Discuss Detroit » Archives - Beginning July 2006 » GM to revive the electric car? « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge

Post Number: 90
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 1:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I you do a check on my earlier posts, you will see that I predicted the revival of the electric car. I love it when I am right!

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20061110/A UTO01/611100327
Top of pageBottom of page

Supersport
Member
Username: Supersport

Post Number: 10863
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 3:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

The advanced technology vehicle would have an extended driving range on battery power alone and would also have a diesel or gasoline engine that could power the car when the battery was low.




It's not an electric car, it's a hybrid, and it's hardly anything new. It's simply GM trying to play catch up with the rest of the competition after initially leading the pack with the EV1.
Top of pageBottom of page

Spacemonkey
Member
Username: Spacemonkey

Post Number: 120
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 3:46 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Jerry Seinfeld quote about the Detroit Auto Industry:

“I think of the entertainment industry and Detroit similarly,” Mr. Seinfeld said as he dressed down the television executives in the room for not being bolder in their programming. “They don’t have confidence in their instincts. Maybe they don’t have instincts to be confident in?”
Top of pageBottom of page

56packman
Member
Username: 56packman

Post Number: 708
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 4:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Don't they know the Stonecutters hold back the electric car?

WE DO, WE DO!
Top of pageBottom of page

Mongo
Member
Username: Mongo

Post Number: 6
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 8:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Gm isn't playing catch up. GM gave the technology to Toyota. A full electric vehicle isn't a good idea. Hybrid is better but the battery cost and the more upfront expense isn't worth it.
I like the fuel cell idea myself so far. Also the new Saturn Vue hybrid is far superior then any other hybrid.
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 301
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 8:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I think hydrogen fuel cells are more of GM's focus now then electric cars would be. Those electric cars were too expensive for what you got, that's why they flopped.
Top of pageBottom of page

Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge

Post Number: 91
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 10:09 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This is a plug-in electric hybrid and yes, it is something new. The current hybrids hardly make use of their electric motors. They are regular cars with an electric assist. A plug-in hybrid is an electric car with a gas engine assist. Big difference. Hydrogen cars are 25 years off if at all - don't hold your breath. Electric cars are currently viable (see Tesla motors).

They stopped production on the EV1's in 2000. The technology has changed A LOT since then. Just look at the batteries in your cell phone. Lithium Ion is not your Daddy's car battery. Lithium Polymer will be even more powerful and lightweight. The EV1 was also expensive because it was low production. Anyone can tell you that low production numbers (800 total) means high prices. In my view, the gas electric hybrid will be soon replaced by the plug-in electric which will eventually be replaced by the full electric cars as the battery technology improves. I am waiting for aerogel or nanotube supercapacitors to replace batteries all together within the next 10 years. You heard it here first!

Why is it that people say "electric cars were too expensive" and then go on to talk about hydrogen? Do you have any idea what those hydrogen prototype vehicles cost? Millions! You could buy ten Tesla cars for the price of one hydrogen prototype.
Top of pageBottom of page

Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge

Post Number: 92
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 10:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Oh yeah. I also forgot to mention that hydrogen fuel cells ARE electric cars. Fuel cells use hydrogen to produce electricity which drives ELECTRIC motors. Developing electric cars will also help to make better hydrogen fuel cell cars if that ever becomes viable.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13

Post Number: 1220
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, November 10, 2006 - 10:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Folks, there are already non-hybrid cars out there that average 30+ mpg in the city and close to 40 mpg highway.

Oops... Detroit doesn't produce ANY of 'em.

Oh well. When gas tops $3 per gallon for good next summer, I guess those GM, Ford, and Chrysler engineers will finally be asked to develop high quality, fuel efficient cars. Or... maybe not.

(Message edited by Fury13 on November 11, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Mgoblue
Member
Username: Mgoblue

Post Number: 6
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 12:36 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

If I am thinking 'electric' I really like what Tesla Motors has to offer. Check it out at http://www.teslamotors.com/ind ex.php?js_enabled=1.

the Silicon Valley start-up haas built a mass-market electric sportscar, has raised $40 million in a third round of venture capital from a bunch of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and other gearheads you'd expect in this sort of deal. They include the wealthy co-founders of Google, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, who have owned Prius', but who are now probably looking to upgrade.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mgoblue
Member
Username: Mgoblue

Post Number: 7
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 12:51 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Who killed the electric car??

"Who killed the electric cars" documentary was presented at Tribeca Film Festival on June 28th, a movie directed by Chris Paine. The EV1 is an electric car from GM whom many people were interested to buy it (arround 5000), but GM wouldn’t let them.

The car cost $299-plus a month to lease, went between 60 and 80 miles on a full charge, and took between 45 minutes and 15 hours to re-charge.

The documentary includes interviews with celebrities like: Mel Gibson and Tom Hanks.

