Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
32 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Lawrence Rhodes
Well no wonder it goes so slow.  With cabling like that I bet it's less that
a hunderd amps.  They must be saving the real stuff for production.  WINK,
WINK........Lawrence Rhodes....

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Dan Frederiksen-2
I contacted GM communications Chris Preuss with the following:

*in a online comment to the march 2007 under-the-hood photos, you wrote
that you were very serious about the Volt and you remain transparent and
open to discussion. further you say the skepticism is unfounded. I hope
you will not disown that statement and answer the following:

was the GM Volt a direct reaction to the documentary 'who killed the
electric car' ?

is the blue motor under the hood a DC series motor? could you in general
please describe the electric components that we can see used in the mock
up?
this might seem pointless to you since they will not be in a final
design but it goes to the transparency. please indulge it
was it based on lead acid batteries, was it a DC motor, was it a
commercially available controller (from forklifts or similar), what are
the 3 black boxes.  that kind of thing

thank you
Dan Frederiksen
*

to which he answered (on a sunday):


*Dan,

To your questions...

On the issue of the movie, the answer would be no. No disrespect
intended to the producers, but the movie was simply wrong in its thesis
that GM conspired with Big Oil.  The EV-1 simply lost more money than
the company could afford to lose and the program was stopped. Volt is a
response to GM's belief that we must move away from the use of petroleum
to stay sustainable. We also think a vehicle such as the Volt is a game
changer for the industry and will help re-establish GM to its historic
role as a technology leader...something we sadly just handed to our
Asian rivals.
The internals of the concept car are essentially motors and simple
controllers similar to what you'd find in small electric utlity
vehicles. As was mentioned in the post, this is standard practice in the
industry for providing propulsion for what are essentially styling
concepts (for vehicles of any type). The drive system for the production
Volt is most closely derived from our fourth generation fuel cell
electric vehicles. These components and controllers can trace their
lineage all the way back to EV-1.
The progress on the battery continues at a good pace. The first fully
integrated packs (including the thermal management systems) are under
test as we speak. We move to vehicle based testing in the late spring
next year. Challenges on the battery are essentially the durability of
the cells and cost. The energy density and thermal issues are being
managed...still early in the game. All this is to say that, quoting our
Vice Chairman, Bob Lutz, that we're where we'd figured we would be right
now and we have yet to encounter any deal killers that make us think we
can't get the Volt to production. The Volt remains the number one
priority program within GM and we're sparing no resource or expense to
get it into production. Stay tuned!

Best,
Chris
*

Of course he was lying and gave me the white washed official position
that the GM Volt was out of the goodness of their heart and from their
clear vision and leadership that electric drive is the future. it's just
pure coincidence that they rushed a fake mockup out immediately after
the Paine/Gore body slam from 'who killed the electric car' and 'an
inconvenient truth'. I didn't buy it of course and decided to point out
some holes in his position (I had to restrain myself greatly to keep
from pointing out the obvious that he was lying and use more sugar
coated words for his dense mind)

*
thank you for the response although it seems to be somewhat of a reflex
answer. the quick official policy rather than perhaps somber reflection
on the truth.

two follow ups:

1) how would you know if it was a conspiracy with 'big oil' ? were you
on the board? were you privy to all private communications of the members.

2) and do you deny there was any effort at all to discredit the EV1
program by GM?
I refer to the allegations that sale of them was discouraged, waiting
lists were ignored and the situation was presented to the press as if
noone wanted them, that even Mel Gibson had to go through background
checks to even be considered and noone from the general public had any
chance of getting one, that you said they would not be crushed and they
were, that you refused to sell them to anyone after the program was
cancelled despite significant offers, unattractive ads giving the
impression of post apocalyptic disaster, internal allegations of efforts
to misrepresent the car and the demand by your own employees (John
Dabels, Tom Everhart, Chelsea Sexton), that Ovonic batteries were
forbidden advertising the potential for EV use by you GM.

on the oil side, the allegation is the fake consumer organisations
trying to prevent recharging stations, financed by oil companies,   GM
sold ovonic to big oil and secret NiMH license contracts ensuring that
big batteries were never made that could practically be used in EVs,
that even to this day that once promising technology has not been
available for car makers. why the need for secret limiting licenses if
you are open and transparent Chris? what does an oil company need
batteries for?

