GM claims it's coming...

Even if they are off and it's ready by 2011, I'd give GM a hand for pushing for a serial hybrid while the battery supply for a 40 mile range is not ready yet.

Lutz is on the record saying the competition is in for a rude suprize if they think this is another dog-and-pony show. I hope they are serious this time.

In the meantime, don't expect Toyota, Honda, etc to be slackards....

 

Hope it is not the same empty promises that GM said they are going to sell hydrogen fuelcell car in 2010 under the Cadillac brand.

:blink:

Lets just say, I am in the lets see the proof first camp when it comes to GM.

 

At least GM is saying the right things. The parts I particularly liked:

"GM would take the unusual step of opening much of its development process to the media"

Being open to outside scrutiny could help keep them honest.

"Whether we can make that or not, this is still kind of an unpredictable program for us."

It's good to have them admitting that.

"We're sort of outside our comfort zone."

While, like most people here, I want to reserve final judgment until they're actually delivering a product, I think billions of dollars in losses may have finally woken up GM to the fact that they need to make fundamental changes in the way they do business. If so, the free market is doing it's job. And if not, GM will not be successful in the future and will shrink away or disappear, and again the free market will have done its job.

 

I guess it's a question about how you see a half filled water glass...
To me this seems mainly like a PR stunt and it seems to be working.... Then quietly in a couple of years they will simply say "OPS! Battery tech not ready, How about buying our 25% milage improved Hummer?"

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Mar 6 2007, 01:29 PM) [snapback]401092[/snapback]</div>

It is "all electric" in the sense that there is no mechanical linkage between the gasoline generator and the electric drive propulsion system that turns the wheels. All the gasoline motor does is generate electricity inefficiently to recharge the battery pack when the vehicle goes above 70mph or beyond set acceleration/range limits set by the computer control system.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Delta Flyer @ Mar 6 2007, 01:32 PM) [snapback]401097[/snapback]</div>

The battery supply for a 40 mile EV range is very ready and has been for many decades. Lead Acid batteries that have started most cars for 80+ years can be squashed into a small sedan without sacrificing much storage space to provide 50+ miles of electric range. The Gen I GM EV1 had a 60-80 mile range using subpar Delco Lead Acid batteries. NiMh batteries have been mass produced for about 10 years or so and provide power to most hybrids in small high voltage packs. Ovonic NiMH batteries gave the Gen II EV1 around 150 miles of range and Panasonic/Matsushita NiMh batteries gave the Toyota RAV4 EV about 100 miles of range while not being cost prohibitive. GM could make a small lightweight sedan with affordable NiMh batteries that could provide 100 or more miles of EV range. Although 40 miles EV range is great for a current PHEV, by 2011 it will hopefully be outdated. The current AC Propulsion Ebox ($55,000) based on Scion xB offers 150 mile Li-ion range. The Tesla Roadster ($96,000) offers 300 mile Li-ion range. Newer LiP batteries offer lots of range with minimal cost. Phoenix Motorcars trucks and SUVs have 300 miles of EV range while only costing $48,000. By 2011 I am guessing that enough start-up EV companies will convince at least several mainstream auto manufacturers to capitalize on the EV trend and offer 100 miles of EV range in a nice car for $20,000-$30,000.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(toyotablackbox @ Mar 6 2007, 09:06 PM) [snapback]401300[/snapback]</div>

Sorry, no.

A gas engine who's *only* purpose is to generate electricity is going to run far more efficiently than any general purpose gasoline engine because it can run at one fixed speed where it's most efficient.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Mar 6 2007, 10:01 PM) [snapback]401317[/snapback]</div>

I'd imagine it would run on whatever cycle generators usually run on... that would essentially be what the engine is used for.

 

One good thing about a 2010 production target. By then we will know Toyota’s plans for the next gen. 2009 Prius (to PHEV or not to PHEV).

Need I say more?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Mar 6 2007, 06:49 PM) [snapback]401309[/snapback]</div>

