California Drops ZEV Requirement to 7500 Cars From 2012-2014
California is the only state that has authority to make its own rules about vehicle emissions requirements exceeding federal standards, stemming from its smog problem in the early 70s.
Thursday the California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted to reduce the requirement of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) from the initial mandate of 25,000 sales to 7,500 sales in the years 2012-2014. They also must sell 58,000 plug-in hybrids in the same period. The obligation will be spread among the automakers based on their individual market share.
GM representative David Barthmuss was quoted as saying GM is “still scratching our heads” over the implications of this decision, but said the Volt would be sold in large numbers in California due to the mandate. There is additional credit to manufacturers for making plug-in cars.
Also of interest, 12 other states have adopted California’s standards. These include Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. 120,000 plug-in hybrids must be sold in in those states by 2014.
Sources (Detroit News) (New York Times) (AP)
Popularity: 4%
(1 votes, average: 5 out of 5) 
Loading ...
48 Responses to “California Drops ZEV Requirement to 7500 Cars From 2012-2014”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- GM CEO’s Best Guess: Volt Will be Priced in “Mid to High 30’s”
- The Dawn of the Next Vintage of Chevy Volt Developmental Vehicles
- GM May Reveal the Production Chevy Volt on it Centennial Webcast, September 16th
- GM Has More Than Two New E-Flex Vehicles Already at Scale-Model Stage of Development
- The Volt’s #1 Fanboy and Our Wait List Story is the “Shot Heard ‘Round the World”
- GM’s Future Volt and E-Flex Plans
- GM’s Advanced Battery Director Denise Gray is “Keeping Her Eyes on the Future”
- Interview with Chevy Volt Chief Designer About the Production Car: Plus Leaked Pictures and Video
- BREAKING: GM Releases New Production Volt Photos
- Chevy Volt Update from Chief Engineer: “There’s Nothing Standing in Our Way”
March 29th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Forgive me, everybody, but I need to promote this….
DON’T FORGET: A new forum thread is now available for everyone to RANK the top 10 or 20 questions not yet answered (or not fully answered) by GM at VoltNation or elsewhere. Go to….. http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=175 Here you can rank these questions I’m calling the "Lutz List" from most important to least important. The deadline is Wed, April 2. (If the above link doesn’t work, copy/paste it into your browser’s URL address window instead.) ….ONLY 4 DAYS REMAIN TO RANK THESE QUESTIONS!
March 29th, 2008 at 9:48 am
I believe CARB is making sure it is no longer a contributing force in killing electric vehicles, and is working much better with the auto industry to move forward, instead of maintaining a stalemate that has existed for years.
I truly believe that E-REV are the stepping stone to fuel cell and rapid-recharge electric vehicles.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Nasaman, #1, your link doesn’t work.
I heard this yesterday morning on the radio.
I was wondering what rationale they used to reduce the requirement. I thought we were all going the other way.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:54 am
The press was a little misleading. It is (7,500 “pure” ZEV’s or 12,500 100+ range BEV’s) + (58,333 Silver+ Vehicles) OR (25,000 ZEV’s per previous requirements) for 2012-2014. “Silver Plus”* Enhanced AT PZEV AT PZEV that uses a ZEV fuel such as electricity or hydrogen.
Examples include plug-in hybrids or hydrogen internal
combustion engine.http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/factsheets/2008zevfacts.pdf
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevreview/summary.pdfIt appears they have yet to fully define Silver+ Vehicles, but they must have some electric only range. Longer EV range may count more than short range. Vehicles that can complete US06 in EV only are being considered for extra credit.Overall, it could have been better IMO giving available technology but not a terrible compromise. Make it federal.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:55 am
This news makes it seem my best chance to get a Volt may be in California (luckily, I’ve been a resident of both CA & FL for many years —most of what we launch from FL has been designed & built in CA— so I’ve become "bi-coastal"). If that works out, I’ll probably do what I’ve done many times ….take I-10 from Santa Monica to Jacksonville, then I-95 down to my FL home near KSC. Wow, this time I could probably make the trip in half as many stops as usual, thanks to the Volt’s 600+ mile range …..oops, there’s the minor problem that my bladder’s range is no where near 600 miles!