thanks in advance
Dan Frederiksen *


in retrospect I should perhaps have omitted the oil side but significant
experience dictates that once a densoid has lied about the matter at
hand it really doesn't help pointing out the avalanche of facts against
his position:

*
Reflex answer? It's just the answer. And you've obviously made up your
mind on the other stuff (talk about reflex statements ... like we
haven't gotten this diatribe of "facts" about a thousand times in these
emails).  To be honest, I've answered so many of these emails over the
past year, only to be dragged into endless back and forth debate over
what is now automotive history, that it is a wasted effort. You won't be
convinced so I won't waste either of our time.  Thanks for the interest.
Have a blessed holiday season.

Best,
Chris *


knowing that he had entrenched himself in liar's land I didn't push it
further but instead tried something different and simpler but similarly
likely to fail as it would probably also point to him being a liar. I
asked him when was the design concept of hte GM Volt created and when
was it decided that it should be presented to the public as an electric
car. the idea is that if either of those dates came after the
documentaries it might gnaw in the back of his mind that he is a liar
and it was in fact damage control trying to recover from the publicity
disaster 'who killed the electric car'. He hasn't answered the last mail
yet.

I think it's important to realize that he is just a monkey trained to
give an official position indoctrinated with the subconscious fear that
if he should ever admit the obvious truth that GM has done evil things,
a thousand very hungry lions will wake up right next to him and tear him
apart. Someone once said it's very difficult to convince a man when his
job depends on him not understanding.

Dan

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

mos6507-2
The Volt project has clearly changed over time.

It wasn't that long ago that Bob Lutz was saying that the Volt would
initially be a very small volume niche vehicle that would first have to
prove itself with sales to justify more volume.  Now with oil hovering at
$100 a barrel it doesn't take a rocket scientist to extrapolate what the
sentiment of the car buying public will look like 3 years hence.

So there is clearly some opportunistic timing at work here in which they can
reframe the Volt retroactively as being the a matter of GM acting in a
socially conscious way.

-----Original Message-----
Of course he was lying and gave me the white washed official position
that the GM Volt was out of the goodness of their heart


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Mike Willmon-3
In reply to this post by Dan Frederiksen-2
Dan,
In his first response to you Chris used the term "Big Oil", a term which
he's no doubt heard many times but would not use it himself unless he bought
into its premise.  This says a lot about the man.  ..i.e. 'we weren't in bed
with them, those evil nasty oil mongers.  They killed the Electric Car'

In his second response to your first follow up he accused you of making
"reflex statements"  the likes of which he's heard "about a thousand times
in these emails".   Well true.  I presume you would agree.  But that's the
point I suppose.  Because if there were genuine reasons that supported his
first point I suppose he would stick by them in any further response.  'No
really, we didn't kill the electric car. And to prove it we're building
another one just to spite those evil oil mongers'.

So you've brought to light yet again a point that many have made about GM's
onslaught against EV's.  Isn't it just sick that someone would Even work
that job knowing (or EVen denying) the facts?

Well an entertaining discourse, none the less.

Mike Willmon

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of Dan Frederiksen
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 9:20 PM
To: Lawrence Rhodes; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

I contacted GM communications Chris Preuss with the following:


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Dan Frederiksen-2
Yeah I probably should have used specific oil company names to avoid
that association. sort of doubt it would have made a difference though.
any question where the answer starts pointing to them as liars will
undoubtedly lead to incomprehensible obtuseness.
I think it's important to understand that the lying mind is not aware
that it is lying. however hard it can be for others to understand they
actually don't know they are lying for the most part. this guy certainly
not. short flickery moments in which he has some clarity and he can make
a choice but if he shys away from the truth in that moment he goes back
to being unaware until the next opportunity to stop being a liar. such
is the nature of this that we are.

choose wisely because we reap as we sow even though it might not look
like it while we are here on earth. someone is keeping score so repent
before it is too late.

