Nancy Gioia is Ford’s Director, Sustainable Mobility Technologies and Hybrid Vehicle Programs. I had a chance to speak with her recently about Ford’s view on the Chevy Volt E-REV design. Ford has announced it will bring a 100 mile range battery electric vehicle sedan on the market in 2011, and plans to bring a plug-in hybrid to market in 2012. They have not, however, announced an E-REV. Nancy tells me why.
What is your opinion about about the E-REV design?
Well we said by 2012 we’d have our plug in hybrid. If you’re familiar with our plug-in Escape project and our first partner Southern Cal., now EPRI has joined, and we are delighted that we have a whole other slew of utilities that have joined. And we have vehicle that we are now delivering around the country for testing. Our plug-in hybrid is a blended hybrid, so its a parallel series hybrid and and its based off our current power-split system that we have in our Escape. We make several modifications to that system but instead of having to depend upon the battery to go at highway speeds, or to do wide-open throttles, what we’ve looked at because of the battery costs and the size of the battery, and the weight of the battery, and the fact that battery technology is going to continue to evolve, we believe that the blended hybrid is a better solution.
So overnight you can fully charge your battery. It will be an energy lithium cell. You can run that down in up to 30 equivalent electric miles and then you go to regular hybrid mode. Just like our Escape hybrid today, or our Fusion/Milan, you are still then getting that 70% fuel efficiency city, overall combined 35-40% fuel efficiency.
So its never running on pure electricity, even as your running down the charge you are still firing the combustion engine?
Only in a wide-open throttle or high highway speed. So normal regular acceleration, up to a speed we are still determining, like today our Fusion/Milan goes up to 47 mph in pure electric, and that’s not feathering it to death, you can accelerate. We’re looking at that same thing in our blended plug-in hybrid. But if you need the highway speeds, actually you can run the engine very efficiently. In combination with the motor and give you great performance on the highway but not oversize that battery.
We did a lot of study with our HySeries Edge. This had a fuel cell instead of an engine but was a series hybrid. So it was similar to the Volt concept. What we found is the difficulty with the battery technology and the energy density that you can’t predict what the customer is going to need in the next five minutes. So if you’re in Colorado and you’re going up a steep grade for a very long time, and then you suddenly need to wide-open throttle around something, your state of charge of battery may be at a level even with the engine running full that to recharge that battery and maintain the highway speed and responsiveness you have a power fade issue. We also found if you wide-open-off, wide-open-off, that the 4th or 5th time into a wide open throttle, again because that engine can’t run fast enough and the chemistry of the battery can’t charge fast enough you may end up with limited power.
So the Volt has that problem?
Right. So from our point of view because you can never predict what the customer needs next, that doesn’t lead to a confident driving experience. The solution to that is a bigger battery, bigger engine, and then you get more weight etc. So what we thought was a better solution was our blended plug-in hybrid. You recharge, you have equivalent energy. When you turn the engine on and you have a need for speed or rapid acceleration we now can run that engine at its peak efficiency. Right on that torque curve, peak efficiency and supplement it with the motor. And always keep the battery in the happy zone. So the most expensive and the heaviest part, and the largest package consumer, the battery, can be the smallest it can be. And as the energy dentistry increases all we’re doing is giving greater electric range to our consumers. So affordability and attainability is the cornerstone of our sustainability strategy.
Feb 6th, 2009 (7:14 am)Bummer. I think EREV, for the near future, is the answer.
However, he does bring up and interesting point about limited power when full power is needed. I wonder if this is really an issue.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (7:31 am)It seems like an E-REV could get around the problem of needing power when the battery is nearly depleted by building in a bit of reserve in the SOC. If the Volt’s ICE kicks in at 35% SOC, but the battery can be depleted to 30% if needed without damaging it, isn’t the problem solved for all but the most extreme scenarios?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (7:35 am)Thoughtful comments from Ford that may prove to be correct. I am impressed by their serious evaluation of alternatives. Perhaps the conclusion is that the Volt may be great for some drivers but poorly suited for others, in other places, a bit more of a niche car than we have appreciated.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (7:40 am)I would have thought that a pure electric drive would have delivered more torque when accelerating from 40 to 60 as in an overtaking situation rather than what would be obtained by delegating to an ICE.
The Volt should be ’sensational’ compared to an ICE car in these real world situations thus making it more responsive and ultimately safer to drive. It would be nice to have some numbers in this area from GM.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (7:42 am)Ford is taking the Toyota approach. The piece also shows why GM must spend so long perfecting the battery control systems etc. However with the ’spare’ 8kWh permanently on board I don’t see battery fade being the problem Ford and Toyota would have with smaller batteries.
I have wondered for some time, why GM is committed to the 40 mile range without having a smaller range battery. The problems of power fade are obviously one of the reasons downsizing is difficult. For this reason I have always supported a user operated ‘boost’ switch, which would reset the depletion point where the ICE comes on at 5% higher than normal, ie 35% instead of 30% SOC.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (7:48 am)MDDave says It seems like an E-REV could get around the problem of needing power when the battery is nearly depleted by building in a bit of reserve in the SOC. If the Volt’s ICE kicks in at 35% SOC, but the battery can be depleted to 30% if needed without damaging it, isn’t the problem solved for all but the most extreme scenarios?
I think the current plan is to have the ICE cut in at 30% and recharge to 35% SOC. The battery itself will be able to handle power drains down to 25% if needed. In this range the Volt will operate like a regular HEV.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:03 am)I think most of this issue would be taken care of in the hardware/software implementation. Maybe Ford could’nt figure it out…..
Also, Ford already invested in parallel hybrids, like Toyota, so this could just be spin justification to stay in that direction. If this is really a problem with electric cars, wouldn’t it also effect the Ford or any other true BEV???
Finally, think about your own driving patterns. I can’t think of a single time in the last year where I have five wide-open-on, wide-open-off cycles very close together. So I find it to be a non-issue. Also, lets not forget that GM is only really using 50% of the charge in the battery pack to start with, so they have some buffer area to utilize in “extreme” cases, probably with a warning displayed on the dashboard screen.
IMHO, for the Volt, all this would actually do is to reduce the AER, which would force the ICE to kick in a bit earlier.
Or am I missing something here???
EDIT: It looks like NZDavid and I were thinking along the same lines. He just must type faster than I do…..
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:16 am)Vehicle …………………… Gallons per year
Volt …………………….….. 37
Prius PHEV-10 ……………182
Prius ……..……………..… 228
Ford Escape PHEV-10 …. 268
30 MPG car ……………… 380
20 MPG car ……………… 570
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:24 am)Ford’s approach is to build a car that people can afford.
The fact that the Volt requires a large, expensive battery, along with a fairly good size engine, generator and all the high power electronics, makes the vehicle approach a cost most of us cannot afford.
I was impressed with Ford’s response and the insight they have. Ford is definitely on my “watch list” for my next vehicle.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:26 am)As far as I’m concerned, GM is taking the right engineering route. How often does one go up steep long hills? Rarely, unless you live in the mountains. Then, the Volt may not be the car of choice. The story about DC and San Francisco, which was taken out of context, I found hard believe because of all the hills in San Francisco. DC yes but San Francisco, no.
I think Ford and Toyota is making a huge mistake!
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:26 am)This is something that hopefully GM has thought of and engineered a solution for. Maybe it is time to bounce this off of someone in GM to get their responce…
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:32 am)From the article:
“So from our point of view because you can never predict what the customer needs next, that doesn’t lead to a confident driving experience. The solution to that is a bigger battery…”
————————————————————————————–
The Volt has a bigger battery that fully solves this issue. The ICE comes on at 30% SOC, which means there’s still 4.8kwh of juice in the battery. Together with the 53kw power of the gas engine, that’s enough to go 80 miles per hour up a constantly steep hill for 20 miles straight. If you slow down to less than 60 MPH, or if the road levels off or goes downhill for a bit, the battery recharges, and that 20 miles becomes considerably more.
Bottom line: Only maniac drivers will face this issue with the Volt, and the issue will be that you’ll have to slow down to 60 MPH on steep uphill grades, and only after you’ve been driving 80 MPH uphill for a long time.
http://gm-volt.com/2008/09/02/the-pikes-peak-question-chevy-volt-and-the-infinite-hill/
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:37 am)Maybe I’m missing some fundamental point here, but…what the hell is a “parallel series hybrid”? Shouldn’t it be one or the other?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:38 am)I think Ford and Toyota is making a huge mistake!
_________________________________
The goal of phasing out traditional (engine-only) vehicles will be well served by FULL hybrids. How can shifting production to something that significantly reduces emissions & consumption at an affordable price to consumers while still delivering a profit be a huge mistake?
Within the next decade, what do you think the goal should be?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:48 am)what the hell is a “parallel series hybrid”?
__________________________
ASSIST = Insight & Malibu = parallel
FULL = Prius & Escape & Tahoe = series-parallel
EREV = Volt = series
Hybrids like Prius operate with the engine motionless at times (up to 42 MPH), offering abilities of a series type hybrid. The electric A/C, second electric motor, and power-split-device are what make it different from parallel… offering much more than just assist for the engine.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:49 am)I am thinking the Ford Escape PHEV will be a good product, one that makes great strides in fuel efficiency, but I would still disagree with Nancy’s argument that essentially states bigger battery = bad. I think the EREV is the way to go with everything really–or if/until battery technology and range could evolve far enough to provide affordable all electric vehicles. Again, I think Ford’s hybrids are fine vehicles, but they are missing the boat if they are shunning EREV’s just because batteries would need to be larger. Just my opinion.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:51 am)I think its a good thing that Ford is producing something with a battery & a plug. I will buy the Volt, but for a cheaper, but more gas-using vehicle, Ford’s car will make many people happy (unless gas spikes to $10/gallon).
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:53 am)Did anyone see what the AER Ford expects on their car?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:53 am)I don’t believe Nancy understands the E-REV concept.
Once the generator kicks on, ALL the current supplied can go directly to the motor, it does not have to charge the battery if the power is needed by the AC motor.
Personally, I think Nancy is completely wrong, however, if they wanna make a parallel hybrid, more power to ‘em. HOWEVER, I wish the auto manufacturers would quit flapping their gums and give us a plug in already….
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:56 am)#2 MDDave Says: “If the Volt’s ICE kicks in at 35% SOC, but the battery can be depleted to 30% if needed without damaging it, isn’t the problem solved for all but the most extreme scenarios?”
————————————————————————————–
The Volt’s battery can be depleted far below 30% occasionally without significantly increasing wear. The question is: How often will this happen? If it happens a lot, then the battery will wear out in 3-4 years. If it happens a few times a year, no problem.
So now pretend you are GM and you have a 10-year, 150,000 mile warranty on the battery. Enter the bean counters. Remember that you need to be going more than 60 MPH up a 6% grade for many miles without slowing down to see this problem.
The vast majority of drivers don’t encounter very long steep uphill grades like this on a regular basis. I’ll guess 3%. Now out of that 3%, most will be sensible and not drive 80 MPH constantly up steep curvy mountain passes. So we are probably talking about 0.3% of the population that will deplete the battery significantly below 30% SOC on a regular basis.
If I were GM, I would happily replace the battery in 0.3% of the Volts I sell, just to be rid of this issue.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (8:57 am)We’ve had the debate about hills on this forum before and I feel comfortable with the SOC and systems engineering answers Lyle has gotten over the last 2 years. From an engineering standpoint I think the Volt is a brilliant way to go. I do think Ford will have a cheaper hybrid, but I drive on the highway 95% of the time. I want to drive 75 mph, I want to drive all electric, and I’ll pay a little more for it (with 10K help from the fed).
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:00 am)Interesting article, and the responses to it are perhaps even more enlightening. Quite simply, the Volt isn’t for every driver, but it is perfect for many. If you want to help the US end its crushing dependence on foreign oil, it is a great car. If you like the idea of lowering your carbon footprint, it is a great car. If you want a sporty albeit not sports car-like responsiveness, it is a good car. If you tend to drive like a manic jackrabbit, not so good, maybe the Mustang is more your thing. I mean really, how often are you going to nail it WFO then shut it down completely five or six times in a row? Never?
I think Jim has a very good point in that both Ford & Toyota have engineered very similar parallel hybrids and therefore, they will denigrate any car that bypasses their approach even if that other car, the Volt, has an approach that may end up being superior. Stanley Steamers’ builder was critical of the internal combustion engine right up to the day they went out of business.
That having been said, JEC is also right, in that for the short term, EREV’s are going to be more expensive than a parallel hybrid because the EREV is going to need a bigger battery, in order to eliminate the vast majority of the problems Gioia mentioned, and to get you the nearly 40 mile AER, which gives the EREV the ability to cut the amount of gasoline needed so drastically as indicated by Dave G. The Volts price will come down and then it will become a Prius/Escape hybrid killer. But there will always be people for whom the Prius or the Fusion/Escape hybrid model will work better. No problem, bring on all the cars that will allow us to wean ourselves off of foreign oil.
When you come right down to it, the posters on this site are better educated about the problems and possibilities of this technology than Watanabe, Fukui, Mulally and Gioia. Or, more accurately perhaps, the posters on this site see the possibilities of the Volt just as clearly as the leaders of the big developers of parallel hybrids, but we don’t have billions of dollars sunk into the development of the modern equivalent of a steam powered car.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:05 am)#19 jabroni Says: “Once the generator kicks on, ALL the current supplied can go directly to the motor, it does not have to charge the battery if the power is needed by the AC motor.”
————————————————————————————–
Yes. Diagram #2 shows this case:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/Volt_Electrical_Block_Diagram.jpg
The Volt’s software varies the ICE power output to follow the demands of the electric motor as closely as possible. This has 2 benefits:
1) It lowers the wear on the battery (less charging/discharging)
2) It’s more efficient. Electrical->chemical->electrical conversions have some efficiency losses.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:06 am)#14 I think all he is saying is rejecting the Volt series model is a mistake.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:08 am)The engineers at Ford and Toyota probably know that they’re up against some proprietary stuff that GM now has, and to get around that and compete directly with the Volt may be an insurmountable problem.
So, as Jim I #7 above says, they have to justify staying in the direction they’ve already invested heavily in, which is parallel hybrids.
For the short term they will do fine, but long term they will be left behind when the electrification of the automobile comes about.
I greatly admire GM for this commitment and long term strategy. It takes a lot of courage to see where you need to go and then act upon that with all you’ve got.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:09 am)Vehicle …………………… Gallons per year
Volt …………………….….. 37
Prius PHEV-10 ……………182
Prius ……..……………..… 228
Ford Escape PHEV-10 …. 268
30 MPG car ……………… 380
20 MPG car ……………… 570
This is so relative its not even funny. We dont know too much about the plug in prius, but if everythings true and we get 20miles before it uses gas then ill never (unless im on vacation) use gas. My total commute each day is right at 20 mile and its mostly city stop and go. So there is no difference for me between the two vehicles, except that the prius is about half the cost….
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:13 am)I think Ford is being short sighted. The torque and power from electric motors is instantaneous. How many of us in America’s heartland or Canada for that matter will throttle wide open that often? How many of us are climbing steep hills that often? How many of us want to drive electrically for almost all of our miles every day? Sorry Ford, Toyota, Honda…..GM is on the forefront and you will be left behind in the end…… Enough said.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:13 am)#23 – Dave G.
Nice drawing, first time I have seen such. Thanks.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:18 am)People are referring to Gioia as “him” or “he”. Is Nancy Gioia a guy?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:19 am)I would rather have the Volt over this system but I hope Ford sells millions of these things. A plug in hybrid with ever increasing battery capacity (as batteries develop) is a great idea and will be cheaper than the Volt.
IMO, GM too should have more plug-in hybrids ready to produce. I was excited by the idea of the plug-in Vue but who knows if this thing will ever make it to showrooms.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:22 am)#16 Schmeltz Says: “I am thinking the Ford Escape PHEV will be a good product, one that makes great strides in fuel efficiency…”
—————
#17 k-dawg Says: “I think its a good thing that Ford is producing something with a battery & a plug.”
======================================================
I disagree. Look at the figures:
Vehicle …………………… Gallons per year
Volt …………………….….. 37
Prius PHEV-10 ……………182
Prius HEV ..…………….… 228
Ford Escape PHEV-10 …. 268
Ford Escape HEV ………. 335
20 MPG car ……………… 570
PHEVs with only 10 miles of electric boost offer far too little advantage over their regular HEV counterparts. In order to be convenient, plugging in has to eliminate most trips to the gas station. A PHEV-10 won’t do this. An EREV-40 will.
Within the next 5 years, PHEV-10s will only convince people that plugging in is not worth the hassle, so I think they will actually hurt the rollout of plug-ins.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:27 am)Dave G #8 brings up a good point, but I don’t know if folks in this market take total operating costs into consideration or just go for the lowest fuel usage. It will take quite some time for a First Generation Volt owner to recoup the cost difference between it and the competition, so they will have to look at some other benefits (US jobs, lower total fuel usage, lower CO2, etc) to balance the equasion in favor of the Chevy. This is no surprise to us on this board, but what about the mainstream?
Vehicle ……………… Gallons per year Fuel Cost @$4 gal
Volt …………………….….. 37…………………….$148
Prius PHEV-10 ……………182……………………$728
Prius ……..……………..… 228………………….. $912
Ford Escape PHEV-10 …. 268………………….$1072
30 MPG car ……………… 380…………………..$1520
20 MPG car ……………… 570…………………..$2280
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:33 am)The plot thickens.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:34 am)Many of these automakers who have rejected EREVs are doing so because they simply can’t compete – Ford couldn’t build an EREV
until probably 2015, at the earliest. So they try to put lipstick on the pig and pull a Toyota. The weight business is a dead giveaway that they are lying here. Also thir brainless claim that you can only get
sufficient electrical power reserves from a dual propulsion hybrid.
Maybe someone should point out that Fisker not only will ahve a small battery, but will also possess high output when required – and they don’t need any gas engine powerring the wheels, as Ford claims. they simply run the battery and range extender simultaneously, something that the Volt could also do with nothing more than a simply software change. I’m disappointed that Ford is lying to save face.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:37 am)The datum which is described here the full-on full off repetitively shows up in datasets within scanning the PCM as “racing and abuse” only, not going up long one-mile climb mountains and needing to pass several semi’s . That sort of problem, normally going up a mountain and needing to pass many long trucks can be very easily programmed out of the scenario with the very first time the Volt is started and with the gps or cellular-tower data that the Volt might be able to incorporate in anticipation of any 5 or 10 mile long-hill climb, and then the need to pass many semi trucks at a blistering quickness. (Simply by pre-charging for 10 to 20 minutes).
From my initial perspective, it seems Ford is doing the “marketing” which they need to do to attempt to claim market. There was not sufficient technical impartiality, since the story claims that the Volt already has a problem in any performance category where they (Ford Motor) do not possess one to analyze any software which has not been finalized (nor likely will be until nearly ready to be sold). So, the interview has *zero* technical credibility, *zero* merit, and should be an embarrassment to Ford Motor Company.
I invite Ford Motor Company to publish their systems openly as does GM if we are to begin to respect anything further they attempt to represent. They’ve absolutely nothing to loose by doing that.
Dan Petit Austin TX
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:38 am)If this was a horse race, I’d put my money on VOLTEC.
That was a good interview Lyle did; it certainly reveals the Ford EV development path. It is good that there will be competing approaches taken by the auto-makers. I continue to believe that the VOLTEC platform is the superior approach by a wide margin at several levels. For example, the VOLTEC approach is superior in terms of “getting off gas” as illustrated by # 8 Dave G’s mpg chart.
Every bit of today’s VOLTEC development path accrues towards future EV development whereas the Ford EV development path puts development dollars and organizational inertia into an approach that all agree will diminish in viability as battery technology evolves (and battery technology is quickly evolving).
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:41 am)Great! Pike’s Peak – It’s like deja vu all over again.
It’s simple. If you live on top of Mt. McKinley, you buy a Volt, and it isn’t as peppy as you like -don’t come crying to me. You’ve been warned.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:42 am)This will be resolved in a few years with ultra capacitors…
Which can release their energy much much more quickly.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:43 am)POWER FADE? Seriously? How likely is that to occur. Note to self, when taking the Volt up Pikes Peak, I will not be able to keep up with a Lambo. That’s not exactly a make or break decision on buying the car.
Ford is trying to steal some of GM’s thunder here, po poing their concept. You just wish it was your Mulally.
On another note, a lithium battery for “deep storage” combined with a supercapacitor for rapid discharge would help solve some of this issue. That’s my bet for Volt 2.0.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:45 am)This is what FREE competiton in the FREE market is all about.
Oh, nevermind…
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:46 am)“Our plug-in hybrid is a blended hybrid, so its a parallel series hybrid and and its based off our current power-split system that we have in our Escape. ”
I love the double talk! It is either a series hybrid or a parallel one!
Just got to keep people confused! Confused people will buy anything. Thats why big stores move things around all the time. JMHO
Take Care
Arch
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:46 am)Todd Says: “This is so relative its not even funny. We dont know too much about the plug in Prius, but if everythings true and we get 20miles before it uses gas then ill never (unless im on vacation) use gas.”
————————————————————————————–
Actually, we do know a lot about the Prius PHEV from the 3rd party conversion kits.
First, I’ve never heard of a Prius PHEV-20. The third party conversions I’ve heard of are either 10 or 30. I’m pretty sure the Prius that Toyota is building for fleet testing is a PHEV-10 (i.e. 10 miles of electric boost).
Second, there really is no all-electric range with the Prius. The gas engine needs to run at highways speeds and during acceleration at lower speeds. But even though the gas engine is running, the battery and electric motor still provide most of the power. So a more accurate way to describe a Prius PHEV-10 is that it gets something like 150 MPG during the first 10 miles, and 50 MPG thereafter.
So if you want to know how many gallons of gas you would use per year, plug your yearly driving habits (20 miles per day + some longer and shorter trips) into my spreadsheet:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/Plugin_mileage.xls
and then compare a Prius PHEV-10 to a Volt. You may be surprised.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:46 am)Very good interview Lyle. Good points from Ford for contrast to Voltec approach. Nancy is essentially saying the battery is big, heavy and expensive and is the core of Volt’s pricing problem. This is all accurate so Ford is taking a more conservative approach. I’m sure they feel that if and when batteries improve in energy density and cost they can seamlessly incorporate more battery range.
A 30 mile all electric range is very appealing to me in a plug-in.
The market will pick a winner. Ford & Toyota are going to undermine Volt’s price.
I’m still a Voltiac.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:50 am)Relevant discussion from a previous thread:
The Pike’s Peak Question: Chevy Volt and the Infinite Hill
http://gm-volt.com/2008/09/02/the-pikes-peak-question-chevy-volt-and-the-infinite-hill/
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:51 am)What did you expect her to say, The Volt is a brilliant idea and we really don’t have an answer for it except a copy of Japanese hybrids that are not quite as good. What she is really saying is we are taking a conservative approach and will let GM do all the heavy lifting and when they figure it out we will hop on board along with Toyota and Honda.
GM’s stance has always been to leapfrog current technology, a much more difficult path but one that will pay larger dividends in the end. She talks like battery technology is at a standstill, smaller lighter more energy dense batteries will ensue as the tech evolves and GM will have a huge advantage in the software side of the equation and In 10 years or so you may not need a generator at all.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:54 am)#41 Arch Says: “I love the double talk! It is either a series hybrid or a parallel one!”
————————————————————————————–
Look it up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain
The Power-split hybrid is also called Series-Parallel.
“Power-split hybrid systems have features of both series and parallel hybrids.”
The Prius and Escape hybrids fall into this category.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:58 am)Sorry Ford, E-REV is far better than hybrid. But thanks for adding another plug-in to the mix.
Take the Prius for example. A small economy box vehicle with a small low power gas engine. And an electric motor used to assist the car at parking lot speeds. Both the parking lot electric motor and small gas engine will NORMALLY be pushed at near capacity. This low power vehicle is not fun to drive by any measure. And is made in Japan.
The E-REV always has 150 HP and high torque performance. The ICE (generator system) has no need to run at high RPM. Oil changes can be done annually. Leaky valve covers and blown head gaskets are history. Service station waiting lines are minimal. Pollution production is halved. Quiet operation is the norm. Made in USA.
I know the usual reply to these facts is: “I can drive my Prius for 3 years on the price difference”. True, but look at what you have given up to do so.
=D~
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (9:59 am)# 26 Todd Says:
Vehicle …………………… Gallons per year
Volt …………………….….. 37
Prius PHEV-10 ……………182
Prius ……..……………..… 228
Ford Escape PHEV-10 …. 268
30 MPG car ……………… 380
20 MPG car ……………… 570
This is so relative its not even funny. We dont know too much about the plug in prius, but if everythings true and we get 20miles before it uses gas then ill never (unless im on vacation) use gas. My total commute each day is right at 20 mile and its mostly city stop and go. So there is no difference for me between the two vehicles, except that the prius is about half the cost….
————————————————————-
The difference is that buying a Volt supports American industry and American jobs, while buying a Prius does not.
Not going out of your way to buy American-made products whenever at all possible, especially in this economy, is tantamount to slitting your own throat.
What’s the real cost of buying a Prius vs buying Volt? How many more American jobs would be lost? How many more people would be collecting unemployment? How many more people would have to cancel their cell phone service, cable TV service, or magazine subscription, etc, all of which would lead to more people losing their jobs?
It doesn’t matter how you rationalize it; not buying American-made whenever possible, whether you’re buying a car or toilet paper, always costs you far more than you pay at the register.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:08 am)#43 Shawn Marshall Says: “Good points from Ford for contrast to Voltec approach. Nancy is essentially saying the battery is big, heavy and expensive and is the core of Volt’s pricing problem…
A 30 mile all electric range is very appealing to me in a plug-in.”
————————————————————————————–
A PHEV-30 would have a very big battery. I don’t believe Ford said they will produce a PHEV-30.
From a design point of view, I believe that when you get a battery as big as a PHEV-30 would imply, you have enough power to go all electric. So you might as well just lose the power-split transmission, save the cost and weight of that, and go EREV.
Higher power induction electric motors are very small and light. For example, the Tesla motor is 250hp, weighs 70 pounds, and is about the size of a watermelon. The Volt’s 150hp motor is presumably even smaller and lighter than that. In addition, induction electric motors don’t use expensive permanent magnets, so after they ramp up in volume, they should be fairly cheap to build.
So it appears to me that most PHEVs will be limited to small amounts of electric boost, like a PHEV-10, while EREVs will be the design of choice for cars with larger batteries.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:08 am)#42, Dave G, “Actually, we do know a lot about the Prius PHEV from the 3rd party conversion kits.”
No, you don’t know much about Toyota’s Prius PHEV. You are familiar with Hymotion upgrades to the current Prius and Toyota’s concept testing, also based on the current Prius. Toyota’s PHEV will be based on the 2010 Prius, which can go highway speeds on electric power alone and Toyota has said that it is “PHEV-ready.” They can drop in a larger capacity battery pack as soon as they think the costs and benefits are right. Their fall fleet test (500 vehicles worldwide, 150 in the US) will be representative of their upcoming PHEV.
#5, NZDavid, “Also, Ford already invested in parallel hybrids, like Toyota, so this could just be spin justification to stay in that direction. If this is really a problem with electric cars, wouldn’t it also effect the Ford or any other true BEV???”
Or… maybe Ford is entirely right. After all, Toyota has also decided they like this approach. GM is being outvoted two to one. Maybe there are really good technical reasons for series/parallel hybrids.
Consider this, GM showed off a concept car, the public liked it and Lutz committed GM to building it and then went to lunch. Maybe GM’s own people have found really good reasons not to do this but it’s too late to define the project from the bottom up, it’s coming from the top down, gathering speed as it goes, and stepping in front of it is career suicide.
—
Ford is taking a proven system and extending and enhancing it. They already have a successful system on the road that they can sell at a fairly competitive price. Their new Fusion hybrid actually beat the Camry on the EPA cycle.
I see no reason to doubt Ford’s ability and expertise.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:09 am)Turbo diesel for the generator for fastest recharge. Problem solved. Duh.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:11 am)Alright, I’ll wade into another thread…hold on to something, it is going to be another bumpy ride.
——
Ford (in this particular instance), unlike GM plans/builds future cars with reason, logic and accountability.
They know how to build a parallel and they build them. For them, these products are a logical extension of what they know, it is a no brainer (and fairly easy/thrifty) to add a pack and give it a all electric range for ‘most’ of the packs charge. Also, the pure BEV is a fairly straight forward creature, without all the tricky R&D questions of the E-REV (and the added cost/weight of basically 2 seperate propulsion system that go witht he E-REV system), the cost of the BEV is the pack…and thats about it.
Ford is building ‘next generation’ cars with the intention to actually SELL them, LOTS of them, and at a price that is AFFORDABLE to the WIDEST range of customers, and make a PROFIT on them. GM can not make this statement.
GM has come up with the most ideal and most practical use of available technology for the average driver. It has all the benefit of a full EV, backed up with the extended range of the traditional ICE (and the confidence that goes with that)…but invariably, it is still a flawed product when it comes to the most important things, CAN YOU SELL IT? CAN YOU MAKE A PROFIT WHEN YOU DO? What is your ROI?
The answer to those questions is: NO, NO and ‘really bad’. The only way the Volt sells and is ’successful’ is with MASSIVE gov’t intervention, subsidies to GM to build it and huge rebates to the public to buy it.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:13 am)Diesel Electric trains have been around for 40+ years. A generator/electric vehicle is not a new concept. I don’t plan on using my Volt like a train, nor do I plan to use it in an SCCA event where multiple WOT’s (Wide Open Throttle) would be required, mountain or not. I am sure GM will have the ICE directly drive the electric motor when needed versus purely charging the battery for my driving needs, as in #23 Dave’s graph. Wouldn’t this negate the WOT issues if the ICE was running?
IMO, Nancy’s statement was made to confuse the unknowing public, and make an issue about something that’s a non-issue.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:15 am)#48 Daniel Says: “Not going out of your way to buy American-made products whenever at all possible, especially in this economy, is tantamount to slitting your own throat.”
————————————————————————————–
I’m more concerned about importing $700 billion of foreign oil a year from countries with totalitarian governments that hate the U.S., some of which are building atomic bombs, and others with terrorist groups that are trying to kill us. In the scheme of things, buying a 50 MPG Prius to save gas is better for our country than buying an American made SUV.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:17 am)Power fade is a possible problem but, as Cautious Fan mentions, worrying about the zebras is more distraction than solution. In this regard, it seems inconsistent to be worrying about power fade on the one hand and releasing a BEV with a very limited range on the other. Can we spell “range anxiety”?
Thanks to Dave G for continuing to pound at the advantages of E-REV. Here is a more thorough explanation which has been posted before:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/02/13/autobloggreen-qanda-peter-savagian-talks-about-studying-driver-be/
Basically GM has gotten it right. Whether that’s by luck or design or whatever, all the variables like battery technology and battery cost and driving habits, over which it had no control, have come together to make the basic 40 EV range a very workable proposition. It all looks so obvious … in retrospect.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:18 am)#50 charlie h Says: “Toyota’s PHEV will be based on the 2010 Prius, which can go highway speeds on electric power alone and Toyota has said that it is “PHEV-ready.”
————————————————————————————–
I believe the 2010 Prius will top out at 62 MPH in all-electric mode.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:21 am)personally PHEV’s are commuter cars or neighborhood vehicles. above 42-47 MPH you need the ice.
In my daily commute, I need to hitt 100kmh for limit and closer to 120 to keep up for about 35km.
The volt fits me better.
The PHEV for the wife to run to schools, soccer and get groceries would work.
Depends on needs I guess.
Either way my solar, and wind generator and next (if I can get it a free watt) will cover me nicely whatever I get…
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:22 am)Many, many great posts on this thread – very well thought out.
I agree with the poster that Ford did Toyota’s math awhile back, committed to a blended hybrid, which Toyota is about to introduce with the plug-in Prius, and is now just spinning their choices.
GM’s Volt aims for the future, when battery costs have been significantly reduced, and/or other tech come online, to increase range / reduce volum and cost. Also, it becomes an excellent platform into which to place fuel cells, as they, and their fuel, are cost reduced / efficiency increased.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:23 am)The Volt way is the best.
The Ford way is ok and will cost less.
Success to both of them ! We can pay our money and take our choice.
Just get ‘em on the road.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:25 am)Just shows the different ways the two companies approach matters. What is right for GM is not right for Ford. Doesn’t make Ford’s decision less correct, just different. I think they will have a very viable program and will provide value to their customers. GM’s Voltech drive train is a much larger gamble, but if successful, could place much more value into the customer’s hands. I can’t wait to see who is correct. I am pulling for both companies to be successful. That way we all are winners. Go, Go GM and Ford.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:29 am)Cris A: No, The Volt always runs on Electric, the ICE is simply an electric generator & never directly powers the wheels.
From the Ford Rep in the Above article :
“….And as the energy dentistry increases all we’re doing is giving greater electric range to our consumers…..”
Does This mean the front grill will have Teeth?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:31 am)Dave G–
I’m confused by your gallons used comparison. There is no baseline of miles per day. You’ve got the Volt using 37 gallons a year. If that is so, then obviously you have it going more than 40 miles per day. If that is true, the 20 MPG car usage of 570 gallons is off, because that amounts to only 31.23 miles per day driven. At 40 miles per day, the 20 MPG car would use 730 gallons.
What am I not getting?
Thanks.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:31 am)#52 statik Says: “GM has come up with the most ideal and most practical use of available technology … but invariably, it is still a flawed product when it comes to the most important things, CAN YOU SELL IT? CAN YOU MAKE A PROFIT WHEN YOU DO? What is your ROI? The answer to those questions is: NO, NO and ‘really bad’.”
————————————————————————————–
Why do you think the Volt will cost so much to build in volume? Once mass production kicks in, what parts of the Volt are intrinsically expensive.
When you make batteries for cell phones and laptops, you can afford a certain amount of overhead. When you scale that up to cars, it’s a whole new ballgame. In other words, current battery prices reflect current battery markets, not cars.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:31 am)#3 RB
“Thoughtful comments from Ford that may prove to be correct. I am impressed by their serious evaluation of alternatives. Perhaps the conclusion is that the Volt may be great for some drivers but poorly suited for others, in other places, a bit more of a niche car than we have appreciated.”
——————————–
Of course, another way to look at it is that they may be saying all of this as a way of justifying their decision to go the way they are going and not develop a competing drive train to the Volt’s. You just never know for sure. They have and will spend much money on their platform and they do not want to be second guessed before the final results are in.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:40 am)#62 Detfan Says: “I’m confused by your gallons used comparison. There is no baseline of miles per day… What am I not getting?”
————————————————————————————–
My spreadsheet assumes the following typical yearly driving pattern:
• 30 days at 8 miles per day
• 50 days at 16 miles per day
• 240 days at 30 miles per day
• 30 days at 60 miles per day
• 3 days at 450 miles per day
The spreadsheet further assumes 1 charge per day (overnight charging only).
I realize that this typical yearly pattern doesn’t fit everyone, but I needed some sort of pattern as a baseline to compare things.
You can modify the spreadsheet to fit your yearly driving pattern here:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/Plugin_mileage.xls
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:49 am)#52 statik Says: GM has come up with the most ideal and most practical use of available technology for the average driver. It has all the benefit of a full EV, backed up with the extended range of the traditional ICE (and the confidence that goes with that)…but invariably, it is still a flawed product when it comes to the most important things, CAN YOU SELL IT? CAN YOU MAKE A PROFIT WHEN YOU DO? What is your ROI?
CAN YOU SELL IT? – They will sell everyone they make. Do you honestly think they will not sell Volts ?
CAN YOU MAKE A PROFIT WHEN YOU DO?-Maybe not initially, but as they share the platform with other models and the cost of the technology comes down…YES! You don’t think the Japanese, Germans and Koreans subsidize their auto industries, think again.
What is your ROI? – Having a huge head start on electric powered vehicles and the associated software to run the package and putting people to work in new tech jobs that will be created. The generator is a transitional piece that will eventually disappear as the technology evolves and pure EV takes over. GM will be at the forefront of the next gen auto and have an advantage over the competition. So when the cost per unit comes in line with the competition it will be a no brainer for the consumer.
Are you a banker, because if you want to talk about subsidies at least you will get something for your tax dollar beside the vapor from trading paper and the problems it has produced?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:50 am)Kudos to Ford, I think this is the way to go. We dont need range extenders! Gas cars don’t have range extenders, when you run out you run out. Just build us a battery electric car.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:55 am)1. It’s called product differentiation (it’s a competition, not a war).
@DetFan
Repeat from prior comment, sorry:
2. MPG is an obsolete metric, meaningless for directly comparing vehicle efficiency, especially for anything that uses electric drive. The correct (DOE/EPA, since the late 1980s) metric for direct comparion of vehicle efficiency is number of kilowatt hours per 100 miles ( # kWh / 100 miles), the smaller the number the more efficient the vehicle. GM claims the Volt will use about 33 kWh / 100 miles (dubious as that’s the same as the 2008 v.1 Tesla Roadster) unless there really are large (ca. 8%) annual improvements in battery technology and series plug in hybrids really are 50% more efficient than parallel plug in hybrids (based on real world aftermarket lithium plug in Prius results of about 50 kWh /100 miles (CR)). My estimate is that the Volt is claimed to be 1.5 times more efficient than a current aftermarket lithium plug in Prius. Against the 2010 more aerodynamic plug in Prius with incremental battery improvement, anybody’s guess right now. It’s closer than you think, Van and Dave G, but I agree that the Volt series hybrid is a leapfrog past Prius technology, just as the Prius full parallel beats current weak Honda and GM parallel (not the 2-mode) hybrid tech.
(new material)
The first gen Ford full parallel hybrids and plug in parallel hybrids will be Prius chasers in efficiency, using pretty much the same tech and methods, but will be cheaper (less dependence on battery and electric drive) and WAY more acceptable to general buying public on standard looks and small price premium. While less efficient than the Honda Insight, the results will have fuller hybrid tech than current weak Honda and GM offerings. As far as robust market penetration goes, Ford appears to have a great plan. This is GOOD NEWS for GM, as the mainstream acceptability of the new Ford (DOMESTIC) Fusion full hybrid and future plug in parallel offerings will increase GM Chevy Volt acceptability and awareness. Ultimately, series hybrid will dominate for quite some time (decades to centuries?), until some better electric drive configuration does.