March 29th, 2008 at 10:00 am
3 Rashiid Amul …..
If the link below & in #1 doesn’t work, copy/paste it into your browser’s URL address window instead….
http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=175
(Oddly, this link works in some threads here but not others.)
March 29th, 2008 at 10:25 am
You FL guys better not be so sure about getting the first run production cars.
FL is not on the 13 states listed above, so GM may have to change their plans……….
March 29th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Jim I
They’re discussing it. It’s a lock!
March 29th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Nasaman, #6. Thank you.
I know why the link does not work here but works in other places. Put your mouse over your link above and read the link that appears in the bottom left corner of your browser status bar. You will see that the links to you post here actually go the NULL.COM and not GM-VOLT.com.
In the other threads, like the one yesterday, your link goes to GM-VOLT.com. I hope that helps.
As far as your questions go, they are fine the way they are.
March 29th, 2008 at 11:09 am
I just fear this’ll be a repeat of the 90’s: The auto manufacturers will deliberately go out of their way to make sure very few EV’s sell by NOT letting people PURCHASE them and only letting people LEASE. Or making the commercials so obscure and weird that no one gets excited about EV’s, and then turn around to say "No one is buying them, lower the requirement again please."
March 29th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Mark,
I hope your wrong. Fortunately, I believe the cat’s out of the bag now and they can’t go back (at least on the plug-in portion, ZEV limits may get further reduced).
Assuming this revision to the ZEV mandates stick (BIG assumption, I know) this is what to look for IMO:
-Big incentives for BEV’s in 2012, so look for GM to offer battery only option by then
-Plug-ins from all of the big 6 will be available by 2011 in order to meet 2012 production. Those with longer battery only ranges will count more toward requirements.
-VERY good news for the Volt
March 29th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
I’m glad to see CT on the list, although I don’t know if I will still be here by then.
March 29th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
As long as it’s sold in Florida. I have relatives in California and in Maryland. I’ll buy regardless but I’d rather not have to go all the way to San Diego. I’ll make the trip to Maryland if I have to. Just means a quick visit to my parents. At least I won’t burn a lot of fuel on the way home.
March 29th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
This is great news for the Volt.
March 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Firefly #13:
I have said this before, but I am going to say it again:
If you travel to one of the "limited availability" areas and purchase a Volt, and drive it back home, what are you going to do if it has a major malfunction? Your local Chevy dealer is not going to be able to service it!
If GM is going to the trouble of releasing this car in small geographic areas, don’t you think they are going to require that it be sold to people within a set distance from servicing dealers? Otherwise, why do it this way????
Washington, D.C. is only 300 miles from where I live, but I would be seriously concerned about service, especially with a serial number of less than 10,000.
My Chrysler Crossfire was purchased in October, 2003, and is serial # 2476. It had a few trips in to the dealer to fix some early release problems. And it is basically a re-skinned M/B!
With an entirely new propulsion system, there are bound to be service issues that will need to be taken care of, that are not just software downloads. And putting it on a flatbed and hauling it 600 miles total is not the best way to handle these types of problems…..
Personally, I think limited release is just plain dumb, but since I am not on the Board of Directors at GM, I guess they don’t really care what I think! :)
March 29th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
It seems strange that the onus is on the auto manufactuers to sell 7500 ZEVs. While I’m pretty sure that 7500 sales will be attained with ever-rising gas prices, the consumer is the ultimately one who decides to buy a ZEV. The manufacturers shouldn’t be punished. It’s sort of like requiring McDonald’s to sell at least 20% of their hamburgers being low fat and fining the corporation if people don’t buy. Remember the McLean Deluxe? That didn’t last. Why? When people had a choice, they went for the greasy Big Mac. That wasn’t McDonald’s fault.
Same with the EV-1 (and other less-publicized electric cars that didn’t make it) introduced in the 1990s: they didn’t last because it didn’t make financial sense to buy a dorky overpriced car with limited range car at a time that gas was cheap. It’s not the manufactuer’s fault that 100,000 didn’t fly off the showroom floor per year, it was essentially a "McLean Deluxe" that car manufacturers were required to make that few people wanted to buy. As vocal as EV-1 supporters were, they were few and far between because I (and many others) sure as hell would not have bought a car with such limited range.
March 29th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
If you think regular dealers can not be trained to service the Volt, think twice. GM will not sell cars that needs to be towed hundreds of mile to be service. That kind of thinking is nuts.
March 29th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
CARB is the most useless agency and the most egregious waste of public funds known to man.
March 29th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Koz hit the head on the nail on the different ways manufacturers can meet the requirements. Mark, I don’t think the manufacturers can drag their feet this time because there are so many independent startups demonstrating that the battery technology is for real and workable (and tons of evidence that fuel cells aren’t right around the corner).
March 29th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Gary,
I can see that manufacturer side of the arguement but then I can see the other side where customers want ZEV’s but there aren’t any serious ones available from big auto, not even at high prices. Many of us believe the auto industry and the oil industry actively resisted making these available in the past. I personally would love to buy one but can’t. And where I live NEV’s aren’t allowed either (and aren’t available either). Something’s got to jump-start this.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
jabroni @ 18, my vote is for the UN, CARB takes second.
Look, the bottom line is in the free market consumers decide. No plug no sale.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Da Guvantor will be pleased when California has da futuristic electric cars and plugin hybrids everywhere.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPG-tKLAJuE
He’s coming after you Big Oil and OPEC! I’m sure he’ll have his Hummer converted to 100% electric as soon as that’s possible. Guvanator will frown at da people with da gas guzzlers. Much better to keep da Guvanator happy you know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlzptZ9wieQ
The new machines of da future are coming …. da older model cars from da 20th century must be terminated by order of da Guvanator.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/C/j/arnold_governator.jpg
He’ll be back … in 2010 to celebrate the big day when the first Chevy Volts arrive in Cali.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
What everyone is forgetting is that while CARB dilly-dallys around month in and month out, they only regulate one state, and as history has shown, can be pressured to back down.
CAFE covers the nation and won’t back down. Lutz has made statements about CAFE on Autoline Det. similar to what we hear about CARB, likening it to treating obesity by making only 34" waist pants. However, recently WRT to Eflex and the Volt, he did mention that among other things electrification of the auto is the only way they’ll meet the standards.
So regardless of the Volt being the right thing to do, CAFE seems to also be having an effect, and as long as we don’t build any more refineries, and the world demand for oil continues on it’s course, we are looking at a much different situation than the 90’s and the EV-1. So…..let the price of oil continue to rise!
March 29th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Da Guvanator will be pleased when California has da futuristic electric cars and plugin hybrids everywhere. He’s coming after you Big Oil and Big Coal! California is sick of the wasted gas and the smog coming out of inefficient gas guzzlers and coal plants. They’re dead serious about the environment out there.
I’m sure Awnuld will have his Hummer converted to 100% electric as soon as that’s possible. Guvanator will frown at da people with da gas guzzlers. Much better to keep da Guvanator happy you know.
The new machines of da future are coming …. da older model machines from da 20th century must be terminated by order of da Guvanator.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/C/j/arnold_governator.jpg
He’ll be back … in 2010 to celebrate the big day when the first Chevy Volts arrive in Cali. I’m sure GM will sell a lot of them there without those CARB requirements.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
They couldn’t put the bar much lower if they tried…I guess they did (90 percent cut preposed).
March 29th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
frickin’ spelling hell — proposed
March 29th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
CARB is a Joke ?
They should be promoting more EV’s
No Wonder Chindia doesn’t give a dam about pollution when the suposed leading US state is setting such a bad example.
After all the Health promblems have a cost and they would pay for a lot of EV’s on the road.
LA such a punch ball for pollution and what is CARB doing ???
My God they are corrupt!
CARB is a disgrace and must be on the car/oil pay roll.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Reading the requirements a 50 mile PHEV would enable 2 credits per car. The Tesla roadster, for a comparison, gets the maximum of 5 credits.
I can’t see when the test is applied. If it is at the start of battery life, GM might be able to claim the Volt as a 50 miler. Of course, they could always buy credits from someone else and have a smaller sales volume of Volts.
Depending upon the price of credits, it might be worthwhile to lower the price of Volts in states with CARB requirements, to ensure the 60,000 sales mark per year is met. I would also expect rollout to occur first in states with CARB requirements, then elsewhere, as supplies ramp up.
I agree with Lutz now. There is zero chance the Volt will not be produced.
A marginal increase in the price of ICE vehicles would also cover the price of credits, so this is another way retailers could go.
Exciting times! Go Volt go.
March 29th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Who cares!!! These requirements whether you believe they should be there or not are too little too late to matter. The electric vehicle is being rolled out to the masses little by little and the leak in the dam is about to bust. With gasoline prices above 3 dollars and no sign of that changing coupled with the advances in Battery technology that has been going on the mandates are no longer required. The age of the EV is apon us and by 2013, EV’s (new cars) in some form or another will be the norm instead of the exception. The year the average car on the road relies on some form of electrical propulsion won’t be far behind. (talking usa)
March 29th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
There’s logic, there’s fuzzy logic, and then there’s
California logic.
I’ve run across dozens of environmentalists’ blogs that
have bemoaned this reduction of 25,000 (nonexistent)
to 7,500 (also nonexistent) all electric car "requirements"
proposed by CARB and have yet to come across any knowledge from these people as to what the changes actually mean. They don’t know, but they’re certain it’s got to be bad.
I’m wondering where these CARB folks were when Nissan, Mitsubishi, Renault and others have publicized their plans to import electric cars into the US, most of them way before the 2012 - 2014 timeframe the CA CARB is talking about. The CARB "requirements" don’t actually require that anyone actually ever buy any of these electrics, and judging by the reaction of GM’s EV-1 customers during the 1990’s,
one would doubt that once word gets out about the reality of driving a battery-only EV, any sales would quickly dry up. The cars simply are not and never have been viable alternatives to the gasoline powered car and can only exist as adjunct, second (albeit very expensive) cars used for commuting and local driving. And since plug-in hybrids
will be on the scene from at least 2010 onward, no one in their right mind would ever subject themselves to the cost, headaches, and inconveniences of a battery-only electric car using today’s batteries. Not even the most rabid
environmentalist will suffer the headaches and expenses once it becomes common knowledge that a plug-in like the Chevy Volt has the capacity to reduce emissions at least as much as an EV with 90 miles or so of driving range, which the vast bulk of them will be. You see, a Volt can
get to that destination 50 miles away and back and log 40 miles of electric driving along the way in doing so, but that 90 mile ranged EV can’t get there and back, so it can’t be used - you’ll need a gasoline powered car for the whole trip. We know a Volt can eliminate over 93% of gas requirements
while commuting (which is over 1/2 of all driving), and easily 90% overall.
I doubt that a 90 mile ranged EV can supply 90% of an owners mileage needs. A single vacation by itself of a few hundred miles away would consume around 4% of their yearly mileage needs, and would require gasoline powered
transportation.
Now virtually all these self-proclaimed environmentalists are claiming the 17,500 target reduction is killing the electric car all over again, an odd claim indeed, since 17,500 EVs would be about 18 times more than ever populated the streets of California in the past, when supposedly
they were a living technology. Apparently ‘dead’ and is a relative term in California - it’s that fuzzy logic again. Sort of like their treasured phrase: zero emission vehicle, none of which has ever actually been powered by a zero emission fuel.
It gets even zanier : California has two types of ZEVs. CA CARB says:
"Zero means zero only when I say it means zero.
Which, to be precise, is never.
Got that?"
March 29th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Global warming has just been proven beyond doubt, CO2 levels are now dangerously high, peak oil has either happened already and they’re hiding it or it will happen in the next decade or so, and CARB decides to reduce the requirements. Gas prices can drop to $1 per gallon and it won’t change any of the above.
CARB and CAFE (even if they had the stones to put the limits where they really need to be) can’t change anything on their own. It has to start with us.
We as consumers need to demand a plug-in hybrid or a true battery electric car if you can afford it. Vote with your dollars not your typing fingers. If we continue to buy gas guzzlers then that’s what the auto makers will sell us.
March 29th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
As I recall, a recent appellate court ruled that a state did not have the right to override Federal regulations and create a crazy quilt of conflicting standards for those providing goods throughout the U.S. I see the argument as a restraint of free trade and attempt by the state to regulate interstate commerce, which they are forbidden to do by the Constitution. The ICC has been used a WHOLE lot of times in the past and the question is why not now? Basically, California can be portrayed as trying to extort money from the automakers - fines levied against them (or credits traded) would transfer money from citizens of other states to manufacturers located in California to sell goods that they
could not otherwise produce at an attractive price. Altair Phoenix is the perfect example here - a California corporation whose business model actually (and publically)
bases its business plan on its ability to extract hundreds of thousands of dollars per electric vehicle from a major automaker because of the CARB ruling.
March 29th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
… one additional note. This website and GM will earn a lot of points (karmic type points) when the Volt gets on the market in real, meaningful numbers. That will be a momentous day.
March 29th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
>> That will be a momentous day.
It will indeed.
13 years is a looooooong time to wait for competition.
Tokyo Motor Show, October 1997
March 30th, 2008 at 5:18 am
If you travel to one of the "limited availability" areas and purchase a Volt, and drive it back home, what are you going to do if it has a major malfunction? Your local Chevy dealer is not going to be able to service it!
Why not? If worse comes to worst, they will just swap out the broken motor or battery. They’ll get the replacements from the same GM parts network that gives them replacement parts for any other model car.
For some reason people have the idea that the Volt is going to be like the alien spacecraft in Independence Day, only serviceable by Jeff Goldblum. The reality is that the Volt will, for the most part, be the same as any other car, and its extra/unique parts will be bolted on just like any other car parts.
March 30th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Tom #34:
I am afraid that our assumption is just incorrect. The main reason cited by Larry Burns was about this very reason. Here is the quote:
“It just doesn’t make sense to do that yet. You’d have to set up the service parts in all of those dealerships and train all of those dealers to service the vehicles. We might concentrate it in five or ten cities and say that is where we want to start.”
And having your local Mr. Goodwrench attempt to service this car without the proper training and tools is just not going to happen,if my experience with my Crossfire is any example. Chrysler dealers had to purchase all the diagnostic tools and send the techs to a one week training school. And those are the only techs allowed to touch my car. Now don’t you think that the Volt, with a 300V+ main bus will be even more restrictive in their servicing???
March 30th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Here’s a question I hope somebody can answer…
I drove a 2008 Honda Accord this past week, and noticed that it is recognized as a “PZEV” by CARB. While Honda’s get fairly good gas mileage, what makes this car partial zero emissions? It certainly wasn’t a hybrid. It seems like this is just a scam to help big auto meet the PZEV requirements.
March 30th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
#35, Jim:
I don’t know what went wrong with the design of your Crossfire that your diagnostic equipment isn’t just a nice ODBII scanner like almost any other car.
I’ve done some work on cars and I have some mechanic friends, the “Mr. Goodwrench” type, as you call them. These guys are called upon to service pretty much any vehicle you bring in, any year/make/model. Usually it’s pretty straightforward. Sometimes they do have to look up some stuff in various service manuals, which can take some time and head-scratching, but ultimately the work gets done, and it gets done just fine. It’s a widely perpetuated myth that only dealership mechanics know how to tighten a bolt correctly.
The other thing to realize is that a design goal of a car is to make it serviceable. GM doesn’t want its mechanics getting electrocuted either. I’m sure any dangerous parts of the Volt will be located and connected in such a way that it’s really not very dangerous to work with, and anything that is somewhat dangerous will be colored red, have warning stickers all around it, etc.
March 30th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
If the Volt is sold, (rather than leased like the EV1), it would be impossible to tell people that they can only buy it if they agree to keep it in a limited geographic area.
First of all that’s unconstitutional to tell you what you can do with your own personal property. Second, say you live in So. California then get transferred to Nebraska or anywhere else. Are they going to repossess the car?
I think all GM, Facilities will have to be trained to work on this car. It shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to be able to change the spark plugs on the ICE, it will look pretty much like every other ICE that’s been built in the last 100 years or so.
If there is a problem with the electrical system they may take some time to figure it out, but GM simply has to be working on a plan for global support of this vehicle, otherwise, it would be leased where they could stipulate how it is to be used.
I suspect that a good number of people will travel great distance to purchase a Volt. I’m sure eBay will have them for sale at a hefty premium to the highest bidder, regardless of location.
March 30th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
It’s not a matter of bootleg service — for most of us GM is going to have to provide service at a local dealer if it wants to sell us a Volt, and it’s going to have to be an attractive car for the price. Maybe the Volt will be limited by the numbers of available batteries to California, Florida and Washington only, and maybe it will turn out to be a car just for geezers, but I hope both of those speculations will be wrong.
March 30th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
#37 Tom said: It’s a widely perpetuated myth that only dealership mechanics know how to tighten a bolt correctly.
Sometimes Tom, even they can’t do that right….
#38 jscott1000, I agree with you. I’d be damned if I lived in S. Cal. and drove it to Colorado, just to ski, and it broke down.. I don’t see how GM can regulate where you can travel with it. It’s not like they’ll tell Onstar to shut down the car when it crosses the state line..
March 30th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
If these are just the first markets in what really will end up being a national roll-out, your risks are limited to a short period of time. Like if the national roll-out takes a year, you will have to cross your fingers for 12 months until the national roll-out completes.
If the national roll-out doesn’t happen at all, Volt owners will have something bigger to worry about than service. No matter where they live.
March 30th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
#37 through #40:
First of all, I agree with you that it has to be easily serviced through ALL Chevy dealerships.
But it is GM is saying that they will not have nationwide availability of service at the time of the initial release, not me. And if that is the case, they are going to have problems with people that move, travel, or decide to go and purchase a Volt from a dealer that is not able to provide local service for the car they sold!
Believe me, I was not trying to slam any mechanic. I was just saying that if they are not trained to service this vehicle properly, and do not have the correct documentation, diagnostics, and parts available to them when service is requested, there could be unanticipated problems.
I have posted this before, but what we really have here is a lack of information from GM. How long is “limited availability” going to be a part of the Volt’s release? Are we talking a month, a quarter, the first year, or until the release Gen-2 of the Volt. It is this crazy piecemeal release of tidbits of information, without any explanation of how it will be implemented that causes all this wild speculation!
I truly hope that the design and manufacture of the car is being done better than the job GM is doing so far with the release of information concerning this vehicle. IMHO, they would be better off to say nothing, and then releasing information for any particular portion in its entirety, when they are sure that this is the implemetation they are going to pursue.
March 31st, 2008 at 11:41 am
Spineless cowards!
April 1st, 2008 at 6:59 pm
…California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted to reduce the requirement of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) from the initial mandate of 25,000 sales to 7,500 sales in the years 2012-2014.
Thats how the car makers do it, they manage to erode legislation and mandates piecemeal, bit by bit.
In a little less than 4 years, the car makers will have to sell 7,500 ZEV’s and do it in 2 years.
Sooner or later, I expect CARB to throw out the ZEV mandate as well.
We’ll see what is to become of the PHEV mandate as well.
April 5th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Actually I know mechanics from many various dealerships, I have family who own dealerships. This is not a big deal. For one, the Toyota Prius did not take long to get the grasp of. They did send out information for the mechanics concerning the electronic components. Within no-time they had it out to other non-toyota dealers too for safety reasons. It happened quicker than they could get people off the waiting lists. The same applies for new cars of almost any type. I asked an associate at the Chrysler dealership about the Crossfire, and he at no time had a “week of training” for it. They received the new literature, and like an encyclopedia, had it available as a resource. They are always receiving updated information about vehicles, especially new ones. I’m afraid your dealer was feeding you some incorrect information, unless that dealership was having some unique problems.
April 5th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Bit of personal opinion here. If companies cannot be expected to adhere to certain varying standards in different states, (only be held to overall federal laws, and not state) then they should be required to release an even amount of product to all states at a given time. I am always very upset when vehicles, or other products are only available in certain states. I do not want to have to travel across the country to get a car, instead of having my dealer sell me one, and I WILL do it, because I am not going to sit around and wait any longer.
April 6th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Brad #46:
All I can tell you about the service on my Crossfire is that no other techs, except the two that were trained on it, will work on it, except for oil changes, etc. And the computer they have to plug into the connector under the dash on the drivers side is M/B specific. I have a separate set of wheels and snow tires for winter use, and no one has been able to reset the tire pressure monitor system when the wheels are changed over, except the Chrysler dealer with their computer. It only takes them a few minutes, and they only charge me a few dollars, but over the last four years, they have had to do that reset each time.
And that is the general concensus of the Crossfire owners on two other forums I check in on regularly……….