Bob Lutz: Volt plug-in powertrain should have gone into Escalade first

About 2-3 times per year which I usually handle with a Harbor Freight, fold-up, 4x8, trailer. But I also have a larger one used for oversized loads such as ~800 lbs of light airplane on ~1,000 lbs of pontoon boat trailer 600 miles.

The 1.8L Prius has more oversized, load carry capability than many realize. To me, it looks like what could easily be the first, light-pickup, re-introduced to the USA market. Not original to me, AutoBeYours did a credible prototype with the 1.5L many years ago as well as a 'woody-style', wagon by a Prius Technical Stuff contributor, Bob Bruninga. The 1.8L Prius could be a front-wheel, hybrid version of the S-10 pickup. With a panel body style, it could also become a light-duty, utility van but that deserves a separate thread.

Bob Wilson

 

I know what pickup owners say, but in truth they rarely haul things that they could not do so in a car so the the studies are far from exact. The truck owner who picks up 50 bags of mulch from Home Depot counts as someone who uses their truck to haul. I can do the same in my Prius. It takes me 3 trips, but I can do it. Better yet, I just pay the $20 to rent their truck for 90 minutes. Or if I did it often I could spend a$500 for a decent open trailer.

The point that I was making is how many truck and big suv's are actually needed - not used to their potential once or twice a year, but used a great deal of the time? Or put it this way - if gas cost what it did in Europe would they still drive the big truck or suv or something more reasonable and figure out a way to deal with the occasional need for something big?

 

HSD (initially THS) have spread to several systems, also on many vehicles.
From HSD itself (Prius, Auris, CT200h, Yaris/Aqua/Prius c, Estima, Gs450h, RX400h/450h, LS600h, Camry, HS, Dyna Diesel, Highlander, Alphard)...

Much knowledge went to FHCV (hydrogen fuel-cell), and also to EV vehicles development...still to launch though.

We are approaching the time when for every car in the Toyota/Lexus brand line-up there is a hybrid...

 

so how many people get in a car to go 3-5 miles when they could walk or ride a bike just as easily? or how many people drive a 5 seat sedan when they could easily take a two seater?

the opportunity cost of having a vehicle with more capability is something each individual case evaluates. the soccer mom might drive 50 miles a day but only 5 miles with passengers and equipment. should she have a smart car and a van? the cost of fueling is only one aspect of a vehicle and until gasoline went over $2/g was a relativly minor one.

 

You are kind of missing the point. I was talking about decisions made on the macro level - people buying cars way bigger than what they need. It is not about making huge compromises, but rather making more sensible decisions.

You are correct that Americans should walk more, unfortunately it is not at all practical unless you are in the city.

As for the comment about a 2 seater car - that is just crazy. On top of not being reasonable or practical you also have to deal with the fact that other than the Smart, a 2 seater is a sports car. Even with the Smart and other small cars like the IQ and the Mini there is little benefit - they are neither inexpensive nor fuel efficient - the only real benefit is parking in congested areas.

 

Bob Lutz is wrong. Those truck owners complained that hybrids need to replace battery every 3 years, so why would they buy a plugin truck/SUV then?

These uneducated would not change their mind just because these modern technologies are on a truck/SUV.

 

I think that you make sense, but Bob Lutz is one of the smartest guys in the car industry and I would tend to believe that he could make it work. My guess is that it would be marketed differently. The old GM mild hybrid that was so panned in cars like the Saturn Vue was re-branded e-assist and now tons of old folks drive around in their Buick Lacrosse's and love the gas mileage never the wiser.

 

He has been wrong on many fronts. Example: He said no one will buy a Prius. It was going to be a FAILED experiment. That was 2005.

 

You are both right and wrong. He was a public skeptic of hybrids in general and the Prius in particular but way before 2005 His opinion was that fuel cell cars were the true goal and that hybrids were just a distraction. Why, if you remember back 10-12 years the reports were that fuel cell cars would be a reality by 2015 or so. If that were indeed the case hybrids would have been just a short stop along the way.

It was in 2005 that he did a major and public mea culpa admitting that he and the rest of the industry were wrong. It was at that point that he championed the Volt.

 

Back in 2005, the story was they would become available in 2010... which wasn't the slightest bit realistic. Until you see stationary devices in full operation, cost effective, proven realiable, etc. with the fuel itself readily available, there was no chance of seeing one in a vehicle... not to mention the problem of what to do with the dripping exhaust during the winter.

