<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GM May Share the Volt Powertrain With Ford</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/</link>
	<description>Real-time news, information, and discussion about the Chevrolet Volt.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:53:37 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-58136</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 22:36:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-58136</guid>
		<description>Ford really does not need GM, the Volvo electric drive train is the way forward. In wheel electric/brake motors, not an inboard electric motor and drive train. If the drive shafts, brake rotors/hubs and all the hydrolics are dumped, then the wheel weight is within 5lbs. The only mechanical brake are the emergency/parking brakes.  This means all control is electronic, cheaper, simpler, lighter. The leader in, in wheel motors is PML Flightlink, a UK company, their best motor produces 120kilowatts/700nm of torque (about 150hp)  The hybrid Volvo C30 is based around a version of these motors. They have a demo car based on the BMW mini that is mouthwatering.

Spec 150mph top, 0-60 4.5sec, 21Kw battery, 15Kw genset under trunk floor 400 miles on battery, 900 miles combined 80mpg.
No impact on carrying capacity 200kg heaver than standard car.
Total power 480kw 2800nm torque, 

Zapp and several others are going down this route, so the Volt is out of date before it even hits the streets and there is better battery technology than A123 coming down the line.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ford really does not need GM, the Volvo electric drive train is the way forward. In wheel electric/brake motors, not an inboard electric motor and drive train. If the drive shafts, brake rotors/hubs and all the hydrolics are dumped, then the wheel weight is within 5lbs. The only mechanical brake are the emergency/parking brakes.  This means all control is electronic, cheaper, simpler, lighter. The leader in, in wheel motors is PML Flightlink, a UK company, their best motor produces 120kilowatts/700nm of torque (about 150hp)  The hybrid Volvo C30 is based around a version of these motors. They have a demo car based on the BMW mini that is mouthwatering.</p>
<p>Spec 150mph top, 0-60 4.5sec, 21Kw battery, 15Kw genset under trunk floor 400 miles on battery, 900 miles combined 80mpg.<br />
No impact on carrying capacity 200kg heaver than standard car.<br />
Total power 480kw 2800nm torque, </p>
<p>Zapp and several others are going down this route, so the Volt is out of date before it even hits the streets and there is better battery technology than A123 coming down the line.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grizzly</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57739</link>
		<dc:creator>Grizzly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 04:09:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57739</guid>
		<description>Toyoda #54

&quot;I totally agree about Japan. In fact former Toyota employees are in many influential position within Japan Government. Over there the Corporations and Government are totally intertwined. Basically, it is one giant Good’ol Boy network with everbody washing each other’s back. Not exactly fair competition.&quot;

*** *** ***

I&#039;ve been trying to make this point for quite some time.  It&#039;s amazing to hear all who bellyache about Uncle Sam helping out GM in a time of need when whatever they get would pale compared to what the Japanese Govt has given to their companies like Toyota over the years.  Remember also that it&#039;s not as though their market has ever been open to GM, Ford, and Chrysler.  They&#039;ve had pretty much a free ride, yet you hear the stupidity of the left on just how great Toyota is.

Free trade is a good thing, but it&#039;s got to be reciprocal.  Japan has always been set on protecting it&#039;s market from foreign competition and making absolute sure that it&#039;s companies forsake profits for market share (domination).  This is not in dispute, and it never hurt their efforts that our congress is largely &quot;For Sale&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Toyoda #54</p>
<p>&#8220;I totally agree about Japan. In fact former Toyota employees are in many influential position within Japan Government. Over there the Corporations and Government are totally intertwined. Basically, it is one giant Good’ol Boy network with everbody washing each other’s back. Not exactly fair competition.&#8221;</p>
<p>*** *** ***</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been trying to make this point for quite some time.  It&#8217;s amazing to hear all who bellyache about Uncle Sam helping out GM in a time of need when whatever they get would pale compared to what the Japanese Govt has given to their companies like Toyota over the years.  Remember also that it&#8217;s not as though their market has ever been open to GM, Ford, and Chrysler.  They&#8217;ve had pretty much a free ride, yet you hear the stupidity of the left on just how great Toyota is.</p>
<p>Free trade is a good thing, but it&#8217;s got to be reciprocal.  Japan has always been set on protecting it&#8217;s market from foreign competition and making absolute sure that it&#8217;s companies forsake profits for market share (domination).  This is not in dispute, and it never hurt their efforts that our congress is largely &#8220;For Sale&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57442</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 21:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57442</guid>
		<description>#54 
&quot;I totally agree about Japan. In fact former Toyota employees are in many influential position within Japan Government. Over there the Corporations and Government are totally intertwined. Basically, it is one giant Good’ol Boy network with everbody washing each other’s back. Not exactly fair competition.&quot;

It&#039;s not like that could ever happen in America.  Rice, Bush, Cheney were never involved in private companies and even if they were they wouldn&#039;t be helping those companies reap record profits.  No sir.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#54<br />
&#8220;I totally agree about Japan. In fact former Toyota employees are in many influential position within Japan Government. Over there the Corporations and Government are totally intertwined. Basically, it is one giant Good’ol Boy network with everbody washing each other’s back. Not exactly fair competition.&#8221;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not like that could ever happen in America.  Rice, Bush, Cheney were never involved in private companies and even if they were they wouldn&#8217;t be helping those companies reap record profits.  No sir.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Mbongo</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57410</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Mbongo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57410</guid>
		<description>I just don&#039;t get it. 
After all the criticisms GM has endured since the very first day they announced plan to built Chevy Volt, now they want to have a part of it? Who&#039;s going to be the next: is you Toyota? Honda? Chrysler? or Nissan?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just don&#8217;t get it.<br />
After all the criticisms GM has endured since the very first day they announced plan to built Chevy Volt, now they want to have a part of it? Who&#8217;s going to be the next: is you Toyota? Honda? Chrysler? or Nissan?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe OBrien</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57331</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe OBrien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:12:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57331</guid>
		<description>Excellent News</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent News</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tagamet</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57295</link>
		<dc:creator>Tagamet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57295</guid>
		<description>Jim I@133
Well said!

Nasaman@135
I agree with this post&#039;s first premise about the battery situation. I&#039;d only &quot;tweak&quot; the second &quot;Signature Series&quot; suggestion such that it would be badged &lt;b&gt;&quot;Presient and Patient Volt Fan Edition&quot;&lt;/b&gt;. You can guess who I think &lt;b&gt;they&lt;/b&gt; should go to. (g).
Be well,
Tag
cc: Bob Lutz</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim I@133<br />
Well said!</p>
<p>Nasaman@135<br />
I agree with this post&#8217;s first premise about the battery situation. I&#8217;d only &#8220;tweak&#8221; the second &#8220;Signature Series&#8221; suggestion such that it would be badged <b>&#8220;Presient and Patient Volt Fan Edition&#8221;</b>. You can guess who I think <b>they</b> should go to. (g).<br />
Be well,<br />
Tag<br />
cc: Bob Lutz</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nasaman</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57258</link>
		<dc:creator>nasaman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 05:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57258</guid>
		<description>79 DonC...... You said, &quot;....I think what you’re saying is that GM could use the signature series idea to establish strong demand, and then use this demand to convince the battery guys to commit the funding needed for volume production. Is this right?&quot;

No ---if you re-read my post #72 you&#039;ll find that I&#039;m saying two essentially unrelated things....

1) That a GM/Ford collabaration could considerably reduce the cost &amp; risk of investing in a highly-automated battery factory themselves and/or increase the willingness for either Volt battery bidder to build their own factory because of the larger sales potential (to Ford as well as to GM) ---battery cost should drop to about $3,000 this way, allowing the Volt to sell for  &lt;$30,000

2) That the marketing dilemma of angering those (like us) who heard or expected the Volt would sell for under $30,000 while recovering as much of the Volt development cost as they can, could be resolved by offering the first 10,000 or so Volts as &quot;Signature Series&quot; cars* for $40-50,000 each &amp; the following production for &lt;$30,000 (base price)

*Each of Chevy&#039;s 4,000+ dealers would get 2-3 &quot;Signature Series&quot; cars to be sold for $40-50,000 each (as classics, these would appreciate, not depreciate, in value ---probably even more than a &#039;57 Bel Air has appreciated)--- GM, their dealers &amp; Volt&#039;s first buyers all win!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>79 DonC&#8230;&#8230; You said, &#8220;&#8230;.I think what you’re saying is that GM could use the signature series idea to establish strong demand, and then use this demand to convince the battery guys to commit the funding needed for volume production. Is this right?&#8221;</p>
<p>No &#8212;if you re-read my post #72 you&#8217;ll find that I&#8217;m saying two essentially unrelated things&#8230;.</p>
<p>1) That a GM/Ford collabaration could considerably reduce the cost &amp; risk of investing in a highly-automated battery factory themselves and/or increase the willingness for either Volt battery bidder to build their own factory because of the larger sales potential (to Ford as well as to GM) &#8212;battery cost should drop to about $3,000 this way, allowing the Volt to sell for  &lt;$30,000</p>
<p>2) That the marketing dilemma of angering those (like us) who heard or expected the Volt would sell for under $30,000 while recovering as much of the Volt development cost as they can, could be resolved by offering the first 10,000 or so Volts as &#8220;Signature Series&#8221; cars* for $40-50,000 each &amp; the following production for &lt;$30,000 (base price)</p>
<p>*Each of Chevy&#8217;s 4,000+ dealers would get 2-3 &#8220;Signature Series&#8221; cars to be sold for $40-50,000 each (as classics, these would appreciate, not depreciate, in value &#8212;probably even more than a &#8216;57 Bel Air has appreciated)&#8212; GM, their dealers &amp; Volt&#8217;s first buyers all win!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim I</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57254</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim I</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 04:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57254</guid>
		<description>Statik:

I agree that just tossing out insults gains nothing, and I thank you for your comments.

But like you said, we disagree about this, and I would like to point out two things for you to consider from your last post:

1.  You said &quot;It is no secret I think this project is needlessly over-complicated, over-promised, over-budget and the design is completely unnecessary to be viable&quot;.  But on the other hand, you don&#039;t seem to have a problem with taking a factory built Prius, and adding a third party battery pack and charging system to it.  Do you really think that is a good long term solution?  I sure don&#039;t.  There is no single point of responsibility for service on the vehicle.  And if there are long term problems with the PHEV add-ons, Toyota has the right to walk away and say, &quot;this was not the car we sold you, so all warranty bets are off&quot;.  I see the GM Volt project as being a company wide solution that will be made available to many different vehicles, all designed to be built and serviced by that same corporation.  Does that make it more complicated and take longer to implement?  Sure.  But I also think it is the correct long term strategy, which is something that GM had lost sight of, and which you have pointed out on many occassions.  I just do not think it is right to beat up GM for finally getting a good idea and seeing it through to completion.  And I really do not think that now is the time for a hacked up quick fix.  They need to do this right...........

2.  You also said &quot;I think if GM would have slapped a 50kW pack into the trunk of a Cobalt and marketed it just with a sign that said, “It goes 175 miles, yours for $39,000″ they could have got it out 2 years earlier, built twice as many…and sold everyone they could make.&quot;.  I do not argue that point, but there is a flaw in your logic.  Where exactly were they going to come up with large quantities of 50KW battery packs at this time?  As you said in post #18, &quot;The problem is the Lithium battery–availability and cost.&quot;  I agree with that statement.  The batteries are what is holding up the Volt project.  I do not think there is a company on the planet that can produce the quantities required with the long term reliability needed at this time.  That is why you are not going to see 100K Volts produced in 2012, and lets not forget that they only require 16KW packs for the E-REV design.  I suppose they could assemble 3-4 thousand small computer batteries like Tesla is doing, but as has been discussed here previously, the long term reliability (10 year life and 7,000+ charging cycles) of that approach is in question.  And there is still the large quantity availability problem.

That is why it is not all that easy.  Sure it would have been nice if back in 2004, we all had been told by the magic genie that in June, 2008, gasoline would spike to prices never thought possible in the USA and the rest of the world.  Then, maybe, this project, and many others would have been ready to go about now.  Since that did not happen, we have to wait for all of the manufacturers to get the vehicles we now want and need out to us.  Some will be thrilled with a micro BEV car with a 50-80 mile range.  Many will buy the Prius, since availability will improve, with new plants being set up.  Personally, I  do not like the Prius parallel hybrid design, and although it is an excellent piece of engineering, it is not what I want for an electric vehicle.  It is the E-REV type vehicle I have been waiting for.  You will get the benefit of grid based charging, without the problems of range anxiety and without having the ICE directly connected to spinning the transmission and wheels.

Again, that is how I see it.

As Tag says,  the next 28 months are going to seem like a really long time!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Statik:</p>
<p>I agree that just tossing out insults gains nothing, and I thank you for your comments.</p>
<p>But like you said, we disagree about this, and I would like to point out two things for you to consider from your last post:</p>
<p>1.  You said &#8220;It is no secret I think this project is needlessly over-complicated, over-promised, over-budget and the design is completely unnecessary to be viable&#8221;.  But on the other hand, you don&#8217;t seem to have a problem with taking a factory built Prius, and adding a third party battery pack and charging system to it.  Do you really think that is a good long term solution?  I sure don&#8217;t.  There is no single point of responsibility for service on the vehicle.  And if there are long term problems with the PHEV add-ons, Toyota has the right to walk away and say, &#8220;this was not the car we sold you, so all warranty bets are off&#8221;.  I see the GM Volt project as being a company wide solution that will be made available to many different vehicles, all designed to be built and serviced by that same corporation.  Does that make it more complicated and take longer to implement?  Sure.  But I also think it is the correct long term strategy, which is something that GM had lost sight of, and which you have pointed out on many occassions.  I just do not think it is right to beat up GM for finally getting a good idea and seeing it through to completion.  And I really do not think that now is the time for a hacked up quick fix.  They need to do this right&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..</p>
<p>2.  You also said &#8220;I think if GM would have slapped a 50kW pack into the trunk of a Cobalt and marketed it just with a sign that said, “It goes 175 miles, yours for $39,000″ they could have got it out 2 years earlier, built twice as many…and sold everyone they could make.&#8221;.  I do not argue that point, but there is a flaw in your logic.  Where exactly were they going to come up with large quantities of 50KW battery packs at this time?  As you said in post #18, &#8220;The problem is the Lithium battery–availability and cost.&#8221;  I agree with that statement.  The batteries are what is holding up the Volt project.  I do not think there is a company on the planet that can produce the quantities required with the long term reliability needed at this time.  That is why you are not going to see 100K Volts produced in 2012, and lets not forget that they only require 16KW packs for the E-REV design.  I suppose they could assemble 3-4 thousand small computer batteries like Tesla is doing, but as has been discussed here previously, the long term reliability (10 year life and 7,000+ charging cycles) of that approach is in question.  And there is still the large quantity availability problem.</p>
<p>That is why it is not all that easy.  Sure it would have been nice if back in 2004, we all had been told by the magic genie that in June, 2008, gasoline would spike to prices never thought possible in the USA and the rest of the world.  Then, maybe, this project, and many others would have been ready to go about now.  Since that did not happen, we have to wait for all of the manufacturers to get the vehicles we now want and need out to us.  Some will be thrilled with a micro BEV car with a 50-80 mile range.  Many will buy the Prius, since availability will improve, with new plants being set up.  Personally, I  do not like the Prius parallel hybrid design, and although it is an excellent piece of engineering, it is not what I want for an electric vehicle.  It is the E-REV type vehicle I have been waiting for.  You will get the benefit of grid based charging, without the problems of range anxiety and without having the ICE directly connected to spinning the transmission and wheels.</p>
<p>Again, that is how I see it.</p>
<p>As Tag says,  the next 28 months are going to seem like a really long time!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bruce g</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57237</link>
		<dc:creator>bruce g</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 02:21:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57237</guid>
		<description>We have Ford versus Holden arguments in this end of the world but they are mostly written on the back of toilet doors.
Hard to comprehend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We have Ford versus Holden arguments in this end of the world but they are mostly written on the back of toilet doors.<br />
Hard to comprehend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Statik</title>
		<link>http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57230</link>
		<dc:creator>Statik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 01:22:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may-share-the-volt-powertrain-with-ford/#comment-57230</guid>
		<description>#131 Jim I 

You and I have had our moments in the past, but this is the way to make a rebuttal..  You have a opinion and you state why.  We have different opinions, but we can co-exist.

There is no offical &quot;I win&quot; in these posts.  No one gets a big checkmark beside their name.  We are best served to be cordial to one another at least on a one-to-one basis.

Saying something like, &quot;I think that making simplistic comments about what is involved is insulting to the thousands of people that are working to bring this project to market&quot; is perfectly fine, it&#039;s not a personal attack, but rather a observation of how my statement may be interpreted to those directly involved.  

Even more than that, it is completely accurate, it is insulting to them, they should be unhappy about it.  It is no secret I think this project is needlessly over-complicated, over-promised, over-budget and the design is completely unnecessary to be viable.

I think if GM would have slapped a 50kW pack into the trunk of a  Cobalt and marketed it just with a sign that said,  &quot;It goes 175 miles, yours for $39,000&quot; they could have got it out 2 years earlier, built twice as many...and sold everyone they could make.

...but all that doesn&#039;t matter to much to me right now, because they still have a real good shot at being &quot;first.&quot; That is why I am here, that is why my name is on the list.  Speaking of myself only, If you get the first EV out GM, you win my business, if Mitsu/Toyota beats you...you lose, simple.  I&#039;m pretty sure alot of people, even who post here, won&#039;t sit around and wait for a Volt, if another EV is readily available....but some will.

/such is life</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#131 Jim I </p>
<p>You and I have had our moments in the past, but this is the way to make a rebuttal..  You have a opinion and you state why.  We have different opinions, but we can co-exist.</p>
<p>There is no offical &#8220;I win&#8221; in these posts.  No one gets a big checkmark beside their name.  We are best served to be cordial to one another at least on a one-to-one basis.</p>
<p>Saying something like, &#8220;I think that making simplistic comments about what is involved is insulting to the thousands of people that are working to bring this project to market&#8221; is perfectly fine, it&#8217;s not a personal attack, but rather a observation of how my statement may be interpreted to those directly involved.  </p>
<p>Even more than that, it is completely accurate, it is insulting to them, they should be unhappy about it.  It is no secret I think this project is needlessly over-complicated, over-promised, over-budget and the design is completely unnecessary to be viable.</p>
<p>I think if GM would have slapped a 50kW pack into the trunk of a  Cobalt and marketed it just with a sign that said,  &#8220;It goes 175 miles, yours for $39,000&#8243; they could have got it out 2 years earlier, built twice as many&#8230;and sold everyone they could make.</p>
<p>&#8230;but all that doesn&#8217;t matter to much to me right now, because they still have a real good shot at being &#8220;first.&#8221; That is why I am here, that is why my name is on the list.  Speaking of myself only, If you get the first EV out GM, you win my business, if Mitsu/Toyota beats you&#8230;you lose, simple.  I&#8217;m pretty sure alot of people, even who post here, won&#8217;t sit around and wait for a Volt, if another EV is readily available&#8230;.but some will.</p>
<p>/such is life</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.396 seconds -->
