New light on GM's EV1

[CaptainDan]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

By killing EV1 Gm killed its self. Instead of being leader in eco. technology. Now that is toyota.

Toyota killed it's electric vehicle too. GM took all the flak because their car was by far the best of the electrics. It had the most promise. Not Toyota's. Not Porsche's. But they all "killed" their electrics.

Originally Posted by VCDJ

If gm just kept improving this car each year i am sure by now it would be way better then volt that does not even exist yet. I am sure gm would not be losing market share like they are losing now. This is another one of gm mistakes.

Originally Posted by VCDJ

If Toyota had continued to spend the billions on the developement of their (greatly inferior) electric vehicles, GM's market share would be through the roof, since Toyota would be out of business.

Please try not to say that technology did not exist for electric car. Most of you do not know first car that porche made over 100 years ago was electric car. Second car that porche made was hybrid like Volt. Technology was there even 100 years ago. It just looks like that oil companies have to much power.

And those "technologically superior" electric Porsches were so successful, that the roads are covered with them now..........oh wait.

Yes, technology existed to build a car that could just barely move for a short distance on electric power a 100 years ago. Did you know that PLENTY of companies (in addition to Porsche) built electric vehicles back then? Every one of those companies gave up and went out of business, or started to build FUNCTIONAL vehicles.

The technology didn't exist then to build an electric vehicle that could even come remotely close to competing with the gas engine cars. Maybe, just MAYBE, we are getting into that ability very soon. But no, that technology did not exist 100 years ago, or even twenty years ago. Maybe soon.

[Chaz_23]

I'm sure Enron, or whoever is the new Enron would be more than happy to sell them overpriced electricity.

Originally Posted by Jimbus

I hope Cali goes electric vehicle CRAZY, so I can laugh when they have to choose between cooling/lighting their houses and charging their vehicles. Their electrical grid can't handle their current load, how do they think they can add something as demanding as a large number of electric vehicles?

[GMforME]

The infrastructure issue still exists. While you can build an electric vehicle right now today that will go a hundred miles what about the guy that forgets to plug in his car one night. Who leaves half charged and gets stuck in rush hour and the batteries are exhausted. He's not just going to stop and plug into 110. The vehicles will have dedicated wall mounted chargers and there is no standard connection method established yet.

The other issue is that while GM is mocked for 40 mile range the volt could concievably go 100 running the batteries 0 to 100 percent charge cycle. However the reality is that if you want them to live 150 miles you may only be able to charge to 80% and discharge to 30%. Full cycling lithium batteries greatly reduces their life cycle. Hence limited battery range.

The other thing about the EV1 was at the time of its release lead acid was the only choice. (these were the facts the day it was released) Nickel Metal was unproven technology albiet GM was testing Nickel packs. By the time nickel was viable it was game over. Toyotas Rav4 was a couple years behind the EV1 in its launch which was why Nickle was available, however it was launched and killed almost before anyone knew it existed.
Because the EV1 was lead acid battery based it could only be leased in limited markets where the weather was warm as lead acid batteries don't perform in cold weather worth ****. This is the reason that the car was launched on the west coast on top of the California mandate. GM knew at the time it was not a nation wide marketable vehicle due to climate conditions and may never be. It was DOA.

The technology for the EV1 was not all lost though as many of the designs for the lighting, accessories like AC and heat are being redesigned with the latest advances and directly applied to the Volt.

[Rocket 88]

<P>

Originally Posted by Uzzy

Did you even read the article? Have you heard of the Volt? The Volt is the successor to the EV1. It is was the next gen EV1 was intended to be, but California's own legislation at the time killed it, since it would be a PZEV, not a ZEV, which is what they were mandating. By the time they changed, GM had already decided to scrap the project. You might want to edit your post into something more intelligent rather than your usual GM bashing, or not, w/e.

Just my opinion, but it seems like a bit of stretch to say that California killed the project because the EV1 with a turbine would have made it a PZEV and not a ZEV. Its not as though GM could not have decided to produce the car with a turbine for markets other then California. And ( IMO) it seems pretty reasonable to think that if the PZEV was successful (granted, a big "IF") California would have ultimately wanted it and changed the regulation. As it is, they changed the regulations anyway. Regardless, it isn't like an EV1 with a turbine couldn't have been sold in Califonia either. It just wouldn't have counted toward the zero emissions mandate.

[Wolfman01]

Originally Posted by CaptainDan

Toyota killed it's electric vehicle too. GM took all the flak because their car was by far the best of the electrics. It had the most promise. Not Toyota's. Not Porsche's. But they all "killed" their electrics.



