am a strong proponent of alcohol fuels because we can still use the good ‘old internal combustion engine, we can keep using our existing fuel stations and pipelines (which would require changes to prevent corrosion from methanol and ethanol). Besides, corn ethanol is not what I’m supporting at all. It is an inefficient process, and unless the corn is genetically modified for a competitive yield, it’s a waste of time. Electric cars are good for city-dwellers, because the range problem is not as big of an issue. But until they find a way to get a fairly compact battery that can get at least a 400 mile range, enough for a day’s driving on an interstate trip without taking longer than a night’s sleep so the car is ready to go the next day, the range problem is still there. Besides, once we find a way to harness the energy lost as heat, the momentum of the crankshaft, the force of the moving exhaust, which is already underway, the low-energy battery will be left beside the nuclear powertrain and the turbine engine as a former “powertrain of the future”.
Blunozer:
As much as I loooove to debate the failure of GM…
As I have with anyone who thinks they have half a clue…
Go pick up the John Z Delorean book called, “On a Clear day you can see GM.”
This little book… details their FAILURES at the TOP MOST LEVEL of this b.s company from 30-45yrs ago.
Ya dont actually think this all just popped up in the 80s? Nah to be this stupid, ya really have to work at it. And that.. they did.
See the “New GMC Terrain” for that, look towards the TB and its copies, and the Equinox for more evidence of failures, in management, in execution, in sales, in marketing.. AND look at the copy over at Pontiac.. FOR BRAND DILUTION.
What’s with all this EV1:FAIL talk? Perhaps GM spin was stronger than I anticipated…
Fact of the matter is, GM caved under internal and external factors and killed the EV1 program. It was a setback for GM, both then and now.
Regardless of whether or not the car would have sold (truth is, probably could have – early customer feedback was off the charts) -when GM pulled it plug, it severely hurt alternative energy engineering development within GM and in the possible suppliers that could have supported a ‘leaner’, ‘meaner’, and dare I say it – ‘greaner’ GM now.
O, and let’s not forget about the aforementioned infrastructure as well.
If you’re in NYC this week, check out the NYAS – it may be the last time you see GM and Chrysler there.
Rev Junkie : First of all, the EV1 was DEFINITELY NOT the future. At most, with the NiMH batteries, not the golf-cart lead-acid battteries, it got 100 miles per charge, and it took eight hours to recharge. That is what is known as regression, you moron. And even the more conventional energy miser Insight didn’t sell because it had ONLY TWO SEATS.
Remember that the Insight and EV1 both followed an era when there were tons of two seaters. Honda Del Sol, Honda CR-X, Toyota MR-2, Pontiac Fiero, Mazda Miatas, Mercury ??? (that two seater Aussie Ford ‘vert), the Geo Metro ‘vert and then the whole list of European two seaters in an earlier era (Karmann Ghia, Porsche 914, MG, Austin Healey, etc but still seen as the occasional daily driver in the 1990s). No, I don’t think two seats is or was a problem. We did experience a shift towards large vehicles during that same period which ended the two seaters for a while. I remember a lot of people saying how they were going to buy something larger b/c the other vehicles on the road had gotten so large. Otherwise they liked their tiny two seaters. I certainly did. I’d like to think a return to our senses is right around the corner but until gas prices go back up… No I’m not hoping for high pump prices – just a return to some sense. Just no point in driving a ~6,000 vehicle to haul a ~250 lb person to the corner store for milk… Save that HD vehicle for the family vacation trip.
And of course, Detroit never wants to change. Yes, if it wasn’t for the damn guv-mint, we’d still all be riding around in ‘67 Chevelle hardtops with carbureted big-blocks and Powerglide transmissions.
And choking on the lead-gasoline fumes/smog. The problem is that Detroit seldom leads – they have to be dragged forward into modern vehicle standards. Not saying they are the only ones but they make the most noise when new standards are proposed. Detroit has offered some WONDEFUL concept cars that introduced us to all sorts of new technology but essentially the new family sedan we have today is just like the family sedan of 1985. The fuel injection is better, the crash protection is better but the features – much the same. I recently drove a 1989 Volvo for a few days. Nice car. Only difference between it and the modern cars is it had ABS and airbags then and they are common now in more pedestrian vehicles. Is that Detroit making advances or is that the gov’t pushing them?
Having driven a lot of vehicles from the Model-T and up I’m glad that safety standards have evolved away from gas tanks behind the pickup truck seat, plate glass replaced by safety glass, crumple-zones, and pollution controls. Yes the easiest examples of some of these technologies were pretty sad examples of modern technology (shock absorber bumpers and early feedback carbs) but the mature examples of these technologies are nice. That said I would be plenty happy with a well engineered vehicle that did not include airbags and ABS.
EidolWays : One problem is, of course, the repeated accusation that the EV1 was the future and GM killed it. No, the thing never hit the market or even had the potential of turning a profit as it was. Much as with any true electric car today, range and infrastructure are an issue. A tiny car with no range will not appeal to most people, and if something can’t turn a profit… Well, as you’re all saying here, it should die.
The infrastructure is there in every 220V outlet. My house has three. I just added one to the garage for my MIG welder for less than $50 The fact is there are a huge number of people who don’t exceed the range of the original NiMH powered EV1. Yes, there are a large number of folks who could not live with an EV but not MOST people. Most people could live with a daily range of 100 miles. Stan Ovshinsky said that the NiMH EV1 prototype he delivered to GM would go 245 miles per charge. Thanks – I’ll take a large investment in renewables to offset the fossils with rooftop solar across the nation and a fleet of EV vehicles on the side.
Look – every gallon I don’t burn means there is another for the diehard fossil fuel consumer to use up. Lowers the price. We can run nukes to satisfy the baseline grid demand and then supplement with solar and wind with hydro and mtn top pump lakes to back it up. Use breeder reactors to minimize waste, maximize fuel efficiency. Require all new home and business construction to have at least a minimum rooftop solar. Standardize the solar panel interface so that people can easily expand the rooftop arrays with mixed panel brands as their budget and interest in solar allows. Require commercial businesses to have a certain amount of solar on their big flat roofs too – count the number of big box retailers across the country – okay? How much could their rooftops be generating? Give some thought to how much money goes out of our economy into the oil producing countries around the globe. And then how much we send to China who is only marginally happy with us. Happy to build our retail crap but also gearing up to build a very capable military to protect themselves from us…
Big picture. Long term thought.
FWIW I’m shopping for an EV-bike conversion kit (the choices are endless). I’ll be biking to work twice or three times a week. Will make my bike more practical and safer than it is right now when I bike. ~20 mph for ~20 miles. More pedaling = more speed and range if I choose. Aiming at exercise and losing a little weight. Costs 5 cents to recharge at the end of the day. Batteries cost less to replace than any trip to a mechanic for anything fixed on an average vehicle. Working towards building a full EV out of my second car unless the car manufacturers begin to sell something before I need to replace the engine. My car lasts longer, no gasoline consumption when I bike and believe it or not bike stats say that biking is safer than being a pedestrian.
So what if everything goes electric? Buses and trucks can use pantographs for power from overhead cables. So can trains. Reserve diesel fuel consumption for off-road situations.
Big picture. Long term planning. Careful thought.
My government isn’t going to do it but my family will do plenty of these babysteps in the right direction over the next few years so that if the **** hits the fan we are still able to do what we need to do. Lead by example. Talk is cheap. If people see other people going down a different path, then they can SEE what is a viable choice.
Don1967: Hyundai and Subaru have been growing their market share throughout the oil price bubble and the economic meltdown, and they did it without any goofy golf carts.
Have been wondering for some time if the GM “mistakes” were designed to collapse the company gently so they could shed overhead costs (labor, pensions, etc) quietly and semi-legally so they could be better prepared for the rise of Chinese and Indian vehicles on the American markets. Detroit could survive the Europeans in the 1950s/60s. They could survive the Asians. And the Koreans. Could they survive the arrival of the Chinese and Indians?
Perhaps Detroit is preparing for higher fuel prices which will drive Americans to smaller cars long term – or encourage the Europeans to return their products to the American market. There would be a lot of competition with the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans, Chinese and Indians all selling cars here. Any room left for Detroit products that the consumer believed to be marginal? How many more consumers will jump the Detroit ship just to try out the new (future) imports?
Surely the guys at the top have much smarter people than us armchair engineers and much longer term outlooks using data unavailable to us? Perhaps all of the apparent confusion and BS the folks at the top use during interviews are designed to reassure the consumers while giving nothing to the competition??? Surely they SAY they don’t know the competition’s products while quietly knowing everything about the competition???
