Lutz Explains Why the EV-1 Can’t Simply Be Reintroduced
After GM first introduced the Chevy Volt concept in January 2007, there was a lot of ire and skepticism from the former EV-1 crowd. Most vocal among them was Doug Korthoff who appeared in the film Who Killed the Electric Car?
Doug has since filled the web with extensive anti-GM rhetoric and used to make appearances on this site. He and I had a chance to meet in LA last year as well, quite cordially.
In response to an article in the LA Times outlining the Big 3 automakers financial difficulties, Doug has reappeared with a letter to the editor that he copied to GM vice-chair Bob Lutz.
Doug’s letter:
"GM has been seriously looking for options for getting more fuel-efficient cars on the market quickly, because there is some question about its financial health after 2008. Rebranding foreign cars has become more expensive as the dollar falls. GM has proposed producing the VOLT, described as an Electric car with a range-extender, but it isn’t planned for earlier than 2011, and it depends on Lithium batteries which don’t yet exist.
There is one option GM has not considered, which would turn things around, both in image and in reality.
GM could resume production of the 1999 EV1, using Panasonic lead-acid batteries. These were leased in Arizona in 2000, and regularly attained a range of over 100 miles on a charge.
Resumption of production would be simple; the EV1 plant is empty, the former assembly workers have been laid off and are idly drawing "jobs bank" salaries, the batteries are available off-the-shelf in any quantities over 1000, and the design is proven successful.
Production of the EV1 does not depend on an expensive product design cycle, new engineering, questionable battery testing and recalls; it’s a proven winner.
This is the GM car that fans watched over in a rain-plagued vigil for 28 days. Here’s an example where would-be purchasers clamored for a chance to buy GM products, hoping for the faint chance that GM would sell six-year-old used versions for $25,000 cash.
Supposedly, GM is now bemoaning the lack of enthusiasm for its current products; why not re-activate the EV1 fan club, recharge the excitement of the "21st century test pilot" GM fans, and turn GM around? Spend scarce engineering dollars on new versions of the EV1: four-passenger, pickups, serial hybrid with range-extender; but the current version could be in showrooms in six months.
If GM had re-started the EV1 line, instead of starting design work on the VOLT, the EV1 would already be generating revenue right now.
Fresh off the assembly line, these cars would sell for no less than $35,000, perhaps as much as $50,000 or more. But the morale value would be even greater.
Revival of the EV1 would quiet GM’s critics, make GM some money, and attract new customers as well as increase floor traffic for other models. New and improved versions of the basic Electric car, year after year, would expand GM’s footprint on the world market, leveraging scarce investment dollars, maximizing profit and leading the way forward.
And we could say once again that our cars were "made in America and fueled by American Electrons".
Is it a measure of GM’s past failure that resumption of EV1 production is not even under consideration?"
Apparently having heard enough of this Mr. Lutz in his earnest no-nonsense way decided to respond:
"The EV will not meet any current safety laws. Putting a version into production that meets regulations would put us out to ’11 or ’12. They cost us well over $80,000 to produce, and, being a two-seater, we could only sell 800 in four years. We lost over one billion dollars on that experiment.
I don’t know why you insist that lithium-ion doesn’t exist. We are getting packs from our suppliers, they test well in both hot and cold, they store the energy as claimed, we are fast-cycling them to make sure they last, we are doing high-temp, high-load testing with the cooling system shut down and are experiencing no thermal problems. Trust me, the battery will not delay the car."
Source (LA Times ) and thanks to our reader KFO18 for Doug’s letter.
Popularity: 6%
(12 votes, average: 4.58 out of 5) 
Loading ...
June 28th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Interesting. This EV-1 simply won’t die. Why can’t they just give it up and move on. The car is gone gone gone. It doesn’t work for today’s market. Washed up. Finished. Doesn’t Doug get it? Good grief. Let’s get the Volt perfected and released to the public. That is what we really need. Not some dead car from the past.
June 28th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
You have to love Bob Lutz. He obviously dediced that sometimes it’s worth the time it takes to respond to off the wall stuff in order to at least take the edge off the wingnuts.
June 28th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
I agree with Lutz. Range costs money no matter what battery you use. The EV1 (though an awesome car) was a total failure because very few wanted the car until after the project was crushed. If it were re-released, it would be a much bigger success, but would still be too expensive. I think GM is looking to produce a superior product that the masses (not just environmentalists) will buy.
Though Doug does post a lot of anti-GM stuff, I think he has every right to. I don’t blame him for hating GM. GM really made a stupid mistake with how they ended the EV1 project. And even they admit, from a PR view, they couldn’t have handled it any worse.
GM needs to show people like Doug Korthoff and Chris Paine (the outspoken GM haters) that they are serious with the Volt. Their voices go a long way. I think GM should take steps to win over these people. And I think they are doing their best by being transparent with Volt progress. I hope that continues.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
The EV-1 was and remains a disaster for GM. The movie was a great movie. Like most documentaries, the movie was far from balanced, but it was well done, and there was enough truth to it to give it lasting effectiveness. For many of us, the EV-1 left such bad memories because so much of what GM has said about the EV-1 has been, at best, only one part of the whole truth.
Even so, it makes no sense to try to bring the EV-1 back now. For GM, the bad memories of the EV-1 have to be expanded by association with good memories of a new and successful car, the Volt, so that the long-term trend line for GM electric cars can go in a positive direction.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
The EV1 is not applicable any longer, GM have paid their penance and are planning to produce the E-REV concept.It should be possible for the EV1 believers to transfer their belief to the Volt.