Dan


Mike Willmon wrote:

> Dan,
> In his first response to you Chris used the term "Big Oil", a term which
> he's no doubt heard many times but would not use it himself unless he bought
> into its premise.  This says a lot about the man.  ..i.e. 'we weren't in bed
> with them, those evil nasty oil mongers.  They killed the Electric Car'
>
> In his second response to your first follow up he accused you of making
> "reflex statements"  the likes of which he's heard "about a thousand times
> in these emails".   Well true.  I presume you would agree.  But that's the
> point I suppose.  Because if there were genuine reasons that supported his
> first point I suppose he would stick by them in any further response.  'No
> really, we didn't kill the electric car. And to prove it we're building
> another one just to spite those evil oil mongers'.
>
> So you've brought to light yet again a point that many have made about GM's
> onslaught against EV's.  Isn't it just sick that someone would Even work
> that job knowing (or EVen denying) the facts?
>
> Well an entertaining discourse, none the less.
>
> Mike Willmon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
> Of Dan Frederiksen
> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 9:20 PM
> To: Lawrence Rhodes; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood
>
> I contacted GM communications Chris Preuss with the following:
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
>  

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

evmagellan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Frederiksen" <[hidden email]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 4:13 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood


> I think it's important to understand that the lying mind is not aware
> that it is lying. however hard it can be for others to understand they
> actually don't know they are lying for the most part. this guy certainly
> not. short flickery moments in which he has some clarity and he can make
> a choice but if he shys away from the truth in that moment he goes back
> to being unaware until the next opportunity to stop being a liar. such
> is the nature of this that we are.
>
> choose wisely because we reap as we sow even though it might not look
> like it while we are here on earth. someone is keeping score so repent
> before it is too late.
>
> Dan

Are we leaving the planet soon? I hope I'm involved in that program! And
who's keeping score? Is it the FBI? I'm confused. I thought this was the EV
Discussion List.

I see the light now.

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

EVDL Administrator
Folks, this discussion is futile.  Nothing we do will change GM's behaviour;
we saw that with the EV1.  Writing accusatory letters is a waste of your
time.  Railing at GM execs is pointless.  Nothing will change.  

GM has no social conscience.  They're not alone.  A few managers do, but by
their nature companies don't.  They do exactly what their top managers
decide is going to make them the most profit - whether those managers are
right or wrong - and any appearance of social conscience will only be
generated if it will make them more money.  

Call it greenwash or anything you want.  Certainly there's institutional
resistance to change, but if they see dollar signs in building the Volt,
EV2, or whatever, it will happen.  If not they'll just keep talking, as they
always have before.

All we can really do is sit back and watch the show.  That, and build our
own real working EVs so they actually get on the road!

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Dan Frederiksen-2
that's bullshit David
"who killed the electric car" and "an inconvenient truth" made GM
announce the Volt. I can't begin to stress how wrong you are in this matter.
The Tesla Roadster played it's part too.
The world is changed by the few who act. for good or for worse. two men
with a typewriter took down nixon.

we went from no chance in hell for the EV to all the big auto makers
talking electric drive and you think it's coincidence?
Nissan has announced all in. don't you get how huge that is?
ye of little faith

Dan


David Roden wrote:

> Folks, this discussion is futile.  Nothing we do will change GM's behaviour;
> we saw that with the EV1.  Writing accusatory letters is a waste of your
> time.  Railing at GM execs is pointless.  Nothing will change.  
>
> GM has no social conscience.  They're not alone.  A few managers do, but by
> their nature companies don't.  They do exactly what their top managers
> decide is going to make them the most profit - whether those managers are
> right or wrong - and any appearance of social conscience will only be
> generated if it will make them more money.  
>
> Call it greenwash or anything you want.  Certainly there's institutional
> resistance to change, but if they see dollar signs in building the Volt,
> EV2, or whatever, it will happen.  If not they'll just keep talking, as they
> always have before.
>
> All we can really do is sit back and watch the show.  That, and build our
> own real working EVs so they actually get on the road!
>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EVDL Administrator
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not
> reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my
> email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
>  

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Christopher Robison
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 01:29 +0100, Dan Frederiksen wrote:
> that's bullshit David

Dan,

Much of the problem people have with you isn't always your content, it's
your delivery. I think your email here is a perfect example -- some good
thoughts made less effective by the package they're wrapped in. I'm
going to rephrase what you said, in a way that gets the same idea across
without soaking it in needless invective.

David, I disagree with your assessment of our input into the change we
see happening with the belated OEM re-adoption of electric vehicles.
Through the public mindshare gained by such things as the WKTEC movie,
the publicized protests over the destruction of discontinued electric
vehicles, the emergence of small new manufacturers developing compelling
all-electric products, and the exploits of electric motorsport across
the US as well as the success of grassroots initiatives like CalCars and
the Plug-In Partners program, I believe we have ample evidence of the
pressure applied by wide-scale public support and advocacy slowly doing
its work.  Whether GM's particular efforts are a greenwash or not, I
would say that we have more of a voice than you think.

After all, it's public outcry in large numbers that has a chance at
convincing GM that there *are* dollars in this idea. Maybe that's their
only rationale, but it's one we can influence as well.


Dan, I think in general the world could use a little of your rage and
anger to knock people out of their ruts and drive things forward. Direct
it with well-considered discretion at targets that matter. Use it where
it can actually help, instead of wasting it here among EV enthusiasts.

  --chris

--
Christopher Robison
[hidden email]
http://ohmbre.org          <-- 1999 Isuzu Hombre + Z2K + Warp13!

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Dan Frederiksen-2
it was directed where it was needed Chris. my 'rage' moved you a little
although not enough.
tell me in honesty had you responded to David had I not

your suggestion to take it elsewhere is similarly ignorant.
for instance the open source controller I have suggested could be a
significant influence by making it much cheaper for people to make EVs.
if not carried forth by EV enthusiasts, then who else.

and my rage is far from exclusively here

temet nosce
Dan



Christopher Robison wrote:
> Dan, I think in general the world could use a little of your rage and
> anger to knock people out of their ruts and drive things forward. Direct
> it with well-considered discretion at targets that matter. Use it where
> it can actually help, instead of wasting it here among EV enthusiasts.
>
>   --chris
>
>  

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re; Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood

Robert MacDowell
In reply to this post by mos6507-2
[hidden email] wrote:
> The Volt project has clearly changed over time.
>
> It wasn't that long ago that Bob Lutz was saying that the Volt would
> initially be a very small volume niche vehicle that would first have to
> prove itself with sales to justify more volume.  Now with oil hovering at
> $100 a barrel it doesn't take a rocket scientist to extrapolate what the
> sentiment of the car buying public will look like 3 years hence.

Assuming oil doesn't go back down.  It's a chess game with OPEC.

I believe that in the past, they've manipulated oil prices to undercut
alternatives before they can gain a real foothold.  See the emergence
then disappearance of EVs in the 90s, and (inflation adjusted) oil
prices during that time.

On the other hand, perhaps OPEC can't do that anymore because world
demand has overtaken production capacity?

Anyway, I sure hope GM has got that angle figured out...

> So there is clearly some opportunistic timing at work here in which they can
> reframe the Volt retroactively as being the a matter of GM acting in a
> socially conscious way.

Not at all.  That's just how GM *thinks*.  They experiment ravenously in
unexplored areas of their trade.  They didn't just sleepwalk through the
1990s EV revolution, they *defined* it and out-innovated everyone else
by a factor of 10.  That's nothing, you should see what they did to the
locomotive business!

So yes, their serious commitment to the Chevy Volt is uniquely GM.   It
may even work this time.  It would certainly not be their first wild
gamble, or wild success, in electric propulsion.

Robert

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

EVDL Administrator
On 27 Nov 2007 at 1:07, Robert MacDowell wrote:

> They didn't just sleepwalk through the 1990s
> EV revolution, they *defined* it and out-innovated everyone else by a factor
> of 10.

Sorry, I must disagree.  The EV1 was a very good EV, but not a great one.  
Certainly it inspired an intense emotional reaction in those who used it,
but that's a complex matter.  The EV1 has been promoted to legendary status
largely by its martyrdom* - not to mention a book and a well-produced
documentary film.  However, in the 40+ year sweep of modern EV history, I'm
not at all sure it deserves all the accolades it gets.

The Solectria Sunrise got better range and could carry a family of 5, for
example.  Where's the documentary about that EV and its freeway-speed trip
from Boston to New York, with charge left over?

I'll bet Lee Hart and some other longtime observers of EV development can
think of at least a few other purpose-built EVs that were more innovative
than the EV1, at least for their times.  

*The more I think about it, the less sure I am that GM was as clever about
killing the EV1 as they're said to have been.  A much smarter strategy for
them would have been to allow the cars in service to decline in use by not
servicing the batteries as they failed.  EV1 users surely would have been
significantly less reluctant to see the car hauled away if it were not
operating at the time.

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

gottdi
The EV-1 was the martyr but not the only EV made that could do better  
than what they say about the Volt. Heck, I can do better with my  
neighbors golf cart. 40 miles even with old technology is possible  
and couple that with a nice 1 liter turbo diesel and you have a  
killer hybrid. I say what would the EV be today had they not killed  
it but kept improving it. This is an alternative we need. It should  
be kept in the forefront and not allowed to die again. Keep working  
on the hydrogen and other forms as well. It is not a matter of one  
kind over the other but to help clean up the world. It will take more  
than one kind of fuel to do that. One person may need that clean  
hybrid but another will do just fine with all electric. Another may  
need gas but I say use bio diesel electric hybrids and keep moving  
forward. We can dump OPEC out of the picture now. Not later. We may  
not get rid of them entirely but we sure can put a dent in  
production. We the need to be the leading country to do this sort of  
thing.

Oooops. I forgot, If we allow that to happen these guys will loose  
all their party money and they can't have that now can they!

: )

Pete


On Nov 27, 2007, at 7:53 AM, David Roden wrote:

> On 27 Nov 2007 at 1:07, Robert MacDowell wrote:
>
>> They didn't just sleepwalk through the 1990s
>> EV revolution, they *defined* it and out-innovated everyone else  
>> by a factor
>> of 10.
>
> Sorry, I must disagree.  The EV1 was a very good EV, but not a  
> great one.
> Certainly it inspired an intense emotional reaction in those who  
> used it,
> but that's a complex matter.  The EV1 has been promoted to  
> legendary status
> largely by its martyrdom* - not to mention a book and a well-produced
> documentary film.  However, in the 40+ year sweep of modern EV  
> history, I'm
> not at all sure it deserves all the accolades it gets.
>
> The Solectria Sunrise got better range and could carry a family of  
> 5, for
> example.  Where's the documentary about that EV and its freeway-
> speed trip
> from Boston to New York, with charge left over?
>
> I'll bet Lee Hart and some other longtime observers of EV  
> development can
> think of at least a few other purpose-built EVs that were more  
> innovative
> than the EV1, at least for their times.
>
> *The more I think about it, the less sure I am that GM was as  
> clever about
> killing the EV1 as they're said to have been.  A much smarter  
> strategy for
> them would have been to allow the cars in service to decline in use  
> by not
> servicing the batteries as they failed.  EV1 users surely would  
> have been
> significantly less reluctant to see the car hauled away if it were not
> operating at the time.
>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EVDL Administrator
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not
> reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my
> email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
http://onegreenev.blogspot.com/
No need to wait any longer. You can now buy one off the shelf. You can still build one too.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

Zeke Yewdall
On Nov 27, 2007 9:16 AM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Heck, I can do better with my
> neighbors golf cart.

Ummm.   Didn't we establish that the car at the show probably WAS a
golf cart, with a nicer body....  One would hope that they upgrade the
production version.........

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

gottdi
Yes for the show car that has been shown. However they are touting  
for the production car of only 40 miles and we all know that the EV-1  
did better than that and that was without an onboard charging generator.

One would hope but we all know what that means.

:  )

Pete


On Nov 27, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote:

> Ummm.   Didn't we establish that the car at the show probably WAS a
> golf cart, with a nicer body....  One would hope that they upgrade the
> production version.........

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
http://onegreenev.blogspot.com/
No need to wait any longer. You can now buy one off the shelf. You can still build one too.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

David Dymaxion
In reply to this post by EVDL Administrator
How can you say the EV1 was "a very good EV, but not a great one"?

It was the world's most aerodynamic production car ever. That alone is greatness. A prototype with some mods went 183 mph on the Salt Flats in 1994 (50 mph faster than Toyota's modified Prius did recently). You could program the heater or cooler to come on as the car was parked. Love it or hate it, the inductive Magnacharger was innovative. I don't see any other charger manufacturers volunteering to plug in whilst being showered with water. It also was the only car ever with a heat pump. The rear brakes and parking brake were electrically actuated. Radio reception was good. Users were reporting 80+ mile ranges with the 2nd generation Panasonic lead acid batteries, and 120+ miles with Nimh. It used exotic metals to make the car lighter, and passed the crash tests. About 1000 were built, and the fleet drove millions of miles. Reliability was very good.

I rented EV1s on a couple trips and did about 500 miles of driving. It was undefeated in every uh, well, never mind.

The EV1 was legendary in its day, not just in death. Yes it "inspired an intense emotional reaction" -- which is a hallmark of a great and legendary car. I have driven a natural gas Crown Vic, natural gas Civic, Prius, diesels, Corvettes, etc. The EV1 was easily king of the hill. Ask anyone that has driven an EV1 -- something about that car grabs you and won't let go.

I hope that Lee Hart's Sunrise efforts lead to similar greatness and emotional response!

There is more to a car than range -- when you consider ride, handling, acceleration, crash safety, backed by a major corporation, quietness, innovative features, great aerodynamics -- the EV1 as a package was hard to beat.

I'll nominate another innovative EV, particularly for its time: The GM Electrovair.

----- Original Message ----
From: David Roden <[hidden email]>
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 8:53:05 AM
Subject: [EVDL] EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

On 27 Nov 2007 at 1:07, Robert MacDowell wrote:

> They didn't just sleepwalk through the 1990s EV revolution,
> they *defined* it and out-innovated everyone else by a
> factor of 10.

Sorry, I must disagree.  The EV1 was a very good EV, but not a great
 one.  
Certainly it inspired an intense emotional reaction in those who used
 it,
but that's a complex matter.  The EV1 has been promoted to legendary
 status largely by its martyrdom* - not to mention a book and a well-produced documentary film.  However, in the 40+ year sweep of modern EV history,
 I'm not at all sure it deserves all the accolades it gets.

The Solectria Sunrise got better range and could carry a family of 5,
 for
example.  Where's the documentary about that EV and its freeway-speed
 trip
from Boston to New York, with charge left over?

I'll bet Lee Hart and some other longtime observers of EV development
 can
think of at least a few other purpose-built EVs that were more
 innovative
than the EV1, at least for their times.  

*The more I think about it, the less sure I am that GM was as clever
 about
killing the EV1 as they're said to have been.  A much smarter strategy
 for
them would have been to allow the cars in service to decline in use by
 not
servicing the batteries as they failed.  EV1 users surely would have
 been
significantly less reluctant to see the car hauled away if it were not
operating at the time.





      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better sports nut!  Let your teams follow you
with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under thehood)

Bob Rice-2
In reply to this post by gottdi

----- Original Message -----
From: <[hidden email]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under
thehood)


> Yes for the show car that has been shown. However they are touting
> for the production car of only 40 miles and we all know that the EV-1
> did better than that and that was without an onboard charging generator.
>
> One would hope but we all know what that means.

 Hell! Our CONVERSIONS will do 40 miles now. Big deal!? Anf faster and
QUIETER, too.

 Bob,  drivin' more than 40 mile a day for 9 years!


> :  )
>
> Pete
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote:
>
>> Ummm.   Didn't we establish that the car at the show probably WAS a
>> golf cart, with a nicer body....  One would hope that they upgrade the
>> production version.........
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
>
> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.28/1023 - Release Date:
> 9/22/2007 1:27 PM
>
>

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under thehood)

storm connors
Come on Bob. The 40 miles is on battery power. But when you are out of
battery you don't have to go home at 10 MPH with batteries merrily
boiling away. :-) Since it is a hybrid, what range would you design
the battery pack for? (Remember these LiON batteries are expensive.)

On Nov 27, 2007 12:31 PM, Bob Rice <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[hidden email]>
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 11:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under
> thehood)
>
>
> > Yes for the show car that has been shown. However they are touting
> > for the production car of only 40 miles and we all know that the EV-1
> > did better than that and that was without an onboard charging generator.
> >
> > One would hope but we all know what that means.
>
>  Hell! Our CONVERSIONS will do 40 miles now. Big deal!? Anf faster and
> QUIETER, too.
>
>  Bob,  drivin' more than 40 mile a day for 9 years!
>
>
> > :  )
> >
> > Pete
> >
> >
> > On Nov 27, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote:
> >
> >> Ummm.   Didn't we establish that the car at the show probably WAS a
> >> golf cart, with a nicer body....  One would hope that they upgrade the
> >> production version.........
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > For subscription options, see
> > http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
> >
> >
> > --
> > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.28/1023 - Release Date:
> > 9/22/2007 1:27 PM
>
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>



--
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1059
http://stormselectric.blogspot.com/
Storm

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

Robert MacDowell
In reply to this post by EVDL Administrator
David Roden wrote:

> On 27 Nov 2007 at 1:07, Robert MacDowell wrote:
>
>> They didn't just sleepwalk through the 1990s
>> EV revolution, they *defined* it and out-innovated everyone else by a factor
>> of 10.
>
> Sorry, I must disagree.  The EV1 was a very good EV, but not a great one.  
> Certainly it inspired an intense emotional reaction in those who used it,
> but that's a complex matter.  The EV1 has been promoted to legendary status
> largely by its martyrdom* - not to mention a book and a well-produced
> documentary film.  However, in the 40+ year sweep of modern EV history, I'm
> not at all sure it deserves all the accolades it gets.

You are putting the hype before the horse.

General Motors did, in fact, design a significant EV from scratch,
intended to be an EV, with a number of revolutionary (for production
cars) features.  Which no one else did, they all threw battery packs in
their existing made-for-gas models.

People are not stupid.  They spotted that in a heartbeat.  That's how GM
could earn the hype among urban carbuyers who generally abhor American
makes and love Toyota.  If GM's entry had been a Pontiac Grand Am "EV",
the RAV4-EV would have looked good.  It was precisely because they made
the EV1 insanely great, that it became an icon.

> The Solectria Sunrise got better range and could carry a family of 5, for
> example.  Where's the documentary about that EV and its freeway-speed trip
> from Boston to New York, with charge left over?
 >
> I'll bet Lee Hart and some other longtime observers of EV development can
> think of at least a few other purpose-built EVs that were more innovative
> than the EV1, at least for their times.  

Anyone on this list could make a "money is no object" one-off EV that is
better than the EV1 when it isn't in the shop.

The real craft of automaking is in doing all that AND ALSO having it be
producible in mass quantity at reasonable cost and with the impeccable
reliability that's mandatory for the consumer automobile marketplace today.

The automobile market is possibly the toughest and most unforgiving
consumer market there is.  Smart isn't enough.


> *The more I think about it, the less sure I am that GM was as clever about
> killing the EV1 as they're said to have been.

Gifted with hindsight, the folks at GM certainly don't think they were
clever.  Bob Stempel called it a serious mistake, says it set them back
10 years on the Volt program, and that it was never about money, the EV1
program wasn't a significant drain on GM's finances.

That's the power of being GM, they're huge, they can absorb the cost of
experimentation.


> A much smarter strategy for
> them would have been to allow the cars in service to decline in use by not
> servicing the batteries as they failed.

Or keep the cars going, so you gain priceless data about life-cycle
costs and reliability in production vehicles, that could improve
reliability of your next product.  Like Stempel says, it set them back
10 years on the Chevy Volt.

Robert

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: EV Innovation (was Volt on Youtube -- photos under the hood)

Robert MacDowell
In reply to this post by gottdi
But this is a series hybrid.

Battery sizing is totally different on series hybrids than battery EVs.

The idea is that the gas engine is there to power the car when you
outrange the battery pack, so dragging 120 miles of battery around 24x7
would be wasteful.  Honestly, 40 is bigger than I expected, but I assume
they'll find a happy medium as this technology evolves.  I'd peg it
around 20 miles, actually.

Robert

[hidden email] wrote:

> Yes for the show car that has been shown. However they are touting  
> for the production car of only 40 miles and we all know that the EV-1  
> did better than that and that was without an onboard charging generator.
>
> One would hope but we all know what that means.
>
> :  )
>
> Pete
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2007, at 8:24 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote:
>
>> Ummm.   Didn't we establish that the car at the show probably WAS a
>> golf cart, with a nicer body....  One would hope that they upgrade the
>> production version.........
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
12