Comments on: GM Submits Long-Term Viability Plan to Congress: $18 Billion Needed

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:31:57 +0000

I am NOT part of a so called “EV” cult! I am part of a “FREE AMERICA” cult. I wanted GM and the VOLT to succeed in the worst way. But not at the cost of losing our Repuiblic to a Socialist State. I am on the “BUY” list for the VOLT, but I no longer have reserves large enough to purchase anything. I will not purchase to sustain a company run by unions and crippled by them regardless of the creativity that comes out of GM engineering. I will not indulge in furthering the Communist agenda of some and Socialist agenda of many in Washington. I have lost confidence in our Congress – they are presiding over the demise of a once great nation. You can tear down the edifices in Washington, the symbols of our history, of commitment to nation, of commitment to faith. Our faith will survive, our nation will not, it’s symbols will come to mean little as our nation embraces the ideals of Socialists and Communists. It may be goodbye America, but before that it is goodbye UAW and goodbye Volt! Where our resources have been destroyed by usurpation, there can and will be no voice to purchase or support “Volt”.

By: Jerry

Jerry — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 06:00:48 +0000

Have any of you seen the new Pontiac G-8

Where has been all the promotions of this
smart good-looking buggy?

Buy the way….only 7% made in US/Canada

By: JonBerg

JonBerg — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:09:27 +0000

Well, I saw the Big Three (B.T.) beggers, otherwise known as the Detroit Three, this morning. Why are they so afraid of Chapter 11? Do you really think that people would be reluctant to buy the cars under Chapter 11 any more, or less, than in some free fall plan with contiuning government funding as proposed by the B.T. and the UAW puppet who has no clue about anything ? The argument about parts suppliers is bogus because they supply” transplants”, as well, who will take up the slack in the demand for vehicles should the B.T. go. They the B.T. and the UAW have had 30 or more years to get their act together but were too arrogant in thinking that because of blind patriotism people would continue to buy anything that they produced. The companies capitulated to all sorts of unrealistic union demands instead of saying we will hire new folks who wish to work, if you don’t, and not have allowed the absurd “Jobs Bank” thing to ever have taken root! File a cogent Chapter 11 plan or die. I prefer the former!

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:38:06 +0000

I’m the guy who made the initial ‘axe buick’ post (#13). I gotta respond to those people who are defending Buick.

Buick currently sells 3 vehicles: The Lucerne, LaCross and Enclave.

Which of these is so great? The Enclave is the same vehicle as GMC’s Acadia, Chevy’s Traverse and Saturn’s Outlook. Since GMC and Chevy are certainly sticking around, we’re not losing anything if the Enclave goes. I don’t see how you can argue that the Enclave is anything special since 3 other brands sell the same thing. FWIW, the Enclave has a ‘below average’ durability rated from consumer reports.

Then there’s the Lucerne. The Lucerne is based on the G-body platform which initially appeared in the Pontiac Bonneville in 2000. It’s not a bad car (style-wise and engineering) but it’s nothing special either. I wouldn’t keep Buick around because they have a car based on nearly a decade old technology.

Lastly, we have the LaCross….and it’s a nice looking car. Too bad it’s not nearly as nice as the concept thought. Besides the styling, it’s still nothing special. It’s got the same Series III 3800 series engine you can find is loads of GM vehicles. I don’t have anything against this car but I would keep Buick because they have one nice car. All of GM’s brands have atleast one nice vehicle.

Honestly, the styling of Buick’s has come a long way since the 90’s. The new Invicta concept car is pretty sexy. By the time this makes it to the market it’s going to be watered way down like the LaCrosse though.

The problem is that the 90’s Buick’s did so much damage to the brands image, that it’s hardly worth pouring all the money into fixing their image. The quality of Buicks have been improving as well, but only because GM is improving their overall quality. It’s not like Buick is getting their own platforms or engines that are above average in quality.

By: JonBerg

JonBerg — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:22:32 +0000

To ug:
I didn’t say that I’m anti plugin, per se, but I think practicality is an important consideration for a possible $40,000 investment. I only posed a couple of questions. I guess that you can’t answer them and thus your surly remark. What other blog(s) should such questions be directed to? If you have a civil, cogent response I would appreciate hearing it.

By: ug

ug — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:48:07 +0000

“f GM goes belly-up, it will start a domino effect that will kill many other companies as well. By the time it’s all done, up to 3 million more people will be unemployed”

Put those 3 million to work building wind turbines and solar panels.

“How do apartment dwellers and others, who park under overhangs or on the street, recharge the battery and how does the heater or AC work under the electric mode? This sounds more like a novelty and less like a practical solution to GM’s problems.”

If you are so anti plugin, why the hell are you reading this blog?

By: NZDavid

NZDavid — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:47:45 +0000

And here’s the link:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/12/coulomb-techn-1.html#more

By: Storm

Storm — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:42:15 +0000

#51 When I read this crap I realize that American industry is doomed. Millions of nice standard 120V outlets available. Hundreds of thousands of available 240V outlets set up for campers and motor homes and yachts. % or 6 other standards for stoves and dryers. So now these morons need to come up with yet another standard for autos? The big advantage that battery powered vehicles have over other alternatives is the infrastructure already exists. Let’s go guys and remove that advantage.

Just how stupid can these folks get?

Here’s the quote:
Coulomb Technologies is showcasing prototypes of Level 2 high power networked charging stations that will comply with the new SAE J1772 Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler Specification at the EDTA conference 2-4 December in Washington, DC.

SAE has been making modifications to the older J1772 REV NOV 2001 standard, moving toward a smaller (and less expensive) coupler made by Yazaki to replace the former Avcon connector. The new SAE J1772 standard is being finalized now, and may be balloted by the first quarter of 2009.

The J1772 standard specifies a specific 5-pin plug (two power, two signal, one ground) for single-phase supply up to 80A.

By: JonBerg

JonBerg — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 18:25:26 +0000

Questions about the “VOLT”: How do apartment dwellers and others, who park under overhangs or on the street, recharge the battery and how does the heater or AC work under the electric mode? This sounds more like a novelty and less like a practical solution to GM’s problems.

By: N Riley

N Riley — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:57:12 +0000

Look, GM stop wasting money on hydrogen. No one wants you to waste money on a potential power source that is another 25 years away. Plus not infrastructure to support it anyway. Just say NO, GM. Stop wasting OUR money. It’s ours if you get a taxpayer subsidized loan. So, just stop it, GM.