GM has a huge believer base, EV1 believers plus the 30,000 on the GM-Volt believer list.
Perhaps as a act of faith they should throw away their marketing and production planning and just do what the believers want.
The results could be startling.
Lets face it, the first sixty thousand are already sold to believers that will forgive any foibles, in fact love them.
OK,OK Im exagerating…Too much coffee…
June 28th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Somebody else is coming to market with the EV-1 Doug Korthoff…it’s the Mitsu i-Miev.
Except they somehow are managing to get 4 seats, and 100 mile range for 25K…go figure.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
If the Mitsu i-Miev turns out as promised, it will be a big success and big competition for the Volt if the Mitsu is readily available.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
I LOVE Bob Lutz.
I have a deep crush on him.
I have a theory that belief in “Who Killed the Electric Car” is inversely proportional to levels of common sense.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Electric automobiles outsold both gasoline and steam powered cars in the United States in the year 1900 !
The main reason that gas cars took over was because of PRICE. It was Ford that started making affordable gas-powerd cars ($650) that were half the price of the popular electrics. Thomas Edison spent the vast majority of his wealth trying to perfect the Electric Car without success, but he knew it was the better technology, he just couldn’t conquer the chemical barriers in battery technology at the time. I hope the Electric Car makes a BIG comeback, because I also believe it was always the better technology.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
For the Mitsu i-Miev, they said 2010 for Japan only. I would assume the US version would pack on two years. It would work as a great little commuter car.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
EV1 is the best car I have ever driven!
I would love to see GM make them again.
I do not understand why Bob keeps repeating the lie that they could sell only 800 of them. They were never sold, and they never put sincere efforts to market them.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Doug just can’t get on the lithium battery bandwagon. He is stuck in the past and realizes once GM builds the Volt he won’t have anything to protest. Doug posted on this site several times that the Volt will never be produced. I could be wrong, but my money is on GM.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
#6 Statik,
Its reasonable to believe the EV1 supporters would transfer their loyalty to the i-miev.
But it will be in the US market maybe 2012 as it needs a rebuild to meet the US safety requirements.
It will arrive at the same time as the Volt and the projected Nissan
The sooner the Volt is out and visible the better.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
#7 cyclop
Like all things new, it won’t be readily available at all. Will probably be 3-4 years before you see your first one…will be even a couple years before they are readily available in Japan.
By the same token it will be 5-6 years before you see a Volt readily at your Atlanta GM-Chrysler dealership.
We spend alot of time bashing Ford for their Fusion hybrid to fight the Prius in the last thread, but no one seems to want to consider what the full EV means to the Volt (…and all the hybrids).
If Mitsu is to market next year with a 100 mile, 4 seater at 25K, how much longer will it be until they plunk in another pack and we see a 200 miler at 29K? How does a 40K+ Volt with a 40 mile range and a gas engine stack up?
Everyone keeps talking about how the battery pack price is dropping so fast…that the pack should only cost $4,000. Doesn’t this mean that the true EVs costs will drop even faster as proportional to any vehicle with a ICE component.
I guess my point is, the Volt is a great go between, the same as the other hybrids. They all have a spot, they can all survive for awhile. But ANY car manufacturer that thumbs it’s nose at the power behind pure EV is a car company that will not survive.
The end game of all of these cars is the EV.
When the first EV from a major auto player hits the market, we will witness a tsunami of change, the likes of which have never been seen in the auto industry. And it will be a great day. GM would be best to be a player, and not a spectator.
June 28th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Is it just me, or does the iMiEV look like a warped VW Bug?
http://www.hybridcars.com/electric-cars/miitsubishi-all-electric-car-2010-imiev.html
It’s cute, the ladies will love it.
June 28th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
#9 Electric Cars,
We should be able to learn a lot from that.
I believe gas was relatively expensive then but perhaps the distances they expected to travel were not great.
Did the extended range of a gas vehicle have any bearing?
June 28th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
#10 TBK
#13 Bruce G
The thread moves fast. Yes, I agree on your timelines for the i-Miev 100%. They are going to pump out a few thousand in 2009…then ramp into 2010, 2011.
They have already decided (like everyone else) that their big ’showoff’ will be at the Detroit Auto Show…so we won’t know the expected roll out here until then. I would wager you would see them trickling in late 2011, early 2012.
By the same token, you might be lucky enough to see a couple Volts popping around California/NY in late 2011, 2012. But you probably aren’t going to see one in Georgia until 2014ish.
With anything hot and new, you have to wait…and wait…and wait. Whatever any of these auto manufacturers say is the ‘official roll-out date’ you have to tack on a couple years for us in the real world.
The Prius is probably the only car any of us will be able acquire (with significant effort) and plug-in in 2010/2011, because as was said here many times before, it isn’t a ‘true electric’ hybrid (whatever that means). The next gen comes ‘wired’ to accept the pack and the plug, and capacity on the platform is not a issue. They are capable of building 600,000+ in year 1. Trick will be getting the battery. No one can pull that off in 2009 for sure, maybe 2010, but 2011 looks to truly be the year the Li-Ion is widely produced.
June 28th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
If EV1 was to delay Volt by only a month due to distracting GM it would be bad. Since EV1 cost $80K, anyone with $80K to drop on a car can get a Tesla for a little more. If EV1 was available in 2009, and Volt in 2010 who would not wait a year for the Volt?
