GM introducing plug-in hybrid Saturn Vue in 2009

Well, now he does.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JustLurkin @ Sep 18 2007, 10:59 PM) [snapback]514628[/snapback]</div>

Thanks for the info, I won't be stepping back to move forward in a Saturn anytime soon then. People have always been looking for effortless acceleration and auto manufacturers have added more power to the engine over the years to satisfy the wants. The problem is not the engine, it is the transmission. The 4-speed auto is too limited by it's 4 fixed ratios to provide the power management available with a CVT. Perhaps GM will one day scrape up enough pennies to design and manufacture a CVT for their own vehicles, I heard that they stayed with the outdated 4-speed to save money.
Just where did GMs forward thinking management staff think that they would be today? I wonder...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JustLurkin @ Sep 18 2007, 10:59 PM) [snapback]514628[/snapback]</div>

If that's the case, it makes the Prius look like a One-Speed transmission. B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hill @ Sep 18 2007, 09:53 PM) [snapback]514598[/snapback]</div>

You guys are so easy. You make my point for me. VBsportbiker wasn't criticizing GM for vaporware or anything like that. He was rather stating how pathetic GM was for even proposing to come out with a plugin hybrid with EV range of a mere 10 miles. The aim of my post was simply to point out the conflict and double-standard that I suspect he has when it comes to Toyota. I suspect that he would have thought a 10 mile EV range was just fine if it had been a Toyota announcement he was reading.

As a side note, I still think you guys are overemphisizing this "certified for road use in Japan" thing. While I do not doubt that Toyota will produce a plugin hybrid some day, I think that announcement doesn't really mean much. It just means they got permission to drive their prototypes on the roads. It does not mean that the car will be in show rooms any time soon. It may very well be, but this road certification of the prototype isn't proof it will be. As evidence of such, I would point out that Honda received the same certification for it's hydrogen fuel cell prototype years ago. I would expect that the certification means little more than that the prototypes have the correct amount of power, brakes, lights, and safety restraints to be driven on Japan's roads.

 

I see "re-fueling" depots all around me for a plug-in hybrid.

I see none for Hydrogen.

Case closed.

Plug me in, Toyota. I'm ready.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Sep 19 2007, 10:46 AM) [snapback]514789[/snapback]</div>

Some of the discussions turn into pointless debates with the greatest of ease. Sticking to the real-world data really ticks some enthusiasts off, but it is the obvious best approach. So semantic issues like "speed" and "mode" don't hold much water.

MPG, PRICE, and SALES are what ultimately matter. That's genuine merit earned.

 

It's also worth noting what the Toyota PHEV prototype actually is: its a Prius with a bigger NIHM battery pack, an on-board charger, and modified software. Here's a description:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/07/25/to...ius-road-tests/

Toyota is simulating how a PHEV Prius might perform, using NIHM not (the presumed eventual) Li-ion.

So it's not clear who's ahead at this point. Toyota's stated reason for not moving to Li-ion for the 2009 Prius was a concern over safety. No safe Li-ion = no production PHEV. But the A123 batteries are already being put into Prius PHEV conversions, so either GM has a safe battery or is less concerned about safety.

My take is that Toyota has a platform but no battery, GM has a battery but no platform. So Toyota nixes Li-ion in 2009 Prius, GM announces production of 10 mile PHEH Vue in 2009. It's at least plausible that GM actually has the jump on this and has the sense to follow through.

 

Isn't there a Ford Escape Hybrid small SUV that gets fairly good mpg for its size ?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(chogan @ Sep 19 2007, 01:42 PM) [snapback]514815[/snapback]</div>

The great thing (more ironic I guess) is that the GM spokesperson never promised to produce the PHEV Vue in 2009. He stated 2009-ish. Does that mean 2009, 2010, 2011 or even further down the pipeline? I personally won't believe it until I see it at the dealership based on the previous deadlines they have missed.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnnArborite @ Sep 19 2007, 09:08 PM) [snapback]515036[/snapback]</div>

It gets 34 city/30 hwy, vs 20 city/26hwy based on the new estimates.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hill @ Sep 19 2007, 02:53 AM) [snapback]514598[/snapback]</div>

thats exactly what is p/o me about GM... they just talk. They have no product on the roads, they actually have outside suppliers to design the system, and yet they just brag as if they are having something on the road right now.

How about bulding the full hybrid first and then talk about it? Because they are just talking about ideas on the paper right now.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(chogan @ Sep 19 2007, 05:42 PM) [snapback]514815[/snapback]</div>

it is not clear who is ahead? Thats pretty funny.

I think ahead is the company that is selling hybrids and that has sold million of them.

Once GM actually starts selling them, we will see who is ahead.

I just hope that GM wont tarnish really good Hybrid reputation for longetivity, as lithium ion batteries can not last as long as NiMH currently.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Sep 19 2007, 12:15 PM) [snapback]514798[/snapback]</div>

If they want to cut cost by staying with a 4-speed auto then that is their burden to deal with. There are no free lunches when it comes to compromise. There is no need to get all catty and snipe at me.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(spwolf @ Sep 21 2007, 12:43 PM) [snapback]515838[/snapback]</div>

My statement was about who is ahead in the race to build a PHEV, not ahead in building hybrids. No question on hybrids.

For a PHEV, you need batteries that can take deep discharges. NIHM won't do, for that reason. For example, as those of us with EV buttons may attest, the 100 lb Prius battery lets you go maybe 1 mile in EV mode, under Toyota's charge/discharge limits. With that setup the NIHM battery lasts indefintely, but a 10 mile PHEV would require half a ton of batteries. Same for an EV -- there are NIHM EVs, but they do not discharge the battery fully every day as you would with a PHEH, and if they did, the batteries would be dead in 3 or 4 years (e,g, RAV4 150 mile range x 365 days x 3 = 165000 miles, certainly near the practical life expectancy of the battery pack based on the Cal Edison studies of their RAV4 EVs.) PHEV is hard on the battery because you want to go from full charge to full discharge every day, versus the Prius (never go outside roughly 40-60% SOC) or EV (almost never run to full discharge).

So, the new battery tech is a critical component for a practical PHEV. I was just pointing that the A123 batteries are already being put in cars, while Toyota nixed use of Li-ion in the 2009 Prius due to safety concerns. GM's definitely ahead on the batteries, based on that.

Now, I'm hardly the person to defend GM -- my first car was a Chevy Vega, for which I will never fully forgive GM. But with any luck, your other statement about no full hybrids will only be true for a few more weeks. Below is a link to a test-drive of a full-hybrid Tahoe. Unless things have changed, those will be out on dealers' lots in the 4th quarter of 2007. Not the kind of car I'd buy, but it is a full hybrid. So, as much as I dislike GM, and as much as I think putting hybrid tech into big vehicles first is a marketing mistake, I can see where they are coming from (gradual evolution of existing tech on their successful hybrid buses), and I'd say it's no longer accurate to insist that GM's full hybrids only exist on paper.

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2007/09...-drive-200.html

So until Toyota says they have a durable safe Li-ion battery, yeah, I'd still say it's not clear who's ahead in the race to offer a production PHEV. Toyota's way ahead in hybrids. And I think they have their head screwed on straight as to where the market is for this (small cars, not megaSUVs). But they appear behind in batteries.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(chogan @ Sep 21 2007, 12:19 PM) [snapback]515857[/snapback]</div>

Appearances can be deceiving.

To be a genuine step forward, the batteries must also be affordable.