Watch a YouTube video at http://video.google.ca/videopl ay?docid=6923835633598627078&q =who+killed+the+electric+car
Top of pageBottom of page

56packman
Member
Username: 56packman

Post Number: 715
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 7:05 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Mgoblue--I look to Hollywood celebrities for all of my automotive information.
Top of pageBottom of page

Supersport
Member
Username: Supersport

Post Number: 10865
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 7:59 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

So you've seen "Tucker?" :-)
Top of pageBottom of page

Ndavies
Member
Username: Ndavies

Post Number: 2301
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 3:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yawn,

If we switch to this plug in hybrid, How are we going to pay for the roads? Are you willing to pay a tax on all your electric to pay for the roads?

Who's going to upgrade the electrical system to provide the power for all these plug in electric vehicles? Do you want a new fossil fuel or Nuclear power plant in your backyard? Our electrical system is already near it's limits.

US auto makers make plenty of 30+ MPG vehicles. GM has more 30+ MPG vehicles on the market than any other manufacturer.

People have already returned to lower milage vehicles now that oil prices have returned to a more normal level. Americans don't want high mileage vehicles. They want vehicles that can carry all there shit around in. Once they adjust to the higher fuel prices they will return to SUV's and trucks.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13

Post Number: 1221
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 11:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"US auto makers make plenty of 30+ MPG vehicles. GM has more 30+ MPG vehicles on the market than any other manufacturer."

That's misleading. Unless I am missing something, GM (not to mention Ford and Chrysler) doesn't make a single non-hybrid vehicle rated at 30 mpg or more in city driving (which is where most of you urbanphiles drive, right?).

"People have already returned to lower milage vehicles now that oil prices have returned to a more normal level. Americans don't want high mileage vehicles."

We'll see about that when gasoline goes above $3 per gallon next year and above $4 per gallon sometime in '09.
Top of pageBottom of page

Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge

Post Number: 94
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 10:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Are you yawning because you just woke up? It is 2006 by the way.

So you are saying that if we all drive inefficient cars, that the roads would be better? That seems to be a rather silly idea. That assumes that the gas tax will forever be the only source of revenue for road repairs. And yes, I would be happy to pay a tax on my electricity - especially since I wouldn't be paying as much for gas anymore. While I am at it, I might use some of the money I save to go out to eat or do something else that will help the Michigan economy. We do not have any significant fossil fuel sources in Michigan, so most of every dollar we spend on fuel goes out of state and often out of the country.

Are you saying that we are unable to build new sources for electricity? Why is that? We forgot how to build power plants? They have to be in our backyard? We forgot how to build transmission lines too?

GM and Ford put all their resources into lower mileage vehicles and are now paying the price. That is not my opinion - that is what the market has said. Also remember that even if Americans "want vehicles that can carry all there (sic) shit around in" that there is a global market out there who doesn't have the same opinion. Try selling an Escalade in Germany. American car companies need to stay competitive on a global market or they will not survive. I believe that there will continue to be a limited US market for large trucks and SUVs but ignoring the market for high mileage vehicles is short sighted.

With your thinking, American car companies will "stay the course" and will refuse to see that there have been permanent changes in global markets. They will not adapt and will fail.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13

Post Number: 1222
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Monday, November 13, 2006 - 7:34 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"GM and Ford put all their resources into lower mileage vehicles and are now paying the price. That is not my opinion - that is what the market has said."

Damn straight. Keep posting those quarterly losses!

"...ignoring the market for high mileage vehicles is short sighted... American car companies will 'stay the course' and will refuse to see that there have been permanent changes in global markets. They will not adapt and will fail."

Right... and if that indeed happens, I will have absolutely no sympathy for them. Certainly, we in Michigan will feel even more pain from a failing economy based on a single industry led by myopic management, but maybe it will force a long-overdue economic diversification.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fortress_warren
Member
Username: Fortress_warren

Post Number: 171
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Monday, November 13, 2006 - 1:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why Detroit didn't build small cars with good mileage? There's no profit in them. They could make $15k selling a big SUV, small cars were there just to get the CAFE numbers up. No one was complaining about gas hogs 10 years ago, they made lots of money to pay for lots of wages and bennies.

When the Neon came out 12 years ago, Chrysler could make $1k on each one. They were losing $1k on the Shadow and Sundance it replaced. Even the Japanese were impressed, they bought a whole bunch of Neons and took them apart to see how Mopar did it.

All those hybrids are money losers. They are halo cars, give the company the green image. That's hardly the way to get Detroit back to profits. Maybe in the future, the technology will get cheaper, but it's not there now.

Detroit needs to emulate the Japanese cars, just do it better.
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 305
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, November 13, 2006 - 1:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Personally I like my big engine luxo yacht, All though I don't want to drive that everyday. I'd prefer a train going down the medians of I-75 and 696 to driving the barge to work daily. That kind of change will need to be driven by our government, we can't keep leaving the greater good of our environment in the hands of for profit corporations. It's a no brainer no real changes have been made since the 70s in our massive thirst for fuel. In fact it's worse, in 1973 a car getting 12 mpg was the norm, now a vehicle average is up around 20 when you factor in SUVs, but there's way more cars on the road now. I anticipate if we make more efficient cars, it won't slow down our consumption one bit, why? Our global vehicle use increases exponentially every generation.
Top of pageBottom of page

Hornist9
Member
Username: Hornist9

Post Number: 22
Registered: 05-2005
Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 1:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

GM gave the technology to Toyota. I don't think so Tim,as Al Borland would say. ECD (Energy Conversion Devices) still owns patent rights to Metal Nickel Hydride Batteries that Toyota and Honda uses.

The technology for the batteries was invented by Ovonic Battery in Auburn Hills, a division of ECD. I know, my wife is a cell development specialist,and has been with Ovonic for over 20 years.

Ovonic had an electric car around the same time as GM's EV 1 that ran completely on Ovonic batteries, that could nearly 300 miles on a single charge.

Fortress_warren, The American car companies knew what Ovonic was doing. GM had a division called GM Ovonic. Unfortunately, I think GM, Ford and Chrysler are in bed with big oil, and will milk oil as long as they can. I have a friend that is an engineer at GM, and he scoffed when I asked him they weren't using or developing hybrids. I just shook my head.

This is hard for me to say as the son of and a former UAW member, but I will support what my wife's company makes and our next car will probably be a Toyota Prius or a Honda Civic.
Top of pageBottom of page

Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge

Post Number: 99
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 11:44 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ovonics is a great company in my book and the inventors of the NiMH are heros for the EV community, but there are some questions I have about them.

Doesn't Chevron own controlling interest in Ovonics? Why do they have "non-traction" contracts in China (This mean that some companies are allowed to use their technology and long as they don't use it in vehicles)?

Why is it that Ovonics does not sell directly to the consumer market? There are many hobbiest and small companies who would love to be able to purchase NiMH battery packs for their prototype vehicles. We are stuck paying high prices for what are essentially golf cart (lead acid) and inferior batteries.

I am looking forward to Lithium Ion. No enforceable patents on that technology so no one company can monopolize and control it. If only the damn things would stop going up in flames!
Top of pageBottom of page

Rjlj
Member
Username: Rjlj

Post Number: 197
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 12:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Nainrouge, you can take about 10 minutes on the web to get your answers answered. Cobasys is the 50/50 joint venture with Chevron. Ihttp://www.ovonic.com
http://www.cobasys.com
About purchasing batteries
http://www.cobasys.com/pdf/faq /faq.html
Top of pageBottom of page

Rjlj
Member
Username: Rjlj

Post Number: 198
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 12:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Whoops, should have said "questions answered."
Top of pageBottom of page

Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge

Post Number: 100
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 1:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I guess I should have said that these are rhetorical questions - as in could Chevron's involvement have a chilling effect on Cobasys' willingness to make NiMH batteries available for EV experimentation and development? The idea of a rhetorical question is to invite discussion - not as an invitation to insult my search engine skills.

The point about purchasing batteries is disingenuous. They are stating that batteries above 10 Ah are too dangerous for the public? Go look at the Ah rating of marine batteries. Chain a couple of those together and you can kill yourself too, so what makes NiMH batteries so special? You can cause some damage with any improper handling of any sort of battery.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ericdfan
Member
Username: Ericdfan

Post Number: 174
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 1:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

About "Have you seen Tucker?"

I know this is lil off topic, but...

Preston Tucker was a genius. His cars were so well and innovative made that the big 3 was doomed unless they killed the tucker.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fortress_warren
Member
Username: Fortress_warren

Post Number: 196
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 2:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hornist9, I'd never heard of Ovonic. The SF area is one of the hotbeds for alternative energy and never saw anything in the news about a 300 mile range electric. If it was a real car; a/c, decent power, not a golf cart, they didn't do much to get the word out.

The big 3 have a multiple billion dollar investment in the current engines. They know this technology, everything's in place to make it work.

Go completely new, but no infrastructure to support it; hydrogen stations, recharging stations, that kind of thing, that's taking a big chance on whether there's a market for it.

My money is on hydrogen; in fuel cells, fuel for power plants, and burning it in cars. Produced by reactors splitting water.
Top of pageBottom of page

Rjlj
Member
Username: Rjlj

Post Number: 199
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006 - 3:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That is a bet that will not pay of in the near future, maybe in the long run 50+ years. You can not make hydrogen cheaply at this point and it takes more energy to create it than it is worth.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.