And those "technologically superior" electric Porsches were so successful, that the roads are covered with them now..........oh wait.

Yes, technology existed to build a car that could just barely move for a short distance on electric power a 100 years ago. Did you know that PLENTY of companies (in addition to Porsche) built electric vehicles back then? Every one of those companies gave up and went out of business, or started to build FUNCTIONAL vehicles.

The technology didn't exist then to build an electric vehicle that could even come remotely close to competing with the gas engine cars. Maybe, just MAYBE, we are getting into that ability very soon. But no, that technology did not exist 100 years ago, or even twenty years ago. Maybe soon.

GM, Ford, Honda, and Toyota all axed their EV programs. The difference between GM, Ford and Toyota is, that Ford and Toyota allowed the owners to buy their EV's outright, along with a release stating that the buyer knew that the automaker would NOT be supporting the vehicles with replacement parts. GM and Honda chose to crush their cars. Honda got away with their decision soley because they leased VERY few vehicles. GM had a comparatively large number of them on the raod. IMO, had GM followed Ford and Toyota's lead on letting the lease owners buy their car's outright, they would have received FAR less flack over cancelling their EV program.

[Hurricane]

Very interesting story!

[scotted73]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

I, too, hope that Cali goes electric vehicle CRAZY. Since most of these cars will be recharged at a time when most people are sleeping(!) and electricity demand falls(!), GM hopefully will be able to lead the electric car revolution-again-and eventually profit handsomely, either directly through electric car sales or indirectly through the more environmentally friendly face it will paint on the RenCen.

While the demand will be lower at night, with the exception of the dishwashers running, demand will be higher during the day as people plug in at work. Add the summer A/C demands and some taxing of the grid could result.
If more solar panels could be implemented to supply grid power and for charging cars, then the effect may not be as bad.
It's a matter of setting up the infrastructure before flooding the area with electricity dependent modes of transportation.

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by VCDJ

By killing EV1 Gm killed its self. Instead of being leader in eco. technology. Now that is toyota. If gm just kept improving this car each year i am sure by now it would be way better then volt that does not even exist yet. I am sure gm would not be losing market share like they are losing now. This is another one of gm mistakes. Please try not to say that technology did not exist for electric car. Most of you do not know first car that porche made over 100 years ago was electric car. Second car that porche made was hybrid like Volt. Technology was there even 100 years ago. It just looks like that oil companies have to much power.

You should seriously invest in a reading comprehension course and a grammar course at your nearest community college. Porsche has been around since 1931, which is not 'over 100 years' ago, and they never, never created an electric car.

"Between 1832 and 1839 (the exact year is uncertain), Robert Anderson of Scotland invented the first crude electric carriage. A small-scale electric car was designed by Professor Stratingh of Groningen, Holland, and built by his assistant Christopher Becker in 1835. Practical and more successful electric road vehicles were invented by both American Thomas Davenport and Scotsmen Robert Davidson around 1842. Both inventors were the first to use non-rechargeable electric cells. Frenchmen Gaston Plante invented a better storage battery in 1865 and his fellow countrymen Camille Faure improved the storage battery in 1881. This improved-capacity storage battery paved the way for electric vehicles to flourish."

You should really research stuff before you blindly post your opinion as fact. Why are you even on this site?

[Ambalanche]

It's too bad that the Volt isn't available now. I had a Toyota sales manager come in today and I was asking about the Prius. He said they sold 30 last month and are getting 2k over sticker for them!

[mbukukanyau]

Originally Posted by scotted73

While the demand will be lower at night, with the exception of the dishwashers running, demand will be higher during the day as people plug in at work. Add the summer A/C demands and some taxing of the grid could result.
If more solar panels could be implemented to supply grid power and for charging cars, then the effect may not be as bad.
It's a matter of setting up the infrastructure before flooding the area with electricity dependent modes of transportation.

The Notion that you can get people to conserve water, and conserve electricity, build no new road, and no new power plants, no new refineries in an area of growing populations and growing demands like California is far fetched.

Already we are about to start our rolling black outs for the summer and what are politicians doing? Asking us to drive electric cars? What about the Factory workers and Nurses, Police, fire figheters etc who work nights? When are they expected to plug in their nanny state erides? at work? and their boss will foot the bill and wire the entire parking lot?
Also, if the parking lot is wired, why should I not plug in my ride, if I work day?

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by mbukukanyau

The Notion that you can get people to conserve water, and conserve electricity, build no new road, and no new power plants, no new refineries in an area of growing populations and growing demands like California is far fetched.

Already we are about to start our rolling black outs for the summer and what are politicians doing? Asking us to drive electric cars? What about the Factory workers and Nurses, Police, fire figheters etc who work nights? When are they expected to plug in their nanny state erides? at work? and their boss will foot the bill and wire the entire parking lot?
Also, if the parking lot is wired, why should I not plug in my ride, if I work day?

Gosh, you're right. Let's not try anything, let's just keep suckling the Crude Oil Teet.

No one said that we should switch ALL of our transportation over to electric, just that for some it's a good alternative. NOT EVERYONE. Cut the 'nanny-state' crap, stop the sensationalistic B.S. and just relax. No one is going to take your car away. Electric vehicles are the future; there are many ways to make electricity but only one way to make gasoline. We can't pretend it's 1950 forever.

[Ambalanche]

Saturn69, I'm not trying to turn this into a political hijack, but we have lot's and lot's of oil in this country our politicians won't let us harvest. It is enough that we can run off of it alone, without ANY foreign oil for 60 years. When the economy takes a serious dive, food skyrockets, and people cannot afford to put $6.00+ gas in their cars then maybe the politicians will take notice and act finally! Just my .02

[edsuski]

Saturn69 is right. Electric cars are not for everyone - just the people who would prefer to pay around $1.70 to drive 40 miles. At 25 mpg - that is like buying gas at $1.07 per gallon. 1/3 - 1/4 of what we are paying today.

As for the power grid - please try to understand that the majority of people work 1st or 2nd shift jobs (I didn't say EVERYONE). These people will be charging at night when rates are reduced and there is so much excess capacity that some of the energy to keep turbines spinning is currently being wasted.

Try to keep in mind that serial hybrids have small flex fuel internal combustion engines to provide power to the drive motor after the battery has been consumed so the range is not limited to 40 or even 400 miles. Obviously - people who have daily commutes within the range of the battery will benefit most (78% of America). In those cases - these people could end up buying ZERO gasoline to commute to and from work!

Lastly, GM is in business to make money - not save the world. It might just be that the elimination of the transmission, spark plugs, spark plug wires, oil filters, catalytic converters, exhaust systems and even the reduced consumption of brake pads and rotors (due to most of the braking being accomplished by regenerative braking forces) just might have made the EV1 less attractive to the corporation that makes and markets so many spare parts. Where do dealers make money - on car sales or service? Think about it.....

[mbukukanyau]

Originally Posted by Saturn69

Gosh, you're right. Let's not try anything, let's just keep suckling the Crude Oil Teet.

No one said that we should switch ALL of our transportation over to electric, just that for some it's a good alternative. NOT EVERYONE. Cut the 'nanny-state' crap, stop the sensationalistic B.S. and just relax. No one is going to take your car away. Electric vehicles are the future; there are many ways to make electricity but only one way to make gasoline. We can't pretend it's 1950 forever.

We cannot have electric cars without significantly increasing our electric power production.
In San Diego, which is already facing black outs, they will not approve a new Gridline to bring power from the valley near Yuma.. to save some silly insect.. Which I have no problem with,...
problem is, that silly insect is being trampled on now by illigal immagrants and camps and trash, which people in the same admin oppose a crack down upon.

Instead the state buys local radio spots to advertise conservation..

Now you tell me, convert our fleet of cars in socal to electric, how the heck are we going to power them?
If that is not irrational madness, to want electric cars without building capacity to power them...
California pols are nut cases

[edsuski]

Originally Posted by mbukukanyau

We cannot have electric cars without significantly increasing out power electric power production.
In San Diego, which is already facing black outs, they will not approve a new Gridline to bring power from the valley near Yuma.. to save some silly insect.. Which I have no problem with,...
problem is, that silly insect is being trampled on now by illigal immagrants and camps and trash, which people in the same admin oppose a crack down upon.
Now you tell me, convert our fleet of cars in socal to electric, how the heck are we going to power them?
If that is not irrational madness, to want electric cars without building capacity to power them...
California pols are nut cases

Do you have any idea how much power is available after midnight on the grid in California? Again - at least 75% of the people in California work 1st or 2nd shift and can charge their cars at night. They will be incentivized to do so by reduced rates - already in place to encourage such activity. Car charging circuits will be equipped with the ability to set the time that the charge is applied. Very simple. Plenty of power available at night. Plenty of power available at night. Plenty of power available at night. Just keep repeating that to yourself.