In other words, it's just an endless effort to hold back the little car that could.

 

you always seem so defensive, as if this was gmchat or something.

 

even george bush said we'd have fuel cells.

 

And neither one is an engineer. When it's new technology, you really really should listen to someone who knows about the technology.

 

Prius gets 80% of miles.
Minivan constant hauling use below.
Got the idea here from Prius driver here on PC, but he can't close his back hatch.

 

My memory is after GW Bush first took the Presidency, he defunded Partnership for New Generation of Vehicles, PNGV for the fuel-cell nonsense. The PNGV program included the GM Precept, the prototype of the Volt . . . in 2000. Lutz may have 'got religion' but that didn't end the fool-cell nonsense and millions more were wasted.

The 2000 Volt/Precept was true competition for the NHW11 . . . 12 years ago. Even worse, the all-electric EV-1 was not just abandoned but actively destroyed and with it another decade of battery technology. This sad history was not Lutz alone, GM CEO Wagner and the GM board of directors were enablers every step of the way. Small wonder that GM went bankrupt . . . they burned up every technical advantage they had and chased off the engineers with the expertise they needed.

It wasn't the Prius but Tesla that finally shamed GM into doing the right thing. It was realizing that a bunch of West Coast 'hippy' engineers were building an electric car that even today shuts-down the Corvette. Talk about a 'slap in the face' reality moment but that is what it took.

So I'm not terribly impressed by Bob Lutz, Wagner, the GM board of directors or a host of enablers. They lied to themselves back in 2000 and nothing has shown they've changed:

​

"An employer who hires a fool or a bystander is like an archer who shoots recklessly." - Proverbs 26:10​

Bob Wilson

 

Knowing someone who owns an Escalade, they will pay big bucks for bling, but pinch the nickel to the point the buffalo sh!ts, when it comes to things like fuel efficiency... they would not pay for Volt technology..

The person who buys and Escalade is not likely to be a person with a mindset to want high efficiency vehicles if it costs more than just a few pennies more..... they'd rather spend it on more bling!

I'm not impressed with Lutz's hot air either... Just wind the clock back and listen to some of the disparaging comments he's made about Prius technology.

 

Perhaps you are underestimating the bling value of the Voltec.

 

Which circles back to the point I was trying to make. The profit margins on trucks and SUV's is enormous compared to that of mundane passenger cars, which is why so much advertising is spent convincing you that you need a SUV. Further, the Escalade is the pinnacle of an american Luxury/Status Symbol SUV, hence it's profit margin is even bigger. You could sacrifice some of that profit margin by putting in a Volt (esque) powertrain. That way, the price stays the same and the Escalade driver has the option for better fuel economy.

 

well HSD is pretty unique technology, so thats why people point it out...

Overall, Toyota as a company is 3x more valuable than GM, I guess you can use that as sum of all parts.

 

Lutz may have a valid point or at the least, a valid opinion about the potential diversity and application of the "Volt" powertrain into other automotive applications such as The Escalade.

But I see his commentary as simply trying to get more exposure and more of his message out.

Because retrospectively redefining "how" one would of developed or applied the "Volt" powertrain is disingenuous to the history as it actually unfolded.

It's once again "great" that in retrospect Lutz is defining himself as such a foresighted pioneer of automotive engineering, but he seems to have forgotten the reality of the history of The Volt and the development of The Volt powertrain.

How many years, and years did it seem The Volt was simply the chimerical product that GM rolled out at Auto Shows?

Seems to me, the evolutionary process happened exactly as it COULD, even if now Lutz retrospectively redefines how he say's he believes it SHOULD of happened.

IMO, took GM long enough to produce The Volt...period. GM had to go to the edge of bankruptcy, and almost be forced by govermental intervention as well as a desire to recreate it's public image before it seemed the Volt itself manifested into anything more than a automotive or trade show gimmick.

Lutz should just be happy that The Volt is now a real product, instead of retrospectively trying to add to his reputation by saying he would of preferred the development of the powertrain in other larger products.

It's a positive thing, that now we are discussing the expansion of alternative powertrains, into a wider variety of vehicles. But it's quite questionable as to whether Bob Lutz or GM deserve any credit for being foresighted about this, or simply now catching up with the reality.