June 28th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
The model years is part of the malaise of the automotive industry.
Surely the glam of those shows could be replaced with, say, two monthly product reviews for software and interior trim details.
Then use, say, two yearly reviews of the exterior, as has happened in the past anyway.
NO!
June 28th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
The EV1 was great, but the volt will be better by far. I can’t wait to get a CUV with E-Flex. I really think that GM should come out with an Equinox that has an ICE and a battery rather than the H2- Fool Sell. It would sell like hot cakes. It would be neat to have one, and they have already made 100 H2 versions to test how about putting an ICE in it and put it in my driveway!
June 28th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Bob’s crdibility is in question when he repeats wrong information. Am I supposed to believe that Tesla makes money on the Roadster at $100k, but GM’s cost on EV1 is $80k? Come on.
GM once led the pack in technology with EV1. If it can not wait to be on that spot again until 2010, it should consider bring it back again.
I will be among the first to buy one. No thanks to lease, though.
I like and admire my RAV4-EV, I fell in love with EV1.
June 28th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Well Bob is correct in saying they lost money on the EV1 project. As I understand it “800″ were leased “in four years” and after the lease was up, instead of selling them to the owners that wanted to buy them, GM decided it would be more profitable to take them back and junk them. I wonder what the lease payment for the EV1 was.
Let’s see:
EV1 cost to produce ~= $90,000
3 Year Lease @ $450/m / $4,000 due at signing = $20,200
Buy option at end of lease = $70,000
Does anyone have the real EV1 deal scenario?
Did anyone get the opportunity to buy the EV1 for $70K at the end of the lease?
Honda is leasing their hydrogen fuel cell FCX for $600 a month. I wonder if Honda will make the same mistake GM did.
June 28th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
The EV-1 was ugly and had only 2 seats. Around the same time that the EV-1 was discontinued, Honda introduced the Insight. In Japanese fashion, it’s styling was a copy of the EV-1… just as ugly and also had two seats. It didn’t sell very well either and was discontinued. At least Toyota got the formula on the number of seats right, and it a became a much better seller… although it is still pretty ugly.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Ugly is in the eyes of the beholder….
June 28th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
A four passenger EV-1 was developed and shown in the late 1990s. By 2001 one of the divisions at GM had also developed a high mileage (reportedly 80 MPG) car, the “Precept”. See the attached “Precept” story. Let’s hope the E-REV “Volt” platform succeeds this time around.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1266481.html
Mitsubishi’s “jelly bean” styled all-electric four passenger I-Miev may be introduced by 2009 in Japan for around $24,000. (before government rebates or credits). Other reports suggest Mitsu’s considering a slightly larger version of the I-Miev for the U.S by 2010.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
I watched a video recently of a guy in Europe quick charging an EV equipped with Lithium-Titanate batteries. It only took 8 minutes for a full charge, but wow was the connector on that battery cable HUGE. Anyway it seems to me that Europe in way ahead in actual battery-powered vehicles being used on their roads. IMO it is going to take us many years to surpass them in actual real use, even if you include the thousands of Volts that are coming.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
The EV-1 was a very fast car. I know it could totally embarrass a Nissan 300Z sports car at the time, which was pretty impressive. Yeah, that machine was way cool, I think most people just didn’t know about it or understand its capabilities, so it never got a fair chance to achieve greatness.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
The EV1 has been replaced by the Tesla Roadster.
Now is not the time to divert scarce resources away from the Volt. The Mitusi will make a great second car. Sorry Ford.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
I noticed that most EV are rather smallish in size. To gain market share in the U.S. the makers had better UpSize those cars because the rest of the world knows that the USA is the land of fat McAsses, many who have trouble just fitting in your typical airline seat.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
I wonder how, at this point in time, anyone can say ‘the battery doesn’t exist’.
GM is already testing them in lab, and has at least one running an actual vehicle!
This Doug Korthoff is a pie-in-the-sky douche with more hope than intelligence. (much like one of our presidential candidates. Remember, hope is an emotion, not a plan)
June 29th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Doug Korthof is delusional. He is wrong on so many things and believes he’s the world’s expert on EVs. He also talks out of both sides of his mouth. He clamors about GM selling the Nimh patent to Chevron and now no car can use those batteries, and then claims that GM should use these NIMH batteries instead of Li-ion because they’re available! Which is it?
He also has this idea in his head that GM doesn’t want anyone to know that there are 300+ Rav4 EVs out there. In his words, “GM denies their existence”. I don’t think anyone denies they’re out there, GM included. In fact I’ll just betcha’ GM has more important things to worry about.
I think everyone is tired of the EV-1 saga. Companies in business to make money make decisions based on the almighty dollar. They also make mistakes. Just ask Coke about the mid 80’s “new coke” and Ford about the Edsel. Are we going to keep bringing these up forever?
Let’s talk about the Volt and what we can do to get it on the road!
June 29th, 2008 at 12:22 am
Statik #14
When are you going to understand that the Volt is an EV?
June 29th, 2008 at 12:32 am
NZDavid, you’re totally right. Anyone who wants an EV1 should buy a Tesla! Supercar performance and a 200 mile range. Who wants 1999 technology? Also, Doug Korthoff doesn’t know what he’s talking about regarding the Panasonic lead-acid batteries. Sure, if you were some techno-nerd you MIGHT squeeze 100 miles from that pack if: You have a tailwind, a full charge, a balanced battery pack, a flat or downhill grade, don’t drive freeway speeds… Wait, my fingers are giving out.
You get my drift. The EV1 club webpage is still up. Read the OWNER’S (ok, make that leasee’s) blogs about range! BUT you say, a hundred grand for a Tesla? Sure, EV1’s in the numbers produced were more like million dollar prototypes. Here we are 10 years later. Don’t you think a hundred grand is kind of a bargain? Admit it! And the Tesla meets all 2009 government requirements!
Lutz is right. Forget the EV1. That was 1999. 2008 gives us the Tesla roadster. Two years and we will have a 4 seat “EV2″ with built in range extender (the “enthusiasts” talked about range extender TRAILERS! Ridiculous, when compared to what the Volt will be!) at a price most people can afford. (Maybe. $40K total (tax, license, etc.) so say $4000 down, finance $36K for 72 months is $614 at 7% but lets hope GM will do 0% financing so that is $500 a month. Okay, I hope you all have a trade-in and the government will have some sort of tax incentive! Whew! This puppy is expensive! But hey! 40K for an EV2? What is Doug whinning about??????)
On with the Revolution!
June 29th, 2008 at 12:46 am
I don’t believe GM even has much in excess stock of parts for the EV1 (although a few parts were from their standard product lines).
I somewhat understand GM’s position about not selling them. They would have to provide spare parts for 5 years and I don’t think that was in the cards. I know many people said they didn’t care, but just wait until a controller or motor died and GM said “sorry, no spare parts”. People would go through the roof. Certainly someone would retrofit controllers and motors to them but there is more to it than just welding and drilling.
A guy at work had an EV1 and while it worked fine it definitely had a “production prototype” feeling to it. He said it ran great but was always wondering what the next version would be like. It was as if he knew it wasn’t really ready-for-prime-time. It was so butt ugly that while I was enamored with the technology I personally thought GM made it as ugly as possible to kill off any interest (it’s a joke folks). Styling-wise, I hated it. The fit and finish was pretty good for the time but there were little things that just didn’t look production. He also said he was told up front that buying it outright was out of the question (remember the Chrysler Turbine? You only got three months with that baby. Chrysler crushed all of them too to avoid paying duty since the bodies were make in Italy.)
I’m sure GM also knew it was going to be a money loser and worked to get the law changed in California. I might have done the same thing if I knew I was headed into a money pit. Think about it, if GM could have made a PROFIT they would have built a billion of them. It’s like the “cure for cancer” being kept a secret by the big pharmaceutical companies. Think of the marketing if they could claim; they cured cancer! They couldn’t make drugs of any type fast enough!
Certainly if I could get one to play with it would be a fun project car.
June 29th, 2008 at 12:51 am
The eyes I be holden also says “ugly”.
Hey GM, why not bring back that 1912 GMTC Electric?
May I pretty please see what My Volts are going to look like first.
June 29th, 2008 at 12:53 am
I must 1st say I agree with GM in that it’s too late to revive the EV-1, and especially not with lead acid batteries!
The Volt is essentially the prototype ranged extended EV-1 that GM demostrated (also a 4 seater as the body was stretched) but with an ICE powering the generator instead of a turbine engine, and a smaller EV only range.
However I also agree with Young that Lutz needs to repeat GM’s mis-information campain better than he is. As already mentioned, the EV-1 was never for sale, only lease…. and 1,135 were actually made, but GM only let 842 of them be leased.
In addition, GM for years denied the existence of the waiting list (which the former employees leasing them for a while were under non-disclosure until 2005 when a GM exec finally acknowledged the waiting list existed). Demand exceeded supply… the specalists leasing EV-1’s had a list 5,000 names long, and those that wanted to lease them had to jump through hoops (such as couldn’t be your only car). Also keep in mind that GM did almost no marketing. The 1st 660 EV-1’s made had the defective Delco lead acid batteries, but they were all leased ($600/month I believe).
It’s no coincidence GM canceled the EV-1 just one month after buying the Hummer brand.
In any case, Young, you really loved the EV-1 more than the Rav4-EV? I’ve never seen either in person, never been lucky enough to try driving either one, but if I had a choice of either one I would have (and still would) liked the Rav4-EV. 5 seater over a 2 seater wins it for me over the modest (from my understanding) extra range of the EV-1.
And I’d like to thank Sherry Boschert once again for her book “Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars That Will Recharge America”, from which I looked up the above info (it’s in the 1st chapter about Chelsea Sexton, one of the 3 GM specialists who leased the EV-1, and from the sounds of it worked on them under the hood with her to be future husband… got to love a woman who doesn’t mind doing that!)
June 29th, 2008 at 1:00 am
The past truly is prolog.
June 29th, 2008 at 2:42 am
#14 Statik
Right on brother!
June 29th, 2008 at 3:16 am
I’m still waiting on a pure EV midsize car.
100 mile in the $28K range
or
150 mil in the $35K range.
I’m not rich.
I’m not short.
I have need for a back seat.
I don’t need a sports car.
I don’t want to do an oil change, tune ups, emmisions testing, etc. when you just don’t need it in an EV (I don’t want E-REV for a car….maybe SUV, but not car)
I hate all these commercials advertising “over 30 MPG” and “guaranteed $2.99 gas for x years” as if that is a good threshold for a petro car and as if the cost of running these terrible gas guzzlers for only 3 years is the selling point.
Some company..please make an affordable mid-size EV.
June 29th, 2008 at 4:24 am
Gawd, I hope this puts an end to the “beating the dead horse” that was the EV-1. This is about the Volt right? Join up…………and let’s go!!
June 29th, 2008 at 4:53 am
Oh man, does no one realise the Volt is nothing other than an up to date EV1?
The battery is also T-shaped, and in R&D they even tested an IC Engine as range extender at the EV1!
So the true answer is:
They won´t build any EV1 because they started the Volt by taking the old ev1 construction, adding rear seats…
and if they weren´t so stupid so destroy the ev1´s and instead kept them for trials on new battery technology, the Volt would have been on the road at least an year earlier!
June 29th, 2008 at 6:56 am
#41 Matthias:
The gas engine range extender used in the EV-1 prototype was nothing like the Volt. It was a small gas turbine, constant RPM, located in the rear trunk. This was an idea that became an experiment - nothing more.
But I’m sure GM did leverage EV-1 technology for the Volt’s AC induction electric motor. Note that Tesla hired engineers that worked on the EV-1 for this same reason. The control code for a variable speed, variable load, AC induction motor with regenerative braking is extremely complex.
All current hybrids use brushless (i.e. magnet based) electric motors. The control code for brushless is much easier, but these magnet based motors don’t scale well. See here for details:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/?p=45
For an electric motor that powers the whole vehicle with decent acceleration, induction is more efficient and more cost effective. This is where GM’s experience with the EV-1 is particularly beneficial to the Volt.
June 29th, 2008 at 8:06 am
Doug Korthoff isn’t a very good Christian, or he would welcome back the prodigal son, GM. The first mistake that GM made with the EV1, which led to every other mistake, is running to the microphones with promises of an electric future, before they had actually developed a vehicle and market tested it - the rest is history:
- CARB took GM at their word and mandated the vehicles GM described
- GM developed the vehicle, but found it fell short of all their predictions of performance and cost
- automakers and oil companies fought the mandates
- GM losts their butts on leases and suffered a hit to their image
The good news is, that both GM and CARB are now doing things right, and all should be applauded.
June 29th, 2008 at 8:42 am
14 Statik…..
You say, “….the Volt is a great go between, the same as the other hybrids. They all have a spot, they can all survive for awhile. But ANY car manufacturer that thumbs it’s nose at the power behind pure EV is a car company that will not survive. The end game of all of these cars is the EV.” Several others here have also said this.
I have to respectfully but strenuously disagree! A pure EV is like having a power boat or a sail boat without an auxiliary “kicker”. And it makes almost NO SENSE as all-around transportation from a cost standpoint. Here’s why…. It’s almost impossible to anticipate an emergency such as your wife calling on the cell phone to say your daughter’s had an accident and is on the way to the ER at a hospital well outside the remaining range of your EV. Or after a trip from Santa Monica to Palm Springs, you want to go on to Las Vegas the next day without back-tracking for your other car because your EV can’t make it. Dozens of other unpredictable things will happen in this complex world we live in that make a pure EV impractical for the vast majority of drivers.
The real genius of the E-REV architecture is that it consists of TWO power sources and propulsion systems, not one, which greatly reduces your likelihood of ever being stranded in a dangerous spot such as alongside a freeway’s fast lane next to the center divider or even just off on the shoulder —motorists and police are killed every day this way.
Finally, the real clincher is that a range-extending ICE/Gen set will both COST LESS AND WEIGH LESS than a battery 4-5 times the size of the Volt’s (i.e., 64-80kWh that would be needed to give an EV a practical range of 160-200miles)!
June 29th, 2008 at 8:46 am
#43 Jason M Hendler
I believe…and get ready for this, your totally right. Wait for it…wait…no buts, or anything.
GM tried something, they tried to build a solution that would satisfy the CARB ZEV 2%, and got ‘totally owned’ trying to make it a reality. Yes, they could have made them, but at significant cost.
I do believe they had a list of 5,000 odd waiting, sure why not, seems reasonable, and I’m sure they are ‘finking’ a bit on the $80,000 a unit number, probably $50,000 was more like it. But it doesn’t take a person very long to see that they couldn’t sell the minimum requirements of this product at $50,000 a pop…not with gas at $1/gallon. They knew it too.
1 out of every 50 cars sold in their lineup had to be this jelly bean, $50,000+, no profit car? When a fill-up of a similar car was around $12 bucks? (2% of 5.5 million–110,000/year if all the states adopted it…or 50K if only California stuck with it)
Once GM realized how impossible it was to hit this mandate, and how they were the best of the pack, they simply stopped making them and turned their attention (and money) to the law against itself, specifically that states can’t regulate fuel economy (when they modified it to include hybrid credits)
Alot of people blame GM because they were the closest to attempting this feat…and to be fair, they weren’t completely honest about the process to be sure. However, the fault ultimately lies with the ZEV mandate, they set the bar so high on a platform that was nowhere to be seen, 2% of all cars by 1998, and 10% by 2003?
If the ZEV mandate would have been something reasonable like .5% in 2000, 1% in 2005, 3% in 2010. We’d all have electric cars today.
Under that scenario, of a small, but easily attainable goal, the automakers would have all came to market, they would have build electric car infrastructures, and through competition and slowly increasing requirements, would continually build a better, more streamlined, most cost efficient product.
June 29th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Why did GM crush EV1 vehicles? GM could have reduced their financial loss in the EV1 program if they sold the EV1 to people who were willing to puchase the vehicles.
Can someone ask Mr. Wagoner is GM going to crush the Hummers because no one is buying them?
June 29th, 2008 at 8:48 am
We need to be fair here. From an environmental viewpoint, we need to judge companies not by what they say, but what they do. GM is paying its shareholders by building thousands of gas guzzling Hummers every day. That’s what GM does best. Is ANYONE truly gullible enough to believe that the Volt will ever actually hit the show room floors!? Get real folks, it’s all an “environmental image” smoke screen. This is GM we’re talking about, and if you want to know what they will do in the future, look to their past! They will continue to trash the world for profit because that’s what pays!
June 29th, 2008 at 8:56 am
#44 Nasaman
I hear you argument, and despite your bold type, I still disagree.
Your example:
“It’s almost impossible to anticipate an emergency such as your wife calling on the cell phone to say your daughter’s had an accident and is on the way to the ER at a hospital well outside the remaining range of your EV”
This is very true. Today! I said it has a limmited shelf-life. I said the Volt will be out available to all in 5-6 years. I figure it is viable for another 6-7 years on top.
Working for Nasa, and proporting the decreasing cost of battery packs, you would think you believe in the future and the advancement of the craft.
Do you believe that in 2020, EVs will still have the 100 mile range of the very first electric car, 2009 i-Miev? EVs with have 300 mile ranges wil be uncommon. So the only way you’d be in trouble ‘rushing to the ER’ if you happened to get a call, would be just after just driving 300 miles, (and of course you’d have to be close enough to home, but still too far away from the hospital under that scenario).
June 29th, 2008 at 9:02 am
#44 Nasaman
Lastly this quote:
“Finally, the real clincher is that a range-extending ICE/Gen set will both cost less and weigh less than a battery 4-5 times the size of the Volt’s (i.e., 64-80kWh needed to give an EV a practical range of 160-200miles)!”
What are you talking about? Are you proving the Volt is impractical? This is a argument for my side.
The i-Miev has 4 seats and goes 100 miles on 20kw,.
At 64kWh the i-Miev would go 300.
At 80kWh it goes FOUR HUNDRED MILES!
Today! And at your stated cost of $3,500 for 16kWh pack, that still puts the 80kWh/400 miler i-Miev at like $36,000 (100 miles at 25K)
(You might say that the weight gain could cut down the range, so I could conceed 375ish miles range…of course the ‘unused’ buffer band in the 80kW pack would be a much smaller percentage of the whole…so it might be still the same. Hard to say).
Side note:
If your car breaks down, you call a tow truck. No one out there is stressing that their gas car has no redundant system…or you take a cab.
Side, side note:
Even if by some freak happening your EV was totally on empty (who does that a gas car?), most people that pay over 40K for a new car…have more than one.
Your ’sudden phone’ call, exacty at the end of trip, exactly out of gas is the ‘perfect storm’ kind of scenario to begin with…insurance salesmen use those kind of statments.
June 29th, 2008 at 9:13 am
The Perfect Solution!
Here’s a thought on how to make everyone happy.
1. Doug and his EV friends get together and Buy or lease GM’s Factory
2. Doug and his EV friends Buy a license to Produce the EV1
3 They make and sell them.
Everyone wins! GM gets money for a plant they are not using. The workers get jobs. Doug and the EV’ers get their EV-1.The marketplace dictates whether they stay in business.
Don’t you just love free enterprise!
June 29th, 2008 at 9:20 am
#48 and #49 Me
Your grammar, spelling and syntax blows. Try going back and proofreading sometime!
Sorry about that. I was rushing to make two seperate posts that connected to each other, because of my long-windedness.
June 29th, 2008 at 9:27 am
GM did nothing wrong with the EV-1, at all, and didn’t make a mistake crushing it.
GM’s mistake was to invest in the research in the first place. The technology wasn’t ready for the car, and the population wasn’t ready for the technology.
It’s as simple as that. Toyota saw an opportunity to create a hybrid, and sell some few. That was a good thing for Toyota. I wish GM/Ford or another US company had seen the opportunity, but it doesn’t mean they were wrong not to.
GM lost the lead because of some very simple, but large manufacturing basics. Their equipment was old, their overhead was high, their design cycle was long, and their quality control was complacent.
Part of Toyota’s success was simply that the Japanese government provided free technology. In Japan they have a department devoted to new technology, like we have one devoted to defense. Their equipment is all new, newly designed and using modern technology.
One last statement I’ll make about the comparison is that the EV-1 and the Prius did not kill, or even significantly hurt GM. The Accord was the first huge bash, the Camry the second.
That’s very clear if you look at the sales numbers. Even with the gas prices shooting higher than almost anyone thought the Prius isn’t a gnat on the bum of the Camry in terms of sales.
The Volt is the right car to show that GM has turned things around.
June 29th, 2008 at 9:47 am
I live in Quebec. We generate 4 times as much clean Hydro-electric energy as we use, lots of clean energy for electric cars. I drive 75 klms. to work and stay 8 hours. Would the Volt be useful for me?
June 29th, 2008 at 10:06 am
#52 greg woulf
I agree completely except hindsight is 20/20. California basically was forcing their hand so they could continue to sell cars in their state. After the mandate was lifted the that is when the program was ended.
Inconsistent laws basically gave GM the black-eye. Sure it could have been handled differently. One option would have been to pull out of California altogether. Not suggesting that should have been done but it was another option.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am
I really cant stand Doug, he is the biggest naySayer of anything GM does. And frankly Doug needs to get his high and mighty EV-1 touting nose out of the clouds.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:19 am
There are a couple of people on here that could join Doug. I would imagine that bashing GM and the EV-1 is a source of income. He’s the Richard Hoagland of EV-1s.
It’s over. Let it go.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I am very familiar with Doug Korthoff. He is a one-man band who believes that NiMH batteries are our salvation and argues against
li ion batteries (and any others) and any attempts by the automakers to use them as part of some global conspiracy - let’s call it the li ion cabal. Naturally, he lives in England, as I recall. His website is a mountain of polemical diatribes that indicate that the NiMH industry is missing something by not paying him to write propaganda for their technology, obsolete though it may be. He wrote hundreds of threatening emails to GM and was finally ordered to desist from harrassing them. Apparently , for some bizarre reason
(like the film “Who Killed the Electric Car?”) Korthoff argues strongly for the patently insane idea that GM does now and has in the past controlled the destiny of the electric car. Gee, and I thought Toyota, Honda and others built electrics. I must have been dreaming.
Without an internet, or with an internet that actually makes some attempt to weed out the lies perpetually occuring on this “modern wonder” the Doug Korthoffs of the world would be where they always have been historically - ignored by society and taken care of by kindly relatives.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:33 am
48, 49 Statik……
I was just listening to Tom Brokaw interview the “Governator”, who described how it’s sometimes unnerving when his wife puts news clippings on Obama beside his place at the dinner table. As you probably know, he & his wife agreed to disagree on politics long ago —maybe, since you & I don’t live together, Statik, we could more easily cope with differing views on EVs vs E-REVs.
My view is that, even if the i MiEV is HUGELY successful in Japan, Europe & even perhaps in Canada, it will be much less so in the US. Why? Because most people in the US make less-reasoned, more spontaneous and more emotional purchase decisions about cars and they won’t be able to get past the appearance of the i MiEV. So no matter how cost effective and practical it is, it won’t sell here in significant numbers —certainly not compared to Asia & Europe.
Regarding batteries, it happens that one of my specialites is long-life spacecraft batteries —NiCd, NiMh & most recently, NiH2. We’re now getting 20 years out of Nickle-Hydrogen batteries (they outlast the hydrazine station-keeping/propulsion fuel, which limits spacecraft lifetimes, so there’s no real need to do better). I can say that “Moore’s law” that people often mention here does NOT apply to batteries! By contrast, battery state-of-the-art improvements progress at a “glacial” rate. And while you’re right that the Volt’s 16kWh batteries should not cost >$3,500, that is not likely to improve dramatically in 10 or even 25 years because of the sheer number of cells & interconnections in a ~300V battery. Likewise, no matter how much money we throw at it, battery weight is unlikely to be reduced dramatically in 10 or even 25 years. EEStor (et al) ultra capacitors are not credible battery replacements even if they achieve big gains in energy density because BaTiO3 leakage rates are MUCH to high —it’s simply fundamental physics.)
So I come back to my earlier conclusion that a range-extending ICE/Gen set will both COST LESS AND WEIGH LESS than a battery 4-5 times the size of the Volt’s (i.e., 64-80kWh that would be needed to give an EV a practical range of 160-200miles) —and I’m convinced this ICE/Gen cost & weight advantage will persist for a very long time —certainly 10 years and perhaps as long as 25 years if not more! IMO the E-REV design will be around a long time!
In other words, again, I respectfully disagree.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:42 am
nasaman #44
Thank you very much. You mention but didn’t expound on one of your own points, that being fail safe redundancy of both power sources. If the ICE fails, you’ve still got a BEV, and if the batt. pack fails you’ve still got locomotive type power. No pure BEV can do this.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:47 am
#47
Uhhh Folks….
P.D.F.T.T
June 29th, 2008 at 10:53 am
My initial response to this posting is that the EV1 proponents just need to “get over it”. I can say the very same thing about the hydrogen proponents. Let’s get over it and get on with the Volt and its successors. Now is not the time to stare the past in the face and spend valuable resources second guessing. This is now and we must move forward based on today’s requirements and resources available.
Go GM and Go, Go, Go Volt. And thank you Mr Lutz.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Kent #57
The unmentionable one is definitely not a well man. He lives in Calif. not England. My first reaction to this topic was that it’s just feeding a troll. That said I’m guessing that Lyle felt as did Maximum Bob that it was finally time to put this one to rest.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:59 am
My second thoughts on this is that maybe Mr Lutz could invited Doug and a few more of his cronies to sit down and look at the Volt from a more inside view. I would like to see GM convert these people to Volt proponents rather than GM haters. We have enough of those already and those that have such an influence as Doug has should be given an opportunity to change his views. Maybe he would change views and maybe he would not. If not, he could and should be viewed by most of us as someone who cares more about hating GM than about moving forward.
June 29th, 2008 at 11:08 am
59 Grizzly…..
As you say, “….(the Volt has) fail safe redundancy of both power sources. If the ICE fails, you’ve still got a BEV, and if the batt. pack fails you’ve still got locomotive type power. No pure BEV can do this.”
Thanks, Grizzly! The ability to get home (or at least “limp” to the next service station and out of moving traffic) is a very important feature that NO pure EV or BEV has (including the EV-1)!
I agree —Go GM and Go, Go, Go Volt! And thank you Mr Lutz!
June 29th, 2008 at 11:08 am
N Riley #63
The unmentionable one is well aware that every manufacturer from Honda to GM to Toyota to Nissan crushed their EV’s when CARB repealed the mandate. Since he has never even mentioned this or badmouthed any of these other companies, what makes you think anything will change his mind, and therefore why should anyone care?
June 29th, 2008 at 11:18 am
In hindsight, it was definitely a mistake to drop the EV1. For that, I fault GM for having less than optimal foresight.
Although not an economic winner in its own right, the EV1 technology forms much of the core competence that will make the Volt possible. The EV1 will still be leased by celebrities, who provide free advertising to the next generation of exciting technology Americans need to get behind. If they could buy it, lots of people would be tinkering with aftermarket conversions, which GM would learn a lot from.
If GM kept the electric team going, they certainly could have built a high performance electric Corvette or new Pontiac convertible long before the Tesla Roadster. And they would have continued to learn that much more, making the Volt better yet.
Sorry, but all around, knowing what we know today, GM blew it. But, it’s never too late to do the right thing, and at this point, GM can’t be doing anything more than they’re doing now to bring electric drive to us en masse.
June 29th, 2008 at 11:20 am
#14 Statik
Once again, on another post, I find myself agreeing with you. This could become a habit. Your comments were very down to earth and without the usual negativism. Keep up the good work. You are completely on target.
June 29th, 2008 at 11:23 am
#65 Grizzly
If he does not become convinced of GM’s commitment, we will know that hate is what drives him and not the desire for a better environmental vehicle. Doug and his like should be fore warned.
June 29th, 2008 at 11:27 am
About six months ago, Korthoff must have gotten all thrilled and thought that things were finally going his way. Toyota had claimed that they were going to build a plug-in and NOT use those scary
li ions batteries, but were simply going to add more NiMH batteries to those already doing hybrid duty in the Prius. They even built several such vehicles and sent them to prominent places in the U.S. for “testing” (apparently Totoya doesn’t have the ability to test a vehicle).
They claimed GM’s use of li ions was “risky” and fraught with danger for their poor customer/victims that would presumably be roasted
alive by rampaging battery packs totally out of control. Then we found out that even deleting the spare tire to allow for more NiMH batteries, those thrown together Prius plug-ins : 1) couldn’t move around on battery power alone, the NiMH packs producing way too little power to accelerate even a lightweight Prius, 2) had an electric driving range of 8 miles (!!!). Apparently even eternally stubborn Toyota execs finally realized that they had better admit that li ions were the only game in town. Which they did so a few weeks ago. Bye, bye NiMH batteries for the future. Funny, but I never saw any reaction from Korthoff to those Toyota actions. Perhaps he was confined to his bed, with a splitting headache. For the past ten years, Korthoff’s entire life has seemingly been devoted to shilling for the obsolete NiMH technology. Now what reason does he have for getting out of bed?
June 29th, 2008 at 11:27 am
nasaman #58 and your other posts
Thanks, you addressed many of my concerns about the technology. Are you neglecting to mention the nano-tech battery so much in the news out of Stanford?
I find the MiEV unacceptable for the reasons you state. I hope your price estimate for the Volt’s batteries are accurate. I think the Volt 40 is the best of all the EV vehicles at or coming to market.
Now if I could figure out how to get one of the 10,000 being produced, no chance of that though. Maybe they should have a lottery of some sort for them. Please GM, don’t give them all to “Hollywood” and politicians.
June 29th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Doug was with lonely few protesters in support of electric vehicles at a time when it wasn’t popular. Yes, he was saying outrageous things about GM, but people who say outrageous things turn a fight into action. He is casting extreme doubt on GM’s plans to bring the Volt by 2010, which motivates GM all the more to prove him wrong.
Unfortunately, his words of late do not have a ring of truth to me. Specifically, his loyalty to all things nickel metal hydride and derision of all things lithium ion. He also makes videos on Youtube making very personal attacks on individuals like Lutz, which is not helpful.
We need him on our side. I hope to see him driving a Volt someday.
June 29th, 2008 at 11:38 am
#49 Statik, I have great respect for you, but I disagree with your statement “If your car breaks down, you call a tow truck. No one out there is stressing that their gas car has no redundant system”
Mechanical breakdown seldom happens, on the average. My Honda, at 99,500 miles, has never broken down. A gasoline car or a PHEV can stop at the next gas station and fill up in minutes. An EV takes much longer to refill, if you can find an outlet.
Never underestimate “Range Anxiety”. Californians loved the EV1, because of their climate. The EV1 would have never sold well in northern America, much less Canada, due to reduced range from cold lead-acid batteries. I HAVE to plan for worst-case scenerios, as a responsible family man. I would listen to the insurance person you mentioned. The Volt sounds close to perfect, if GM can bring it to market, eventually.
I will have to get either a Prius or a Civic Hybrid between now and then. As you said in #14, “Will probably be 3-4 years before you see your first one”. I agree, especially at $40,000.00 each. Meanwhile, Toyota wins with the Prius, and Honda’s Civic Hybrid is a close second, both “comfortably under $30,000.00″. How ironic is that?
June 29th, 2008 at 11:47 am
By the way, for those of you who have not seen the movie Who Killed the Electric Car, you can see it here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7202740060236675590
June 29th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Jeff #70
“Now if I could figure out how to get one of the 10,000 being produced, no chance of that