Sorry, yes!
Gasoline motors (generators) are one of the worst electricity generators available and are less than 25% efficient. When you use gasoline generators to create electricity to charge the battery to spin an electric motor you lose efficiency each step of the way. I'm not saying that ICE cars are better, I'm saying pure electric cars are better, and series hybrids are a great alternative to ICE cars but they are far from pure EVs as far as efficiency. Don't believe me? It is the same principle that will get you better mileage in your Prius if you use regenerative braking only when necessary, as the electric generators in the Prius can only re-coup 30% of the braking force as stored electricity and the rest of the energy that could've kept the car rolling forward is wasted. Hyper-milers drive as if there are no brakes in the car so that they can coast using no electricity or regen and slowly roll up to stop lights. This way energy is not wasted in braking and EV mode is avoided due to the hybrid system's automatic recharge of batteries that consumes fuel to charge batteries when the car could've coasted along w/o using either fuel (only stored momentum) and maintained higher efficiency. It is very complicated but makes alot of sense if you just think about the efficiency losses along the way and how the amazing hybrid system works. Most people can't stand to drive like the hyper-milers who roll up to stop lights creeping along very slowly, but it explains their high milage via reduction of system inefficencies. It is also why the Chevy Volt's freeway gas mileage drops so dramatically (to almost less than the Prius) when it has to rely on it's small ICE generator to create electricity. I hope that all makes sense, but I do know what I'm talking about.

 

Hmmm. 2010. Rings a bell. What was it. Oh! I remember. That's the year that GM promised it would have sold 1 million fuel cell vehicles. They're gonna have their hands full these next two years. Think they'll get 'em both out? Or do you suppose one of those promises might slip?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Delta Flyer @ Mar 6 2007, 12:32 PM) [snapback]401097[/snapback]</div>

Batteries aren't ready for 40 mile range?! I've owned three EVs - all designed in the late 80's - that had more range than that. You don't think we have the batteries today?! Yikes. Turns out that the auto companies don't always say it like it is.

The sad part is that we have the documented EXPERIENCE to expect another dog-and-pony show from GM. Remember, these folks called the Chevy Silverado a "hybrid" because the engine stopped at red lights, and it had an inverter and a power outlet.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(toyotablackbox @ Mar 6 2007, 10:07 PM) [snapback]401473[/snapback]</div>

Yup. Definitely more efficient to propel the car directly with the ICE, than to drag it along to charge the batteries. Remove the ICE to make more room (and money) for the batteries, and we'll be somewhere! Lutz claims that this car will get 50mpg after the batteries are depleted! If that's the case, why don't they just make a 50mpg "depleted-battery" hybrid and put it on the market now without waiting for the magic batteries that make this thing posssible?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Mar 7 2007, 12:17 AM) [snapback]401478[/snapback]</div>

Most of the GM enthusiasts weren't at all pleased when I pushed that idea. A few started to ponder that question, but the thought was quickly undermined.

The other thing that freaks them out is just how rapidly the popularity of Prius is growing. None had done the math to discover the reality of the 150,000 annual sales objective for the United States. That pushes Prius very much into the mainstream, something quite undeniable when it makes the top-20 sales list. Anywho, to compete against that, GM claims would have to be substaintally supported... quite an extreme compared to their previous attitudes about both hybrids and EVs.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Mar 6 2007, 10:55 PM) [snapback]401492[/snapback]</div>

Exactly! Here is part of what I JUST posted to one of my EV groups.

And of course GM did stick the "hybrid" tag on several silly little projects. Like a Silverado that did nothing mor than stop the motor at red lights, and offer an inverter and power outlet. Why were they making these cars back when the "hybrid" idea was no good?

Yes, the GM cheeleaders even managed to drag out some nifty idea that there were 800 EV1s sitting around waiting to be sold - evidence that nobody wanted the crappy cars. I think they missed the part where the ONLY time the cars were sitting in the lot mentioned is after they were reclaimed from the lease holders, and awaiting transportation to the crusher. Oops. Close, but not quite.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Mar 6 2007, 09:01 PM) [snapback]401317[/snapback]</div>

YES! That's it! :lol:

Ok, seriously, the point of the Volt is not to get outstanding gas mileage out on the open road. That's what the Insight was for. GM's engineers know that a gas engine turning to run a generator to charge a battery to drive the wheels is not the best way to get power from tank to wheels. But it is about the simplest fully-functional hybrid drivetrain conceiveable. No more transmission, no clutches, and no need to route power around a planetary gearset to control engine speed using two motor-generators. It's elegant, and it has the potential to be relatively inexpensive. And it provides the architecture to be anything from a standard hybrid all the way to a 300mi+ capable fully-electric car. That's their trump card: if they market to people who can commute mostly on grid power but still get a warm fuzzy that they are not limited to the range of their extension cord, this gives the mass-market something that does not exist in a dealer showroom. That's why it will sell if they make it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dipper @ Mar 6 2007, 05:49 PM) [snapback]401231[/snapback]</div>

hydrogen fuel cells require more energy than they give back, making them a negative energy option. As long as we have a steady supply of cheap oil, that may be ok but it's not going to get us off of our foreign oil addiction.

 

GM, the master of spin. Hey Darrell, you mean you never got your fuel cell vehicle? :lol: