“Who Drove the Electric Car?”: Chris Paine Drives Volt Mule
For those of you who don’t know, Chris Paine wrote and directed the film “Who Killed the Electric Car” which chronicled the demise of GM’s EV-1 program. The film basically villainized GM and intensified their already bad PR. There is little doubt that Paine’s film helped to spark the Volt program. It is also the case that the act of watching that film for the first time sends people to the pages of this site and leads to my receiving some often bitter emails. Here’s a random recent example:
I just finished watching the movie “Who Killed the Electric Car”. It appears General Motors was the primary killer! Accordingly, I suspect GM might do it again, given the right amount of incentives!!
As you might expect, my enthusiasm for the GM Chevy Volt has diminished.
Anyway it turns out at the GM Centennial last week Chris Paine was an invited guest where he participated in a roundtable discussion on the future of transportation.
Many may remember that GM had previously announced they planned to let selected media drive Volt mules this summer, and it never seemed to happen, or did it?
I was told that a group of selected people, variably referred to as “VIPs” or “technical people” indeed had the pleasure of driving Volt mules last week. This group included Chris Paine.
I also observed Paine and his crew filming interviews for a sequel to his movie, to be called something along the lines of “Who Saved the Electric Car”.
It looks like GM is really starting to pull a 180 on this PR thing.
Popularity: 2%
Related posts:
- Chevy Volt on CBS Sunday Morning: Lutz Says Priced “Nicely” Under $30,000
- EV-1 and the Volt: as per GM
- Clarification: Chevy Volt Mule Production Timeline NOT Delayed, only Journalist Test Drive is
- GM-Volt Exclusive: Bob Lutz Details Volt Mule Energy Use in Highway Driving
- What Would Happen to the Chevy Volt if GM Failed?
(14 votes, average: 5 out of 5) 
Loading ...
September 21st, 2008 at 9:04 am
I can see why they included Chris in that group for PR. What I don’t understand is why you (Lyle) weren’t in that group.
Any clue?
Woo-Whoo, never been number one before!
September 21st, 2008 at 9:33 am
yay number two!
September 21st, 2008 at 9:33 am
Congrats, Michael (re #1). I’d have the same question re Lyle not getting a ride! The troops here are going to …. well, the troops won’t be happy (g).
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 9:42 am
Is Chris allowed to comment on the experience of driving the mule??
If not that would be a PAIN
September 21st, 2008 at 9:43 am
My guess would be b/c it was a Mule car…Lyle will most likely get a ride in the production model test car.
September 21st, 2008 at 10:02 am
JB,
JMO, but if Paine is doing a sequel re who SAVED the electric car, Lyle should be the lead character!
It’s just baffling that GM would miss an opportunity to include Lyle. Lyle’s statement above that he saw Paine interviewing people for the film, implies that he wasn’t one of them. What gives? (HARUMPH!).
Maybe GM’s view of the loyalty expressed here is lower than we’d thought (did I say that out loud?)
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 10:02 am
Cheap oil killed the electric car.
But now there’s a resurrection waiting to happen and i got a feeling this is the start of something big.
September 21st, 2008 at 10:06 am
It sure would be nice to see some mules being driven around, let the public see them on the road———NO PLUG NO SALE–TAG spell it out let the world know what NPNS means
September 21st, 2008 at 10:17 am
My spider sense has been going off lately about GM’s actions toward Lyle and by extension this group. With the unveiling of the production model, GM has naturally shitted gears as far as what groups of people they want to give attention to. To say they had us (or most of us anyway) at hello is an understatement and we kept pressure on GM to produce this car.
But times, they are a changing and now GM wants to broaden there PR efforts. I wish them well in there efforts, if the world is going to change they have to appeal to the broadest audience possible. I only hope they do not forget about all of us here on this site who want a first year volt!
September 21st, 2008 at 10:33 am
Way to go GM! Give this guy a schooling on the auto business so he’ll quit whining. Now drag Michael Moore over there to so he can make a movie called “Ricky and Me”.
Of course none of this will work because the true disenfranchised angry people will just claim that Chris Paine sold out and was bought off by Big Oil and their subservient lap dogs, the auto manufacturers. Some will say this is all a smoke screen and white wash for their true desire to keep us in Hummers for all eternity.
Oh well, all they can do is try. Meanwhile, keep quietly rolling E-Flex EVs out the door.
September 21st, 2008 at 10:48 am
What better way to show GM is charting a genuine new course! I couldn’t imagine a better PR tactic!
September 21st, 2008 at 10:48 am
I hate this guy. If I ever saw him in real life I would punch him in the face. The Movie is so vicious towards GM that anyone who watches it automatically hates the company. As if they didn’t have enough of an image problem already. Don’t these people realize when GM does poorly AMERICANS lose their jobs? Over the course of the last 10-15 years over 100,000 GM workers have lost their jobs. High paying jobs. And then people wonder why our economy is so fragile and in such a mess…. as they shop at wal-mart and go over to the Toyota dealer to pick up a new Camry.
Lets take a look at the facts. GM spent more money on their electric car program than anyone else. They came up with a better electric car than anyone else. It had the longest range and the most innovative design. It also had one of the best launch ad campaigns of any car ever. And yet somehow GM is the one that killed the electric car? What about Toyota? Where is their electric car? They made even fewer than GM, but somehow they’re cool though. They did nothing wrong.
Stuff like this drives me crazy. GM’s demise in America is almost entirely because of the media, and movies like these. On any given day you can turn on CNN, Fox News, CNBC and hear the media talking about how bad GM is and how better the foreign competition is. It’s crazy. It’s borderline conspiracy. Even if what they were saying was true (which it definitely isn’t) why would they do that? The media should nurture and protect our industries like other countries do. But then again the media is also supposed to be a service to the America, and it sure as hell isn’t that anymore.
September 21st, 2008 at 10:53 am
What better way to show GM is charting a genuine new course! I couldn’t imagine a better PR tactic! Individuals are capable of
redemption. Why not corporations?
September 21st, 2008 at 10:57 am
#9 John S
Well to be fair they don’t have many things left they can do with anyone individual group now…mass dissemination is the order of the day now they have the world’s ear.
This is the remaining checklist as I see it:
A) Get all the greenwash brownie points possible
B) Tell us the price…explain why its not so bad and not their fault it is so high
C) Get all the greenwash brownie points possible
D) Go bankrupt, enter Chapter 11…cut some pensions, the board
E) Lets do some more ads and get more brownie points
F) Tell us it is delayed…explain why its not their fault it is delayed
G) Paid the HQ green and put a Volt decal on it…more points!!!
H) Start giving ‘important people’ Volts in 2011
I) Celebrity brownie points! (No Volt for you Ed Begley, we got Hanks!)
J) Adjust the price a little higher again
K) More ads! More points! Are we building a Camaro E-REV too? Maybe!
L) Exit bankruptcy
M) Is that one more point down there? Go get that.
N) Start delivering Volts to non celebrity ‘rich Americans’ in 2012, who live in California, NY or DC
/just my opinion though…all conjecture
September 21st, 2008 at 10:58 am
I guess that a group of selected people had the pleasure of driving Volt mules last week may have only 8 people or less.Some of the people who seen many different video that show the volt on the road. Some people have notice that the leaf and button lay out are different. If you notice the screen on the driver side show MPH moving and the car is not moving. It seem that it not a mule car. it seem to be a golf cart with the volt body.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:00 am
Now that Bush is handing over $700B of tax payer money to fraudulant pvt companies - with no strings attached - will GM also get some free money ?
Ofcourse Paine has been bought over ….
September 21st, 2008 at 11:01 am
Off topic, and I haven’t been keeping up with the threads (which I have trouble doing on the weekends), but has anyone seen the new GM ad? Yes, they re-shot the end so that it’s the Production prototype (and it looks pretty good).
Even further off topic: I saw a “My next car will be electric” bumper sticker on Hwy 120 near my house in East Cobb County, Georgia. It was affixed to an xB. So, I’m not the only Atlanta “Volt”-er!
September 21st, 2008 at 11:03 am
I never saw that movie. But I do know what killed that car. It was the lack of range extender. That car was not a transitional car it was a just fancy premium golf cart. Between an EV and an E-REV the first two letters make the difference between a real car and a pure limited range EV. That was not a transitional car only a car for very limited use.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:16 am
9 John S. ….. You said, “….GM has naturally shitted gears as far as what groups of people they want to give attention to.”
———————————————————————————————————————————–
Kind of a shifty way of putting it, John, but you may be right!
September 21st, 2008 at 11:16 am
“But I do know what killed that car. It was the lack of range extender. That car was not a transitional car it was a just fancy premium golf cart.”
______________________________
You’re absolutely right. What’s funny, or I should say sad is the EV1 was originally going to be an E-REV, but because CARB mandated zero emissions that idea had to be scrapped. Yet another example of how government intervention and regulation just makes things worse.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:27 am
#14 Statik
Wow, you need to take some happy pills this morning. If GM goes broke do I personally care? What they have started with the E-REV however will not be stopped and that I do care about.
Give me a Toyota or Tata or whatever manufacturer you could choose, but I want an electric vehicle that does not depend on oil from our enemy’s and from Canada! Once we kick our dependance from Canadian oil, we will be able to spend our time importing Canada’s most valuable export…..BEER!
September 21st, 2008 at 11:32 am
I think Lyle got a ride in the Volt but he is forbidden to tell us because GM feels this site is too much of a problem for them because of all the techno-babble and second guessing that goes on here.
They know they have a good concept and they want to go for a larger audience.
Just recall all the negative comments regarding the production car styling and the little snits, all in a huff, proclaiming their indignation and their insistence to be removed from the wait list.
Do you think GM needs this crap when they’re working their asses off to survive and bailing water at the same time? Who needs another headache?
LJGTVWOTR!!!! Go GM.
Death to the infidels.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:35 am
Fred #12
Great post.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:52 am
I was told that a group of selected people, variably referred to as “VIPs” or “technical people” indeed had the pleasure of driving Volt mules last week. This group included Chris Paine.
————————————————————
GM sees the Volt as an image car and a California car. It is a natural selection Lyle is neither image nor California.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:54 am
Shawn Marshall@22 said in part:
…”They know they have a good concept and they want to go for a larger audience.
Just recall all the negative comments regarding the production car styling and the little snits, all in a huff, proclaiming their indignation and their insistence to be removed from the wait list.
Do you think GM needs this crap when they’re working their asses off to survive and bailing water at the same time? Who needs another headache?…”
So in other words it’s our fault? Tough sale.
I wonder who I should cast as Lyle in my new film -”Who Killed Gm-volt,com”. Statik, are you available?
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNSP (No Plug, No sale, Period!)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:05 pm
#22 Shawn Marshall
“I think Lyle got a ride in the Volt but he is forbidden to tell us”
Either that or they are saving Lyle’s drive for the E-flex with the “actual Volt body”. That will look pretty darn cool in a video!
September 21st, 2008 at 12:07 pm
#22 Shawn said
“I think Lyle got a ride in the Volt but he is forbidden to tell us because GM feels this site is too much of a problem for them because of all the techno-babble and second guessing that goes on here.
They know they have a good concept and they want to go for a larger audience.
Just recall all the negative comments regarding the production car styling and the little snits, all in a huff, proclaiming their indignation and their insistence to be removed from the wait list.”
—————————————————————
Maybe GM is better off to know what thoughtful people are thinking.
Truth is sometimes painful but always useful.
Actually, I can’t imagine they want to put down Lyle or anyone here.
(They did invite Lyle to the 100th, even if at the last minute.)
The GM PR people probably are sorry they hurt our feelings,but they have bigger fish to fry, they believe. (Personally, though, I think they are making a mistake.)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Re: Fred 12’s comments on punching Chris Paine in the face…
How succint, Fred. I totally agree that Chris is a major douche for making the film. He is a greedy opptortunist wanting to make a quick buck because he knows that negativity sells.
Part of the reason why GM didn’t sell the EV1 to the people who were begging to keep theirs is that manufacturers are required to sell replacement parts for many years after the car is stopped being sold. I don’t blame GM for not wanting to do this for just a thousand vehicles or so.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Fred #12: “Stuff like this drives me crazy. GM’s demise in America is almost entirely because of the media, and movies like these. ”
And pushing gas guzzling SUVS and cars had nothing at all to do with it.
It is no secret that Trucks and SUVs have (by far) the largest profit margins. To suggest GM’s short-sightedness is pushing for these short term profits instead of developing AND PRODUCING viable hybrids had nothing to do with GM’s downfall is just silly.
I am sorry if you are losing your job, but GM is a poorly run company. That is what is killing them. Poor product, poor quality, and a failure to respond to the public. I wish it ain’t so, but lets inject some reality here.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
I regard it as a very courageous act to call in your biggest detractor (enemy) and give them access to what you are doing now.
GM is to be congratulated for this.
It will probably turn out to be a great PR move because GM would only do this if they have something very impressive to show Mr. Paine.
Also, #17 Jackson,
Today there are 411 Georgians on the Volt wait list.
You are not the only Volty in Atlanta.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Fred #20: “Yet another example of how government intervention and regulation just makes things worse.”
Hey McCain, I thought you would have learned your lesson last week.
Here we sit on the verge of a depression as a result of unregulated markets and you are using the fall of the EV1 in Cali as a dubious example of the evils of regulation? Would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
It is people like you that bring into question the intelligence of Joe public.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I recently saw a post where someone mentioned their place on the wait list. Can anyone tell me how I find my spot if possible?
Thanks.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Ease off on Chris Paine.
He was able to make “Who Killed the Electric Car” an engrossing movie (and it was) because GM spokesmen said one thing while something else was actually happening.
GM did a great deal to develop the EV-1. Not all of their public announcements about the EV-1 program were the whole truth. Discrepancies have continued to the present day on discussions of the EV-1. It was those discrepancies, rather than anything about the development of the car, that drove the movie. Indeed, most of the people in the movie said it was a great car.
GM has a good story to tell now. I’m glad that Chris Paine is in the loop. I don’t take for granted the plot line of whatever future movies he will direct.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:53 pm
IMO GM can do whatever it wants as far as pricing, PR, media rides, etc…
BUT, if they do not launch the Volt by 2010 at a price comfortably under $40,000 and in reasonable quantiy, competition will run circles around them. The following companies will, should, expect to have viable EVs by then:
Nissan, Tesla, BMW, Smart, Miles, Mitsubishi, Fisker, to name a few. Competition is real.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:53 pm
#7 Alex Says: “Cheap oil killed the electric car.”
————————————————————————————-
YES!
In the late 90’s, OPEC turned on the spigots, gas went below $1/gallon, and the GM Precept, Ford Prodigy, and Chrysler ESX-3 hybrids were all canceled. The EV-1 was canceled around the same time.
Now fast-forward to 2008, and pretend you are considering investing major amounts of money in Ethanol, Bio-diesel, or car battery technology. If oil prices fall, then you lose - big time!
So that’s why I keep talking about the government setting a minimum price for gasoline. If the price falls below the minimum, foreign oil import tariffs would be raised. So this would prevent history from repeating, and guarantee investors that the rug won’t get pulled out from under them.
And given that these new oil tariffs would only come into effect if/when oil prices fall, I think it would fly politically. People are already used to gas prices above $3/gallon. They might not talk about it during election season, but hopefully shortly thereafter.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:55 pm
#32 David
To find your place, go to the “wait list” page (link at top). Enter your email address and anything it asks for. Press continue. You will see your place on the wait list, together with any data you entered before.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Never mind, RB beat me to it (lol)
david@32
I think if you just enter the same email address in the wait list box, it’ll tell you that you are already #XXXXX on the list.
HTH,
Tag
September 21st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
#33 RB Says: “Ease off on Chris Paine.”
————————————————————————————-
I agree. As Lyle says in the article:
“There is little doubt that Paine’s film helped to spark the Volt program.”
September 21st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
#21 John S
“#14 Statik: Wow, you need to take some happy pills this morning. ”
—-Who says I’m not happy? I’m happy…thats me happy. (=
————————————
#24 RB
“GM sees the Volt as an image car and a California car. It is a natural selection Lyle is neither image nor California.”
—-As they say on the interwebs, “You just got pwned Lyle!” You go RB! Hehe.
———————————–
#25 Tag
“I wonder who I should cast as Lyle in my new film -”Who Killed Gm-volt,com”. Statik, are you available?
—Anything for you Tag, but I think your target audience is mostly men for a movie like that…they’ll probably not be able to wrestle any seats away from all the ladies of the world for quite a long time if I’m in it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEcMG2Jvx3k
September 21st, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Shawn:
Put on your thinking beanie. GM is going bust NOW. The Volt is scheduled for release in 2010, but only in limited quantities. Lutz has said that they are relying on there being enough “rich people” wanting the Volt to sell the car in the first “few” years, translated as Joe public will see an affordable Volt in large numbers in about 5-8 years (if ever).
Of course this is greenwash! A limited production car that they claim to be losing money on and won’t be available to anyone for at least two years (if ever) couldn’t be anything else! You have to be an utter cretin to think the Volt is going to save GM, and that is GM’s plan. Personally, I don’t think the Volt as currently presented by GM could compete in todays market.
The only thing that can save GM is convincing an ignorant public that they have seen the error of their ways and cajole the politicians into giving them a huge bailout NOW. The Volt is part of that marketing campaign.
GET A CLUE! This isn’t huffing, it is deduction from the facts!
September 21st, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Dave G@35 said in part:
“…So that’s why I keep talking about the government setting a minimum price for gasoline. If the price falls below the minimum, foreign oil import tariffs would be raised. So this would prevent history from repeating, and guarantee investors that the rug won’t get pulled out from under them….”
I’m assuming that you’ve heard that the USA’s economy is very fragile (it was in all the papers…). IMO, we can not afford tax supports (even for a good cause), nor can we afford protectionism. Even if we were on rock solid financial footing as a country, I’d have different issues with price fixing.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 1:10 pm
This film was for people who do not understand engineering or business. I disagree he had much to do with GM’s decisions. These decisions are based on things more the size of continental drift than they are of one kook liberal with a camera.
Nothing annoys me more than people who lack skills sufficient to be relevant in an increasingly globalized and technical world justifying their existance with lies such as his movie or made up crisis’ like Man Made Global Warming.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Statik,
Is that you in the red bikini?
September 21st, 2008 at 1:11 pm
“Hey McCain, I thought you would have learned your lesson last week.
Here we sit on the verge of a depression as a result of unregulated markets and you are using the fall of the EV1 in Cali as a dubious example of the evils of regulation? Would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
It is people like you that bring into question the intelligence of Joe public.”
_______________________________
Oh… so you think the US government, the largest government in the world should be EVEN MORE involved? Right because they’ve done such a great job so far.
And while we’re getting political I might as well point out it was the Clinton administration that passed the legislation that allowed American banks to essentially gamble with out homes, even while knowing they were bad loans.
This isn’t a left vs right thing. Our government is completely clueless when it comes to regulations. Here’s one example. Our government supports and passes legislation to keep our gas as cheap as possible. That creates demand for gas guzzlers. The government notices we’re using too much fuel so they create CAFE to essentially force the automakers to make more fuel efficient cars. So instead of making smaller more fuel efficient cars, GM has to spend a tremendous amount of money to figure out how to make their big cars more efficient, since even $4 gas isn’t enough to make Americans want small cars.
And then there are the emission regulations, which not only lower efficiency but also make it impossible for most of the world’s diesels to even be sold in America. European diesels by the way are cheaper, more powerful, and more efficient than hybrids. You see what I’m getting at? Our government is constantly writing and passing bills to regulate things they do not understand.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Dave G #35: “So that’s why I keep talking about the government setting a minimum price for gasoline. ”
Great idea! The Europeans have been doing it for years, and any excess could be used to balance the budget without hammering the taxpayer anymore than we already are looking forward to.
(Yes said Fred, this is government intervention and regulation.)
September 21st, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Statik@39 said in part:
“…—Anything for you Tag, but I think your target audience is mostly men for a movie like that…they’ll probably not be able to wrestle any seats away from all the ladies of the world for quite a long time if I’m in it….”
Hmmm, apparently you’d be better cast as Chris Paine….. Works for me (lol).
Jerry,
Just in terms of full-disclosure, (Best McCarthy voice) “Are you now, or have you ever been an employee of GM?”
Be well,
Tag
September 21st, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Have you ever wondered why batterys over heat . Just think for a minute the internal workins the out put of the battery is set in series , but the input is in parallel , so you pump in a very large amount through two inputs . Then out put an amount through many outputs . Perhaps the simple answer is to input through more inputs at a lower volume . Just a simple way of thinking but I find the simple way although may require more plumbing may be the way to go.
God Bless
Edwin Mang Jr.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:14 pm
#18 LazP Says: “I never saw that movie. But I do know what killed that car. It was the lack of range extender.”
————————————————————————————-
Actually, GM made an EV-1 with a range extender:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GMEV1serieshybrid.jpg
It had a gas turbine engine in the trunk. More details here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
But with gasoline less than $1/gallon, nobody cared.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:17 pm
#18 LazP Says: “I never saw that movie. But I do know what killed that car. It was the lack of range extender … That was not a transitional car only a car for very limited use.”
————————————————————————————-
Actually, GM did make an EV-1 with a gas turbine range extender:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
But with gas prices under $1/gallon, nobody cared.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Fred #44:
I feel your pain, but the answer isn’t to continue on with the same mantra you have been chanting since 1968. Don’t blame Clinton. His 8 years is the only period when we didn’t have a major financial meltdown.
I agree with you, the government has been clueless. In the 40 years since 1968 the President has been Republican for all but 12 of them. “Progressive” deregulation for 40 years was a clueless policy. We all know that now.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:20 pm
#41 Tagamet Says: “I’m assuming that you’ve heard that the USA’s economy is very fragile (it was in all the papers…). IMO, we can not afford tax supports (even for a good cause),”
————————————————————————————-
How would what I propose hurt the economy? As I said, the additional tariffs would only come into effect if/when oil prices fall significantly.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:26 pm
One thing on Chris Paine. He has been beside, inside and backing this project from before Lyle.
However Lyle’s goal is to get the word out and encourage the project and the morale high ground that comes with it. Chris Paine’s goal is to make a movie, make money and trumpet the high ground, not necessarily in that order…only he knows what his first priority is, I’m not him. But I do know GM’s goal…to use guys like Chris and Lyle to give them good PR and sell more cars. Personally, I’m good with that too, they are a big auto company and thats what they do.
I do know, that of the three, whose words I would put the most stock into…the guy who has no financial gain in the project. So…Lyle.
———-
On Chris Paine (uber insider…now with deep pockets):
“We came to Detroit for the unveiling and the Volt looks great. It’s a beautiful design and the result of what looks like earnest and incredible hustle at GM over the last 12 months. I was impressed…We talked to senior executives and many employees who looked us in the eye and spoke from their hearts. One executive said “the public won’t forgive GM twice” which is a revealing and accurate comment.
From what I can see, GM is doing the right thing and I’m supporting them as long as they keep making good decisions and moving plug-in cars into production reality. It’s a week we can all be proud of.”
–January 9th, 2007
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/09/who-killed-the-electric-car-director-chris-paine-tells-autoblog/
I think he (Chris Paine) is as much on the inside of this project as is possible (as well as Tesla’s). He’s been working the sequel along time now (earliest confirmation I see of that was about a year ago). I know he has been filming the whole process at Tesla, as well as his ordeal taking possesion of one. I don’t know if he has the keys yet or it is still in Tesla’s ‘makeshift garage..er factory” I believe he is/was mid 20s on their list.
http://blogs.edmunds.com/greencaradvisor/2008/02/lights-camera-tesla-ev-could-star-in-killed-sequel.html
I doubt GM wants another black eye and very much wants his endorsement. “Keep your enemies closer…and all that”
September 21st, 2008 at 1:27 pm
#12 Fred
“Over the course of the last 10-15 years over 100,000 GM workers have lost their jobs.”
The movie was released in 2006. Even if that explains the last two years, are you gonna really blame that movie for events 13 years before it was made?
—————————————————
#18 LazP
Calling a pure EV a “fancy premium golf cart” makes as little sense as calling a gasoline powered car a fancy premium go-kart. Or calling a motorcycle a fancy premium bicycle.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:28 pm
“And pushing gas guzzling SUVS and cars had nothing at all to do with it.
It is no secret that Trucks and SUVs have (by far) the largest profit margins. To suggest GM’s short-sightedness is pushing for these short term profits instead of developing AND PRODUCING viable hybrids had nothing to do with GM’s downfall is just silly.
I am sorry if you are losing your job, but GM is a poorly run company. That is what is killing them. Poor product, poor quality, and a failure to respond to the public. I wish it ain’t so, but lets inject some reality here.”
_______________________
Oh look. Another lemming to fall for the anti gm propaganda.
“Pushing suvs”, lmao! Yeah right, as if GM somehow has the ability to force people to buy their cars. Gm sells a ton of suvs because PEOPLE WANT THEM. If you want to blame anyone for SUV sales, blame the government for being an advocate of cheap fuel. There is a direct relation between gas price and SUV sales.
Andy by the way, Hybrids don’t actually make money. In fact GM doesn’t even make money on their cars. They have tons of legacy costs that companies like Toyota and Honda simply don’t have to deal with.
“The movie was released in 2006. Even if that explains the last two years, are you gonna really blame that movie for events 13 years before it was made?”
______________________________________
And where exactly did I say that? I said the MEDIA. And yes, the media has been bad mouthing the US automakers for a long long time.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:29 pm
You can watch the movie Who Killed the Electric Car here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5871495968130273402&ei=_ZHWSK7aJaK6qAPy1s3AAg
The movie was not completely fair but did play a large role in raising awareness about electric vehicles and the strategic blunder of dropping these programs and instead pursuing only fuel cells.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Tagamet 46:
Cute. I once worked as an outside contractor form Ford (back in the eighties). My only other connection with Michigan has been as a shortcut on trips into Canada.
My hatred of GM is their hat-in hand approach to business and their crappy products. I find it ironic that many of the same people calling for a GM bailout are also so vehemently against government regulation.
When I went shopping for my last car I thought the Saturn Sky might fit the bill. Problem was, none of the panels fit together properly and the interior had way too much really cheap hard plastic (that again was put together shabbily). Worse, there were no upgrades that fixed these issues. Funny how proud the salespeople were of this thing that looked like it was put together by a dyslexic 4-year old. Ended up buying a BMW 3-series convertible. Ergo my problem with the $40,000 price tag isn’t that I can’t afford it. It is that I refuse to pay it for a poor product.
If the Volt is ever made available, I will test drive it and see if my fears are well founded. I wouldn’t pass if it is great car, just because I didn’t agree with the hype that preceded it. But putting the performance issues aside, I do have questions as to whether GM is capable of putting together a car the exudes enough “quality” to tempt people who can afford it to pay for it.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Fred 53:
““Pushing suvs”, lmao! Yeah right, as if GM somehow has the ability to force people to buy their cars. Gm sells a ton of suvs because PEOPLE WANT THEM.”
If so many people what their product, why do they need a bailout?
“If you want to blame anyone for SUV sales, blame the government for being an advocate of cheap fuel.”
So you think the government should have taken steps to increase the price of fuel? I would have to agree, but you are the one who rails against government regulation. Ironic.
At least try to maintain a consistent train of thought.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:39 pm
#19 nasaman - Lutz has explicitly said that the Volt is targeted at “highly educated consumers who live on the coasts” who heretofore “would not think to look at a GM vehicle.” I think we can deduce that many members of this board, and you in particular (I think you’ve said you have GM vehicles), do not entirely fit the target demographic. OTOH there is no way GM is going to forget about this board. It’s huge and, other than Statik, GM probably loves the participants here!
**********************************************************
A point and a question: (1) I think the new Chris Paine movie is called “The Revenge of the Electric Car”; (2) I wonder if Lutz was thinking about Chelsea Sexton - one of the stars of “Who Killed the Electric Car” - when he made the comment about the Volt being attractive to nice smart women who don’t wear makeup?
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm4041054976/nm2197498
September 21st, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Hello world. Make sure Paine runs out of juice along the way and has to walk back.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:45 pm
“So you think the government should have taken steps to increase the price of fuel? I would have to agree, but you are the one who rails against government regulation. Ironic.
At least try to maintain a consistent train of thought.”
____________________
Oh, nice spin Mr. O’reilly.
Where did I say I want to government to regulate fuel prices? I’m saying they encouraged the development of gas guzzlers… which they absolutely did.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Tagamet #6:
“Maybe GM’s view of the loyalty expressed here is lower than we’d thought (did I say that out loud?)”
I’m sure they covet what they don’t have more than what they think they do have. Damn humans!
September 21st, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Fred #59:
How do you propose the government raise “cheap fuel prices” (your words) other than through regulation (taxation)?
As for encouraging gas guzzlers, isn’t there a tax on them for being gas guzzlers? (That is a rhetorical question) and according to your previous post, the government encouraged gas guzzlers through “cheap fuel prices.”
Again, try to be consistent.
September 21st, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Tagamet #6:
Oh…forgot to include. I agree with you 1000%. Baffling why they would miss out on any opportunity to augment Lyle’s efforts to prosletize the Volt and EREV tech.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:04 pm
jerry said in part:
“…I find it ironic that many of the same people calling for a GM bailout are also so vehemently against government regulation.
I’m against both, so if nothing else, I’m consistent.
and…”If the Volt is ever made available, I will test drive it and see if my fears are well founded. I wouldn’t pass if it is great car, just because I didn’t agree with the hype that preceded it. But putting the performance issues aside, I do have questions as to whether GM is capable of putting together a car the exudes enough “quality” to tempt people who can afford it to pay for it.”
I honestly have no doubt that the Volt’s wheels WILL hit the road. I agree with you re quality and GM is at least on record as describing the interior as meeting the Cadillac’s.
Here’s hoping.
~2010 there WILL be plugins available. I hope mine is a Volt. But I’m not one of those rich folks on the coasts - just a hayseed in PA.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 2:07 pm
How do you propose the government control fuel prices other than through regulation (taxation)?
“As for encouraging gas guzzlers, isn’t there a tax on them for being gas guzzlers? (That is a rhetorical question)”
________________________
Again… I don’t think they should control the prices at all. I never said they should “raise” fuel prices. That was your genius.
And that’s called a way of making money. Plus those taxes don’t even apply to light trucks.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Tagamet 63:
I live with you in hope. There looks to be a lot of promising alternatives with a release date of 2010. Unfortunately more than one of them originally had a release date of 2008/2009.
Fingers crossed everyone remains on schedule.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Koz@62 agreed with me at #6, re a missed opportunity for GM.
Plenty of time until 2010. I’m still shaking my head over the whole thing.
Be well,
Tag
September 21st, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I think GM-volt.com will always have the inside ear of GM as much as anyone (other than maybe Mr. Paine, lol).
The fact is the people who see the Volt and are interested in purchasing one always want more information…and everyone knows you won’t get any satisfaction from a trip to your local dealer, so they turn to Al Gore’s internet, whereupon they they will first come across two things:
A) GM’s feeble “Volt is great/GM is great official site”
—Here GM will actually tell you nothing, but show you some pictures, a couple videos and probably some fancy ‘turn of the millenium grade’ flash production. Naturally, there will be no open forum near any of the content of the site…or any news that is current or ‘not favoUrable’
B) GM-volt.com
All the news they can stand, within seconds of it breaking. The bias will still mostly be positive…but bad news will be posted as well, albeit with sprinkles on top. (Then I will attempt to pick each of those sprinkles off the top in the comments section, w00t).
The potential customer will gravitate here, because it is apparent that this is the place to get ALL the news…good or bad, delivered moment by moment, all the while fostering a community of intelligent and corporately uncensored discussion. (with some insane ranting and politically divisive ‘one-offs’)
…and that is all you can hope for in a site.
/nod to Lyle…again
September 21st, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Fred 64:
YOU blamed the government for advocating SUVs through “cheap fuel prices,” as if the government was at the helm controlling SUV sales through fuel prices.
The ONLY LOGICAL CONCLUSION from your comments is that you believe the government shouldn’t have allowed fuel prices to stay low. I.e., they should have regulated them.
If that wasn’t your intention, your previous comments defy logic.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:16 pm
By the way, if you haven’t seen it already, make sure to watch the Nova program
Car of the Future:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html
The Volt is featured prominently toward the end.
The best part is when RAY MAGLIOZZI (one of the guys from “Car Talk”) literally twists TONY POSAWATZ’s arm behind his back and says: “Alright, Tony, tell us. When is it coming out?”
September 21st, 2008 at 2:21 pm
YOU blamed the government for advocating SUVs through “cheap fuel prices,” as if the government was at the helm controlling SUV sales through fuel prices.
The ONLY LOGICAL CONCLUSION from your comments is that you believe the government shouldn’t have allowed fuel prices to stay low. I.e., they should have regulated them.
If that wasn’t your intention, your previous comments defy logic.
___________________
Just because you’re interpreting my comments wrong doesn’t mean they “defy logic”. I was simply pointing out that the government’s policy of minimal fuel prices created the market for SUVS. Not GM. People act like GM was somehow able to brainwash people into buying gas guzzlers.
I don’t think fuel prices should be regulated at all. I don’t think it should be kept artificially cheap, and I sure as hell don’t think it should be massively taxed. Te market should determine the price of fuel and the automakers should make the cars that the consumer demands. Which is exactly what GM has been doing.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:23 pm
So….
1- What about that battery contract?
2- What about the turtle moving Volt video. I would think they would at least have a proto that actually runs at or near speed, by now. If not, they gotta long row to hoe.
3- Whats up with that 40 mile AER? I do not like the “little” disclaimer saying this is city only. What is the highway rating and why don’t they reveal it?
4- Has anyone seen any spec’s on the new Honda Insight? Honda keeps pretty tight lipped, it appears.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Fred #70:
YOU made the comments. How did the government keep prices artificially cheap?! What is your basis for implying the price of fuel wasn’t determined by the market? If anything I would have thought an argument that it was hiked up by greedy oil companies had more leg. That is what I have been reading. I don’t recall anyone arguing fuel was too cheap before you.
You make unsubstantiated statements, false claims, no attempt to clarify,
THEN when called out you blame the response for interpreting you incorrectly while all the time contradicting yourself.
AND like a rabid idealogue you have no idea when to quit.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:28 pm
#65 Jerry
I live with you in hope. There looks to be a lot of promising alternatives with a release date of 2010. Unfortunately more than one of them originally had a release date of 2008/2009.
——————
#66 Tag
Plenty of time until 2010. I’m still shaking my head over the whole thing.
—————-
I think you guys should be adjusting your ‘hoping for 2010′ to ‘hoping for 2011′–it will be easier on your psyche later.
Better to be surprised than let down. Remember how you felt Tag when you had to give up the ‘Volt in 2009′ dream?
September 21st, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Jerry. You’re freakin nuts and need to calm down.
Honestly, I’m not concerned about fuel prices at all. That wasn’t my original point. My point is the government is a hypocrite and has made things worse through regulation.
I don’t know if links work on this site or not, but this article basically sums up what I’m trying to say.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/04/AR2008090401892.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns
September 21st, 2008 at 2:49 pm
#73 statik says “I think you guys should be adjusting your ‘hoping for 2010′ to ‘hoping for 2011′–it will be easier on your psyche later.”
——————————————-
Yes. In addiiton, of late GM has said “production will begin in 2010″, not delivery. And, we have consistently had the “incentives worked out with the government” caveat, so they have lots of wiggle room.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Chris Paine is an idiot who damaged journalism more than he damaged GM.
His value-based lies and twisting of easily verifiable facts in “Who Killed the EV” is something that he and his political cohorts should be ashamed of.
I am disappointed that GM treats this liar as a VIP.
I seriously doubt that the movie was in any way responsible for bringing about the new GM Volt EV2 direction.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:53 pm
You guys are taking far too much credit for “saving the electric car” IMO. An online forum of a few thousand, even tens of thousands is miniscule in the big scheme of things. The same thing can be said for some documentary that only a small percentage of individuals have even seen. So go ahead and pat yourselfs on the back- but there’s still a LOT of work to do by the REAL stakeholders here before there can be any real sucess stories in the EV market.
Just my opinion
C.N.
September 21st, 2008 at 2:57 pm
The article uses the stupidity of the Bush administration in getting us into an expensive war in Iraq, and the stupidity of government deregulation (thank you Sen. Graham, et al.) as a basis for justifying giving automakers a handout.
The health care lobby could also point out that we could fund a pretty damn good national health system without raising taxes if we just stopped fighting neocon-provoked wars or giving wall street handouts.
It is a variation of the old joke: ‘Want to get rich? Buy an island and declare war on the United States.’
Try to get to the point being made by the sarcasm. To miss it is embarassing.
I don’t really see how this helps your point, or supports your contention that SUV sales are a government conspiracy promoted through low gas prices. Or Cali regulation was what killed the EV1, or The “Who killed the electric car?” movie is responsible for 13 years of GM job losses prior to release of the move, or…. well you get the idea. (Probably not, but I don’t want to fill the server space with a repeat of ALL of your nonsense).
BTW, I am happy that you finally got electricity and an internet connection in that Montana compound of yours. Be careful. The electricity company is out to get you too. Did I mention the cable company? Oh, well, never mind.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:04 pm
“or supports your contention that SUV sales are a government conspiracy promoted through low gas prices.”
___________________________
Conspiracy? Wow. Please stop talking.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:04 pm
I watched “Who Killed the Electric Car” last night. Though it doesn’t show GM in a good light it also talks poorly about Toyota, the California Air Resource Board, the Bush Administration, and Bill Clinton. The movie cracked me up though. I found it similar to the conspiracy theories about aliens. GM cares about profits. Not oil’s profits, their profits. And if the EV1 hurt those profits, it’s dead. If it helps it’ll happen come hell or high water. Watching the movie made me more excited about the Volt. It addresses what the EV1 missed.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:08 pm
I watched that movie a long time ago, way before I knew anything about the Volt. I also watched a documentary on the History channel about it as well. As far as the movie goes, it definitely paints GM in a negative way. That was the whole purpose of the movie. It wasn’t even close to being fair and balanced. Being fair though, I never completely understood why GM had to crush them and not give anyone the option to purchase them. As far as the documentary went, it gave several sides and looked to be rather open-minded about the whole thing. In reality, just getting to the nuts and bolts of it, the general American public, along with cheap oil and no range extender, killed the electric car.
Regardless of what you may believe on either side, it looks as though GM has a home run. No wait, a Grand Slam on their hands if a couple of things pan out.
1)The Volt will do what they say it will do without any real problems.
2)Price comes down quickly as GM up-scales this EV program as this is supposed to be a car for the masses.
3)The American public emphasizes and embraces how using this type of car can help eliminate the need for imported oil and can help give us energy independence.
4)GM can finally learn from the Japanese and make continual improvements to this line of vehicles and not let the others catch up and overtake them once they learn ins-and-outs of this type of vehicle.
5)GM makes a pure EV with no range extender to compete with any other companies that are doing so, so Joe Bob can’t complain about how he never drives over 50 miles and does not need a range extender.
Hawk
September 21st, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Statik@73 said in part:
“…I think you guys should be adjusting your ‘hoping for 2010′ to ‘hoping for 2011′–it will be easier on your psyche later.
Better to be surprised than let down. Remember how you felt Tag when you had to give up the ‘Volt in 2009′ dream?…”
Lol, you KNOW what I’m going to post…
“So who gave up on the 2009 release date????”
Now, just to avoid the obvious, I’m still clinging to my July 7, 2010 release date. Independence Day.
Time will tell.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 3:17 pm
#81 firehawk72 says “As far as the movie goes, it definitely paints GM in a negative way. That was the whole purpose of the movie. It wasn’t even close to being fair and balanced.”
—————————————————————
It paints GM in a negative way, but it paints electric cars in a very positive way. Some exaggeration in both.
Documentary films are not made by journalists trying to be fair and balanced They are made by film people as opinion films, similar to opinion columns in newspapers. Expressing that opinion is the goal of a documentary film (apart from making money for the producers).
September 21st, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Fred #79:
That is the best you have? To show you don’t understand what a conspiracy is?
con·spir·a·cy /kənˈspɪrəsi/ Pronunciation[kuhn-spir-uh-see]
–noun, plural -cies.
1. the act of conspiring.
2. a plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
How many people were in the government at last count? Hmmm. Where’s any public proof of the government artificially deflating fuel prices? Hmmm
You are right. You are not worth another post.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:24 pm
To anyone defending GM, don’t. They might do the right thing, they seem to be doing the right thing, but they should of course be held accountable for all that they have done wrong. They teamed up with some major tire companies (I kid you not) and completely wiped out the trolly cars in St. Louis, they did the same thing with the red cars in California, and they also crushed EV1’s and sold awesome patents to ruthless oil companies causing them to search for other battery technology. This entire thing has just been a huge mess. I hope the Volt comes out and blows us all away, but that does not change the past. All we can do at this very moment is look to the future.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Tagamet:
Tesla, Pheonix, pretty much all of the startups that began in the 2000/2001 time frame.
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the Volt also originally slated for release in 2009? I recall reading that. I will try to follow up.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Brad Horton #85:
Detroit not only sold patents to battery technology to oil companies where they now lie collecting dust, they actively sought out such patents from start-ups and sold them to oil companies.
Greed again. The charge for short term profits with the belief that the government would bail them out when the long-term repercussions came home to roost. Not that different from Wall Street really.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:28 pm
jerry,
You may have read about the 2009 release date here - posted by Moi (lol).
Be well,
Tag
September 21st, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Tag:
Thanks for saving me the trouble. Good to see it came from an authoritative source.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Save me a Google, do patents expire after 20 years?
Be well,
Tag
September 21st, 2008 at 3:46 pm
you’re welcome Jerry (g)
re patents for edification:
Because of recent changes in the law, an existing patent can fall in one of three categories in terms of its expiration date. If the patent application was filed after June 7, 1995, the expiration date is 20 years from the date it was filed. If the application was filed by June 7, 1995 and issued before June 8, 1978, the expiration date is 17 years from issuance. The “best-of-both-worlds clause” comes into effect if the application was filed by June 7, 1995 and issued after June 7, 1978, in which case the term is the later of 17 years from issuance or 20 years from filing. These terms are accurate for both Utility and Plant Patents, Design Patents expire 14 years from the date of grant.
This information was found at:
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/inp03.htm
Be well,
Tag
September 21st, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Tag:
I’m a patent agent. Those changes are not so recent.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:54 pm
@12. The lost of 100,000 american jobs was the result of GM moving its manufacturing to other countries.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:54 pm
#90 Tagamet
Yes you are basically right in thinking it’s 20 years from the date of filing. If before June 1995 either 20 years from filing or 17 years from the grant. There are special cases of course. For pharma you have the period extended by roughly half the period of testing.
Nothing simple in IP.
EDIT: Sorry the answer was so stale but OT sort of distracted me and I didn’t see you guys had it covered.
September 21st, 2008 at 3:56 pm
jerry@92 said:
“Tag:
I’m a patent attorney. Those changes are not so recent.”
Well, I’m a patient shrink…(g). So is there a short current answer? (I’m guessing “no” since there ARE patent attorneys).
Be well,
Tag
September 21st, 2008 at 3:58 pm
#82 Tag
Lol, you KNOW what I’m going to post…
“So who gave up on the 2009 release date????”
Now, just to avoid the obvious, I’m still clinging to my July 7, 2010 release date. Independence Day.
Time will tell.
Be well,
Tag
———————–
Indeed I did know what you would post…you crazy ‘glass half-full’ optimistic bastard! Hehe.
Can you believe even THIS thread is going to shove thru 100 posts by sunset? Times…they are changing.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Everyone talks about a free market, but it only works if all the players are free.
What we have today is kings and tyrants controlling oil production. When U.S. cars got smaller in the early 80’s, they increased production to lower gas prices. This led to minivans and SUVs. When hybrids and EVs first came along, they did it again, driving gas to less than $1/gallon in the late 90’s.
This is called manipulating the market, and OPEC has been doing it since the 70’s. Now E-REVs and plug-in hybrids are coming. Shall we just hope they won’t do it again?
Setting a minimum price for oil and raising import tariffs when it falls below that minimum will help the economy. It will encourage domestic oil production from stripper wells, oil shale, and tar sands. It will encourage investment in ethanol, bio-diesel, and plug-ins. In short, it will encourage the free market investment by insuring that kings and tyrants are no longer able to manipulate the market.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:12 pm
$500 billion bailout….wait, no…$700 billion….wait…you know the govt adds at least 25% to any handout due to inefficiencies, special interests, and greed, better make that an even $1 trillion.
Yeah, that should about do it.
Feels the same as getting your prostate checked, and the doc asks “Does that hurt”, with both of his hands on your shoulders…
September 21st, 2008 at 4:17 pm
#71 JEC says “3- Whats up with that 40 mile AER? I do not like the “little” disclaimer saying this is city only. What is the highway rating and why don’t they reveal it?”
====================================
It may be that they don’t reveal it because they don’t have it.
AER can come from a mule with a battery. Changes to production all make things better.
Hwy mpg may require an integrated power system, where the ICE is the real one, and the integration is done in a finalized way. While GM has had prototypes, it may not have had a “production ready” version to test hwy mpg. The mule version likely is lower than what they are hoping to get.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:20 pm
$67 statik says “The fact is the people who see the Volt and are interested in purchasing one always want more information…and everyone knows you won’t get any satisfaction from a trip to your local dealer, so they turn to Al Gore’s internet, whereupon they they will first come across two things:
A) GM’s feeble “Volt is great/GM is great official site” …
B) GM-volt.com ….”
==========================================
Excellent evaluation. Agreed, everyone will go to B.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Tag - Patent agents are not attorneys but they could be psychiatrists or psychologists.
Fred and Jerry - Here is Bob Lutz on gas prices:
Lutz suggested that raising gas taxes was a more effective solution to getting consumers to drive less and to drive smaller vehicles. “If I were dictator of America, I would gradually raise the price of gasoline by 25 cents every six months or so, until it’s more in line with gas prices in the rest of the world.”
September 21st, 2008 at 4:28 pm
101 DonC
Yeah, and Lutz would lobby for making every Friday “Pink tie day”
I have mixed opinions on high gas taxes. I will wait for Fred & Jerry to weigh in, maybe.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Statik@96 said in small part:
“…Indeed I did know what you would post…you crazy ‘glass half-full’ optimistic bastard! Hehe….”
Uncontested, and proud of it! (lol)
Be well,
Tag
(and to push past the 100 mark)
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 4:32 pm
99 RB
Thanks. Sounds like good reasoning.
I just start wondering if there is more behind the highway mode with all electric. Are they having a technical issue running at 75 mph? I cannot imagine what that would be, but why have we not seen any electric (besides Tesla or exotics) running at highway speed?
I am really curious why Lutz is saying the off-the-line speed of the Volt would be “sufficient”. I see no reason (sport mode of course) why the Volt will not jump off the line. It should have instantaneous torque, so whats the skinny?
Just my usual pessimistic view…
September 21st, 2008 at 4:35 pm
WSJ reports “General Motors Corp. said it intends to draw down the remaining $3.5 billion of an existing $4.5 billion secured revolving credit facility to boost its liquidity amid uncertainty in the capital markets.”
September 21st, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Tag:
“If the application was filed by June 7, 1995 and issued before June 8, 1978,” Where did this come from? If it issued before 1978, it had to be filed before 1995, and if it was filed after 1978 it could not possibly issue by 1978.
Me thinks the people at lectlaw are confused. Probably hired a bunch of law students to run the site.
The rule covers two situations:
1: Those applications filed before June 1995 and
2: Those applications filed after June 1995.
The former expire 17 years from issuance or 20 years from the date of filing, whichever is longer. The latter expire 20 years from their filing date.
The old rule was 17 years from issuance. The problem was that certain parties abused the system and would keep applications in the system for years. These applications are termed “submarine patents” and often had very broad claim language allowing the holder to file suit against people who actually developed the technology years later. The classic example are the “bar code” patents which only surfaced decades after they were filed and then finally prosecuted to issuance after the use of bar codes was in widespread use.
Why a problem? Well, if those patents had issued 1-3 years after being filed as intended by the system, they would have expired before bar codes actually came into use. Hence the move to 20 years from the date of filing.
The problem with the 20 years from date of filing limitation is that, like every other executive branch agency under Bush, the Patent Office is run by cronies with no previous experience with the patent system, is undermanned and it can take several years to get a patent issued, which cuts into the patent term and hence its value.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Statik, Tag:
Please join me in nominating fred for an award. Without him there is no way I could have made so many off-topic posts to drive the number past 100.
He is truly a martyr for the GM cause.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
“Tag - Patent agents are not attorneys but they could be psychiatrists or psychologists.”
Or Just EEs, medical doctors, chemists, physicists….. that enjoy winding up people who do not think through their arguments before opening mouth.
September 21st, 2008 at 5:04 pm
#12 Fred says:
“I hate this guy. If I ever saw him in real life I would punch him in the face. The Movie is so vicious towards GM that anyone who watches it automatically hates the company.”
To tell the truth, I haven’t seen the movie, but with clips of a mock funeral for the EV1, its obviously not a documentary. Based on the responses I have seen from the “Flock of Idiots” (yes, Jerry, that includes you), I would like to be second in line to punch Mr. Paine. Maybe we could have a line of people like in the movie “Airplane”, all waiting our turn to abuse this self-serving Hollywoood trash.
GM’s at fault for the EV1 because it was so great! If it was a piece of s**t, no one would have cared if they crushed them (I haven’t heard of any funerals for Vegas).
So, Jerry, as much as you piss and moan about GM qualilty (my vehicles are all GM, and far superior to the comparable imports that my peers have purchased), they obviously did something right with the EV1. Expect to see an improved version of the EV1 in a couple of years, called the Chevy Volt.
For the naysayers, I repeat a previous post:
We too are convinced that GM is building the Volt only to entice you into showrooms to buy SUV’s (GM makes the best ones, and by a wide margin). We know that nobody ever wanted an SUV, but were tricked by GM into buying them.
Only a few Volts will ever be manufactured, and then they will be crushed. Nobody will buy the Volt anyway because it has a dirty, smog-producing ICE. Everyone will be buying BEVs only.
I’m sure highly intelligent people like yourselves can build a better, safer, more efficient, and more reliable vehicle than the Volt in your garages with recycled materials. I can’t wait to hear about it!
Just don’t forget to keep smoking that stuff that you “Need” for medicinal purposes.
September 21st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
DonC #101:
Lutz and I would agree on something? I have no problem with higher gas prices other than the fact that we have no viable alternative mode of transport that doesn’t use gas (or diesel).
I put solar panels on my homes over a year ago. With one exception, all my colleagues though I was nuts. Now they are all doing it. There is nothing I want more than a really good electric car. I don’t care who makes it.
What some perceive as negativity isn’t because I hate GM, but because I was a Volt-ee and now am very disappointed. I would love to see GM get their act together, but if we all keep “oooh”ing and “aaah”ing and lowering our expectations with practically every press release we will never get what we need.
I have drawn my line in the sand. If the Volt is ever going to be the car we want, everyone else has to decide where to draw their line so that we can let GM know when enough is enough. Otherwise we are going to get is series of compromises that nobody wants.
September 21st, 2008 at 5:19 pm
There must be something in the gm-volt.com bylaws that cause threads to develop self-sustaining reactions which eventually consume the thread. Maybe it’s the way to make room for the next topic…..(sigh),
Be well,
Tag
See Ya’All on the next topic.
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 5:23 pm
BillR #109:
First, I have to say, man, you smell like a dirty sock.
GM quality is notorious. It is hardly just a case of me whining.
If you had taken the time to read previous posts, the argument is not that the Volt is being produced to entice people into showrooms to sell SUVs. That has to be the most retarded suggestion I have heard yet.
Quite the opposite. Many of us think the odds of the Volt getting to a showroom anytime soon are remote.
Clearly you are too lazy to read the posts you complain about, so I will repost the logic here to make it easy for you. I would read it for you if I could.
“Put on your thinking beanie. GM is going bust NOW. The Volt is scheduled for release in 2010, but only in limited quantities. Lutz has said that they are relying on there being enough “rich people” wanting the Volt to sell the car in the first “few” years, translated as Joe public will see an affordable Volt in large numbers in about 5-8 years (if ever).
Of course this is greenwash! A limited production car that they claim to be losing money on and won’t be available to anyone for at least two years (if ever) couldn’t be anything else! You have to be an utter cretin to think the Volt is going to save GM, and that is GM’s plan. Personally, I don’t think the Volt as currently presented by GM could compete in todays market.
The only thing that can save GM is convincing an ignorant public that they have seen the error of their ways and cajole the politicians into giving them a huge bailout NOW. The Volt is part of that marketing campaign.
GET A CLUE! This isn’t huffing, it is deduction from the facts!”
September 21st, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Tag:
Its the nature of the beast.
Notice how Fred disappeared and BillR came in on queue with the same argument professing to support fred?
Interesting that this is BillRs first post in the thread? Coincidence?
fred aka BillR, you really are a loser.
September 21st, 2008 at 5:37 pm
112 Jerry
The Volt will not directly save GM, but I do believe the concept and technology may possibly, make GM once again a profitable business.
I have been fairly pessimistic of the Volt, but over the months of following the Volts progress (here and other sites), I do believe there is some hope for GM.
Do not get me wrong. I am NOT for bailing out GM.
But, again I am becoming a believer that electric cars will become the car of choice in the near future (5-10 years). Whether GM survives or goes bankrupt, the technology will survive. I likely will not be in a Volt, but I envision the not to distant future of driving a derivative of the Volt.
You can argue who is to blame for the lack of GM’s commitment to designing fuel efficient cars until your blue in the face. I have NEVER purchased a GM vehicle, but I am leaning that way, not just based on the Volt, but just by becoming more informed of the quality of vehicles and past perceptions that I believe are now no longer as valid.
Ok I am going to say it…. GO GM…GO EREV. (Like I said, I am not a GM horn blower, but I am being slowly converted)
September 21st, 2008 at 5:42 pm
JEC:
I agree totally with your last paragraph. I wish we had the Volt (as originally presented) now. We really need these cars.
As for GM, I don’t care one way or the other. I just want someone to produce a good PEV.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:04 pm
jerry,
I’ve learned long ago, not to post when I notice something…. I’ll suggest an old country bromide:
“Never try to teach a pig to sing.
It doesn’t work, and
It annoys the pig.”
Be well,
Tag
Now I’m really going AFK (lol).
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
September 21st, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Jerry,
You make me laugh!
i’m not surprised that you are a patent agent and not a patent attorney.
As a patent agent, you have made a critical error, in that you have not searched the prior art before your endeavors. Take some time and read some of the history of the Volt on this site so to bring yourself up to speed and become a more intelligent contributor.
Your deductive reasoning leaves much to be desired. I guess time will tell if GM goes belly up and the Volt becomes just a memory.
However, my bet is that GM will survive and prosper, and E-REV will be the technology to have, at least until electric storage technology takes a quantum leapforward.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Fred,
Are we really the same person?
Of course, there is no changing the mindset of some individuals, even when they are proven wrong.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:14 pm
110 jerry - “if we all keep “oooh”ing and “aaah”ing and lowering our expectations with practically every press release we will never get what we need”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well said. The Volt keeps getting worse and worse. I wonder how the Volt would fare in a rollover accident, with that glass roof, hmmm? The phrase “pronounced dead at the scene” springs to mind.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Tag:
I will remember that next time I have indigestion.
In exchanges like the one above, I don’t post for the benefit of my opposite, I post for others reading. Some people can’t read critically very well, but can sort through the BS with a roadmap.
Always direct comments to the audience.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:18 pm
BillR
You really don’t have anything to add, do you? Where did you do any proving of anything?
Oh yeah, you are fred and you still think your previous crap doesn’t smell!
Well the Broncos won, so I am off.
Later.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:28 pm
So GM invited this jerk to drive a Volt mule. Big deal. He should have invited Lyle, since he has done more to promote the Volt than that “GM killed the Electric Car” jerk.
Must be a slow news day.
——————–
FPRNVS - Front plate required ? - no Volt. Sorry.
* Purchase of Chevrolet Volt only legal in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, and countries that DO NOT require a front license plate.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:46 pm
#105 RB
“WSJ reports “General Motors Corp. said it intends to draw down the remaining $3.5 billion of an existing $4.5 billion secured revolving credit facility to boost its liquidity amid uncertainty in the capital markets.”
———-
Yeah, GM ‘dropped’ this nugget of news goodness just as soon as the market closed friday. I wasn’t going to mention it…because it is quite a downer, but I’ll throw in my 2p…quickly.
While yes…they do need to access this money at some point ’soonish’, they don’t really want to take it out now, or start paying the interest on it right now…but they are forced to max it out completely now.
The original facility was set up by a ‘consortium’ of banks in 2006, but it has provisional benchmarks that GM has to maintain…or the line can be shut down.
Q3 is ending in a few weeks and is more than likely the financial apocalypse for GM. (Report comes out November 1st…well around that time, because Nov 1st is a saturday and I’m too lazy to look it up).
Raw vehicle sales have dropped 20%+ in Q3, made worse that all these sales came WITH massive discounting and UNDER market rate financing…coupled with