Business Week: Is GM's Green Tech Better Than Toyota's?

Looks like more scrambling and talk to me. Especially from Chrysler and their huge marketing of the Hemi garbage that has been coming out in the last few years.

Just like when Walmart gave 20million to the Katrina victims, it's all market positioning and a drop in the bucket for them. Toyota is not exempt either. Put out as few "lost leaders" yet continue to sell garbage.

 

Grr, sorry for my negative response to this news.

It's better than them denouncing fuel efficiency altogether and coming out with more vehicles with less MPG and emissions equipment.

 

"There is no question that we [GM] underestimated the marketing power of the technology," says Larry Burns, GM's executive vice-president for research and development.

Translation: we make our highest profits on SUV's and large pickup trucks, and we will do everything possible to keep right on doing that, even if it destroys the planet.

Hey GM, how about offering a high mpg vehicle, instead of a gas-hog?

A hybrid gas-hog is still a gas-hog. And most of these vehicles are simply unnecessary and irresponsible, and damaging to our country and our planet.

Harry

 

OK, so they have big plans. Wake me up when they have some product.

 

No, it is not any significant savings..

For instance if the tahoe fuel consumption is 15 miles a gallon.. A 40% improvement (thats quoted in the press release, expect a lot less in reality) would imply just an extra 6 miles per gallon..

a 21 miles/gallon is still not fuel efficent IMHO..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Chrome @ Nov 14 2007, 06:45 PM) [snapback]539704[/snapback]</div>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pbsriniv @ Nov 14 2007, 04:36 PM) [snapback]539716[/snapback]</div>

It is not a significant number for sure but when that increase is from 15mpg tro 21mpg then the actual gallons of fuel saved is quite immense. More so than the 6mpg gain from 45 to 51mpg. Try the math yourself, it really changd my opinion of milage increases on the gas guzzlers.

I agree that it is not enough but I disagree that it is insignificant. Getting those gas guzzlers to increase by 6mpg is actually better for us than getting the new Prius to go 75mpg.

 

What would be better is to have the numbskulls who feel that they need Tahoes to make a social statement @15 mpg switch right now to a luxury car that gets 30 mpg. No technology necessary, just switch, and get double the fuel economy.

And if we can't get SUV drivers to switch, then let's switch the vehicles out from under them, and require reasonable fuel economy. If that means outlawing SUV's as we now know them, so be it.

Harry

 

Wasn't the point of Two-Mode the fact that it could easily be adapted to other vehicles?

Why then is it taking an additional year before the first pickup gets it?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pbsriniv @ Nov 14 2007, 08:36 PM) [snapback]539716[/snapback]</div>

Funny I never heared of 15 a gallon. With Ethanol yes, not regular gasoline. The Tahoe and Avalanche both get 19 on the highway and 14 in town. And my buddy has a new avalanche with the active fuel management, we drove to Oregon at 75MPH over several passes and the computer showed 19.7MPG average. (about 700 miles) The only real advantage of the Hybrid is around town as its EPA estimates are 20MPG and 20 on the highway. Is it worth the premium? Absolutly not, but the Chevys still get better economy than the tundra (Even without the hybrid) A stagering 13 and 17MPG. So I guess chevy is more efficient than Toyota or whatever.

You cant compair a Prius to a full size truck, so "21 miles/gallon is still not efficient IMHO" Obviously not if your driving a prius, but ask a Ford, Chrystler or even Toyota tundra, they would be quite content. Its not intended to attract Prius drivers, but people who drive trucks love. Mark my words it will sell out even if the premium isin't worth it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikej777 @ Nov 14 2007, 05:33 PM) [snapback]539739[/snapback]</div>

What kind of math are you doing to calculate whether the premium is not worth it? if the premium is only $2500 or so then it wouldn't take long to recoup that over the lifetime of the truck even if fuel prices stayed the same and did not inflate.

Liek stated earlier, getting people to change their minds abotu what they NEED to drive is the most important change that needs to take place. Just because they can afford a gas guzzler does not mean they should be driving one. There are far too many societal/global effects that are connected to those kinds of decisions.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Nov 14 2007, 08:04 PM) [snapback]539727[/snapback]</div>

Isn't HSD nearly as adoptable? Why did it take 7 years (!) before another non-barge car got it (Prius -> Camry)?

And, again, it's going to be in other vehicles before the 'first pickup'. But you knew that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Nov 14 2007, 08:37 PM) [snapback]539756[/snapback]</div>

GM has been to the point of being cocky (smug?) about how easy it would be to install their hybrid system into another vehicle, because everything was squashed into the standard transmission housing... and you already know that. No one is buying the act. In fact, everyone here is quite aware how Toyota is investing in the next generation design rather than expanding models with the old.

As for GM, we want them to deliver on the very thing they had been bragging about.

True, the system ended up having shortcomings. But not even offering the choice is a big problem. Where the heck an announcement for a hybrid sedan to compete head-on with Camry-Hybrid?

And are they just throwing in the towel for competing with Prius? Volt will be smaller and cost more.

After considering that, look at the market outside the US.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Chrome @ Nov 14 2007, 11:44 PM) [snapback]539841[/snapback]</div>

The commercial version has been in use since 2003.

The worldwide market is looking for affordable hybrid cars... now! Gas isn't cheap anymore, like it was back when Toyota had time to spare.

GM said it would deploy the personal version quickly.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikej777 @ Nov 14 2007, 10:33 PM) [snapback]539739[/snapback]</div>

Wouldn't people get 15mpg (or less) when driving in the city since your buddy got right at the highway estimates? BTW, the combined EPA mileage for the regular Tahoe is 16 mpg. As far as the Chevy vs Tundra MPG...both suck. One can really do a true comparison since they have different engine sizes . Tundra 5.7L is 14/18, Chevy's 5.3L is 15/20 and the 6.0L is 13/18 (probably best comparison in terms of conventional truck performance). 1-2 Mpg one way or the other aren't much to brag about for either company IMO.

Sure comparing a Prius economy to truck economy is not a fair comparison. But for the majority of truck/SUV purchases who don't need a large truck or SUV, it is a valid comparison for fuel savings. Getting one person to switch from a Tahoe Hybrid to a Prius (or even a TCH) would save 28mpg (16mpg TCH). Either would switch even more mileage. The problem with trying to push people into large hybrid SUVs is that a lot of people driving SUVs just because they think they need extra space/security is a good part of what got us into the oil addiction we currently have.

As far as the premium goes, I wonder if we will see a bunch of articles about how the hybrid SUVs aren't worth the extra money like we have seen up to this point?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Nov 15 2007, 02:45 AM) [snapback]539873[/snapback]</div>

And the Prius came out in 1997? 1997 -> 2004 for the second HSD vehicle.

2007 for the first two TwoMode vehicles, and 2008 sees a few more coming along. So yeah, we can agree that GM is moving faster than Toyota.

 

Is GM's green tech better than Toyota's? It depends on your point of view. If you're a member of the Detroit 3 fan club then the answer is yes. If not, the answer is no. :lol: