Comments on: Lutz Explains Why the EV-1 Can’t Simply Be Reintroduced http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/ Real-time news, information, and discussion about the Chevrolet Volt. Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:09:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Hammer Man http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-115323 Hammer Man Wed, 27 May 2009 01:15:29 +0000 http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-115323 Lutz was nothing more that a front man for GM to lie to the American People. Obama was right to get rid of Lutz but more should have been sent packing. GM should sink to the bottom of the ocean. The battery story is interesting, but of course no one at GM is willing to tell the truth. GM and Chevron together tried to kill the battery company that made a good battery that really did work. I agree, nobody should trust GM Lutz was nothing more that a front man for GM to lie to the American People. Obama was right to get rid of Lutz but more should have been sent packing. GM should sink to the bottom of the ocean. The battery story is interesting, but of course no one at GM is willing to tell the truth. GM and Chevron together tried to kill the battery company that made a good battery that really did work. I agree, nobody should trust GM

]]> By: Freds http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-111081 Freds Sun, 03 May 2009 13:34:18 +0000 http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-111081 The simple reason GM cant start making EV1 this year is that they also destroyed the plans on how to make it. Simply put they need 3 years to re-engineer it... THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO MAKE THE EV1 Anymore then do Toyota or anyone else wanting to make it.. The plans do not exist. When Obama heard of this he asked Wagner to step down. Thats the story on EV. The Volt will ultimately fail as the large majority of Former EV drivers will not trust GM.... The simple reason GM cant start making EV1 this year is that they also destroyed the plans on how to make it. Simply put they need 3 years to re-engineer it… THEY DON’T KNOW HOW TO MAKE THE EV1 Anymore then do Toyota or anyone else wanting to make it.. The plans do not exist. When Obama heard of this he asked Wagner to step down. Thats the story on EV. The Volt will ultimately fail as the large majority of Former EV drivers will not trust GM….

]]> By: Doug Korthof http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-101907 Doug Korthof Mon, 23 Mar 2009 05:46:39 +0000 http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-101907 Lutz gets away with lies because no one questions his crap. Sure, Lithium batteries exist, but they don't (yet) meet the requirements of an EV: 1. High power draw, at least 40 kW; 2. Deep cycle, at least 25 kWh; 3. High cycle-life, at least 1000, or an indicated life of 100,000 miles. Lithium may someday work, but the only proven battery that lasts longer then the life of the car is NiMH. Lithium is far more expensive, and doesn't last as long. So if Lutz weren't lying, he might explain why GM doesn't release the VOLT with lead, and upgrade to NiMH or Lithium when and if it becomes available. The 1999 EV1 with PSB 1260 lead-acid batteries had more than 100 miles range; Lutz is still not admitting this simple fact. We are still driving Toyota RAV4-EV, last sold in Nov., 2002, the only Electric car ever offered for sale (for six months) by the Auto Alliance; but GM sold control of NiMH to Chevron, on Oct. 10, 2000, and Chevron sued Toyota, winning $30 million -- and no more NiMH batteries for RAV4-EV were ever made. The RAV4-EV program was stopped; the agreement with Chevron's unit "Chevron Ovonics Battery Systems" apparently only allows Toyota to use NiMH for hybrids that can't plug in. That;s the reason that car companies are pretending, fooling with Lithium, they can't pr won't use NiMH. Lutz gets away with lies because no one questions his crap.

Sure, Lithium batteries exist, but they don’t (yet) meet the requirements of an EV:

1. High power draw, at least 40 kW;
2. Deep cycle, at least 25 kWh;
3. High cycle-life, at least 1000, or an indicated life of 100,000 miles.

Lithium may someday work, but the only proven battery that lasts longer then the life of the car is NiMH. Lithium is far more expensive, and doesn’t last as long.

So if Lutz weren’t lying, he might explain why GM doesn’t release the VOLT with lead, and upgrade to NiMH or Lithium when and if it becomes available.

The 1999 EV1 with PSB 1260 lead-acid batteries had more than 100 miles range; Lutz is still not admitting this simple fact.

We are still driving Toyota RAV4-EV, last sold in Nov., 2002, the only Electric car ever offered for sale (for six months) by the Auto Alliance; but GM sold control of NiMH to Chevron, on Oct. 10, 2000, and Chevron sued Toyota, winning $30 million — and no more NiMH batteries for RAV4-EV were ever made. The RAV4-EV program was stopped; the agreement with Chevron’s unit “Chevron Ovonics Battery Systems” apparently only allows Toyota to use NiMH for hybrids that can’t plug in.

That;s the reason that car companies are pretending, fooling with Lithium, they can’t pr won’t use NiMH.

]]> By: Dan Petit http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-84094 Dan Petit Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:15:06 +0000 http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-84094 The simple reason very large companies can not "turn-on-a-dime" in order for consumers to "get it now", is that they can not realistically do business at what I call "direct-tier", one-to-one business contracting. They can not possibly have the infinitely-direct, one-to-one direct communications at every level of product development in any entirely new redirection of the industry like many would hope. That just can not happen ever. Our personal direct involvements regarding products we decide to buy are instantaneous on the 'net. The simple economics and direct transactions we perform every day are at one end of a nearly infinite spectrum of simplicity on our end, and compound-complex transactions, contracts, long-term obligations (from suppliers whom hopefully will stay solvent), and a vast number of other considerations on GM's end. (Hence, they can not easily stop building large vehicles when in only one year, fuel costs skyrocket). Therefore it is not fair to compare the past with the present, the relative design simplicity of the past with the vast array of optional equipment, for example, that motorists demand in the present. While we do NOT want something coming out prematurely which may have a flaw, (and raise heck about it all over creation), the time it takes to build an entirely new set of industries in the decarbonizing of the planet and the satisfaction of the customer can not be reduced to the expressions of frustrations (which frustration energy may be spilling over to the Volt from elsewhere in peoples' lives). GM has ALWAYS done the right thing. ALWAYS. While most can not understand that previous technologies just were not at all cost-efficient, AND, if you TOTAL-CARBON-ACCOUNTED for those old attempts in relation to what it would cost today to fix them, you would know that GM and others certainly did the right thing. Dan Petit Austin TX The simple reason very large companies can not “turn-on-a-dime” in
order for consumers to “get it now”, is that they can not realistically do business at what I call “direct-tier”, one-to-one business contracting. They can not possibly have the infinitely-direct, one-to-one direct communications at every level of product development in any entirely new redirection of the industry like many would hope. That just can not happen ever.
Our personal direct involvements regarding products we decide to buy are instantaneous on the ‘net. The simple economics and direct transactions we perform every day are at one end of a nearly infinite spectrum of simplicity on our end, and compound-complex transactions, contracts, long-term obligations (from suppliers whom hopefully will stay solvent), and a vast number of other considerations on GM’s end. (Hence, they can not easily stop building large vehicles when in only one year, fuel costs skyrocket).
Therefore it is not fair to compare the past with the present, the relative design simplicity of the past with the vast array of optional equipment, for example, that motorists demand in the present.
While we do NOT want something coming out prematurely which may have a flaw, (and raise heck about it all over creation), the time it takes to build an entirely new set of industries in the decarbonizing of the planet and the satisfaction of the customer can not be reduced to the expressions of frustrations (which frustration energy may be spilling over to the Volt from elsewhere in peoples’ lives). GM has ALWAYS done the right thing. ALWAYS.
While most can not understand that previous technologies just were not at all cost-efficient, AND, if you TOTAL-CARBON-ACCOUNTED for those old attempts in relation to what it would cost today to fix them, you would know that GM and others certainly did the right thing.
Dan Petit Austin TX

]]> By: jl http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-80151 jl Sat, 15 Nov 2008 01:18:11 +0000 http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/28/lutz-explains-why-the-ev-1-cant-simply-be-reintroduced/#comment-80151 GM had its chance and has shown to be years in the dark. Billions to prolong what it's grasp that its cars are ugly and consumer rejects. It has proven that technology is possible and proven and was so ignorant and closed minded that consumers are also not willing to waste their time and money on what one possible VOLT which is not even being sold right now. They are bankrupt already in supporters and ideas. They do not care about consumers needs and future innovations. So they are going broke that makes sense. Also there reliability in a Global Economy can not beg it's citizens to throw them a bone when there loyality in return is in their greed and unsuccess. Capitalism has ups and downs the grip has loosened time for new companies to prove and prosper. GM had its chance and has shown to be years in the dark. Billions to prolong what it’s grasp that its cars are ugly and consumer rejects. It has proven that technology is possible and proven and was so ignorant and closed minded that consumers are also not willing to waste their time and money on what one possible VOLT which is not even being sold right now. They are bankrupt already in supporters and ideas. They do not care about consumers needs and future innovations. So they are going broke that makes sense. Also there reliability in a Global Economy can not beg it’s citizens to throw them a bone when there loyality in return is in their greed and unsuccess. Capitalism has ups and downs the grip has loosened time for new companies to prove and prosper.

]]>