GM/Ford/Chrysler needs to reorganize so that even the lowliest products turn at least a little profit. Anything else is putting all of their eggs into one basket.
MrDot : GM did completely botch hybrids. I agree that the mild-hybrid system was a good idea that should have been a place-holder marketed as XFE models while new drivetrains were being developed rather than being sent-up against the Prius.
Except for the fact they make very little on the smallest compacts – the mild hybrid system would have done well in an Aveo where the small power difference would have been most noticeable… Perhaps it would have given those products another 6-8 mpg putting them nearer 40 mpg…
Rev Junkie: Electric cars are good for city-dwellers, because the range problem is not as big of an issue. But until they find a way to get a fairly compact battery that can get at least a 400 mile range, enough for a day’s driving on an interstate trip without taking longer than a night’s sleep so the car is ready to go the next day, the range problem is still there.
Why would you travel long distance in an EV? If we owned TWO EVs right now I’d either keep a used (cheap) minivan in the garage for trips or rent one – or fly. Electric vehicles are not going to REPLACE gasoline powered vehicles anytime soon but they can supplement them TODAY. Get them to market and let the technology mature over the next two decades. Why do electric vehicles need to match gasoline vehicle performance before they are viable? The only thing not viable about them is the fact that the existing business model perfers to gather the revenue created by customers replacing their complicated gasoline powered vehicles every 125K miles and requiring a lot of maintenance along the way.
Of course the vehicle lasts much longer than 125K miles but somewhere along the way the type of person buying the well-used used-vehicle no longer desires to utilize the dealer services or OEM parts. They want cheap and they might get their brother-in-law to fix it when it breaks.
First the early adopters will buy the electric vehicles and then a few skeptical friends/family/neighbors will watch and get charmed by them and then over time ordinary people will buy them as second cars, or something for their kid to drive assuming they aren’t worth $40K or expensive to maintain.
Eventually a few people will brag they replaced both of their vehicles with electrics just like some folks brag now that they have decided they don’t want to own a vehicle at all – a great money saver I’m sure! Remember all the modern gadgets – cellphones, computers, PDAs, MP3 players? They were rich people’s toys at first and then the price came down while the battery got better and the features went up. The same thing will happen with the electric vehicle. First a rich main’s grocery getter with rich men’s grand tourers later and affordable electric cars for ordinary people like me even later. I guess the Fisker luxury sedan/coupe/thing will appeal to rich people who don’t go far but want electric drive and all the lux.
That said I could drive a 125 mile range EV all the way to Grandma’s house across the state and charge overnight before returning home no sweat. My commute this morn was 7 miles. My commute for the next 20 years will be if everything remains constant about 10 miles each way even with allowances errands. That leaves me 80+ miles in a 100 mile range EV to go to the store suddenly, out to the movies, to Cub Scouts, back to work for some sort of emergency call, etc. Every day. Most battery systems I’ve looked at charge rapidly at first so much of the range is recovered quickly.
My wife’s commute for the next 20 years if everything remains constant is about 60-70 miles round trip even with shopping, picking up the kids, and all that. We’re working on finding her something closer. She could come by my workplace and swap cars if she needed the other 80 miles of range left in my battery or perhaps her employer would entice her to stay at that job by adding a charging outlet.
Why wouldn’t an electric vehicle work for us? Running down the mental list of the dozens of friends and family and coworkers – I can think of perhaps 3 I know that couldn’t drive an EV everyday as the tech exists NOW. The ~250 mile range supposedly right around the corner would even take care of those three as well. YMMV…
This might not be true of all of you – you might live in the snowy north or commute through hell every morning and afternoon but it works for a lot of us. Nobody is going to make you drive one so why the resistance?
At my house we talk about taking constant baby steps in the right direction to achieve our goals. Education. Budget. Maintenance. Purchasing quality that lasts and can be repaired.
It looks like Detroit has been taking babysteps backwards my entire life. One step forward, two steps back. What worries me is when I ponder whether I think America as a whole is doing the same thing…
What’s wrong is that some of the external factors are actually internal and vice versa
1. Foreign competition should not read asian makers make quality cars, it should read more desirable cars.
2. Excess liquidity should be about how the domestics flooded the market with discounted cars at low rates. That’s the reason there are too many cars out there, and most of the excess are domestic.
3. The labor related issues are as much external as internal. The unions got too much leverage from state and federal laws and actions.