What we’re seeing here is each company positioning themselves a little differently, with little leapfroggings of each other here and there in a competitive, yet very complementary and supportive way. Good job, automakers, all. You are reawakening my pride in the whole sector.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (10:59 am)I’m actually quite impressed with Ford’s strategy. They are leveraging their existing technology to make a low-cost plug-in hybrid. The primary criticism of the Volt is “death by price-point”, and it is certainly a valid point given the $40k-ish year-one price. Certainly the price will come down over time as the battery becomes cheaper & higer performing, but Ford is pursuing full BEV (non-hybrid) vehicles at the same time as S/P Hybrids which will benefit here as well. it is a legitimate 2-tiered strategy: low-cost S/P hybrids in the near term moving to full BEV’s longer term.
–DRM.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:02 am)The Voltec idea isn’t new. GM Engineers used a Motorcycle engine to charge the EV1. And it worked back then. The Volt will work and I will Love driving past all those Gas Stations.
NPNS =D~~
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:06 am)Porsche designed a hybrid with electric motors in the wheels over 100 years ago. I don’t think GM is tying Ford in knots with patents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid
Locomotives use the electric motors in the wheels for two reasons: to apply high torque to the wheels in a very controlled manner so as to avoid wheel slip and to avoid gear boxes which are fragile when dealing with so much torque.
Paying for both electric motor and ICE will be more expensive than just an electric motor. If there are two, If they are in parallel, they can be smaller and less expensive.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:07 am)#31 Dave G Says:
February 6th, 2009 at 9:22 am
#16 Schmeltz Says: “I am thinking the Ford Escape PHEV will be a good product, one that makes great strides in fuel efficiency…”
—————
#17 k-dawg Says: “I think its a good thing that Ford is producing something with a battery & a plug.”
======================================================
I disagree. Look at the figures:
Vehicle …………………… Gallons per year
Volt …………………….….. 37
Prius PHEV-10 ……………182
Prius HEV ..…………….… 228
Ford Escape PHEV-10 …. 268
Ford Escape HEV ………. 335
20 MPG car ……………… 570
PHEVs with only 10 miles of electric boost offer far too little advantage over their regular HEV counterparts. In order to be convenient, plugging in has to eliminate most trips to the gas station. A PHEV-10 won’t do this. An EREV-40 will.
Within the next 5 years, PHEV-10s will only convince people that plugging in is not worth the hassle, so I think they will actually hurt the rollout of plug-ins.
===========================
Where do you get 10 miles AER? I see that no where from Ford. I think you are making an assumption. I have seen you post about convenience of plugging in before. I don’t think i agree. I think if you have lots of places to plug in, its not a big deal, or even if you just plug in at home, you are still getting miles of electricity gas free. I think there is definately a place for this vehicle in the market, esp when it will affordable to most of the public, and I dont think it hurts the plug-in image.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:10 am)The public will be fortunate to have a choice between HEVs and PHEVs. PHEVs save more gas, but cost quite a bit more to buy.
At $2-4/gallon, the economics are all in favor of the less expensive HEVs, so the PHEVs will be niche products bought by those determined to reduce their own carbon footprint or petroleum usage, even at a personal financial sacrifice.
At $6-10/gallon, the economics are in favor of the PHEVs, so the HEVs will be niche products aimed at people lacking in financial resources, who cannot afford to buy a more expensive car that saves them money over its lifetime.
Of course, there are no mass produced PHEVs on the market now, so if the OEMs can get the PHEV cost premium down to $3-4k, then the PHEV becomes the more economical choice even at lower gas prices.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:16 am)I would not go so far as to say, as others have done today, that Ford and Toyota will be left behind when the electrification of the automobile occurs. That is one reason both companies are developing a fully electric car (BEV). They are banking their gamble with their gas/hybrid vehicles with the electric vehicle development. If the Volt is a huge success and people don’t want what Ford and Toyota are trying to offer them, they will be able to provide a reasonable substitute instead. The Volt will not be a huge success unless and until the battery is made much more cheaper and possibly more powerful and smaller. The final verdict on the Volt and Ford’s and Toyota’s vehicles are many years away. Plenty of time for them to switch sides, if necessary.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:17 am)BTW…I just wanted to say that this is a great article Lyle.
You got Ms. Gioia to open up and give some really conscientious answers to your questions. I wish all execs put this much thought and effort into their responses.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:17 am)That is Good. Less competition
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:19 am)#67 Mark J
“Kudos to Ford, I think this is the way to go. We dont need range extenders! Gas cars don’t have range extenders, when you run out you run out. Just build us a battery electric car”
ummmm HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Gas cars do not need range extenders because you can go to a gas station and “recharge” in about 5 minutes…
if I gave you an BEV with a 400 mile range, and a recharge time of 6 hours, would you drive cross country…I don’t think so.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:20 am)As this point, the Volt’s technology is expensive compared to the current hybrid and upcoming plug-in hybrid technology. Most of the cost is in the battery.
When the first hybrid cars came out on the market for people to buy, many people said that the technology was needlessly expensive, complicated, and full of compromises for what you get. When the cost of high capacity batteries will eventually fall through the floor (something like EEStor?), GM will have a leg-up on its competition with a pure electric drivetrain that’s been refined and perfected over many years.
There is something feel-good (sort of what hybrid’s cachet is now) about cruising around in pure silence using pure electricity, and if marketed right, cars like the Volt will be viewed by the tree-hugging public as feel-goodmobiles.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:21 am)#14 john1701a Says: “Within the next decade, what do you think the goal should be?”
————————————————————————————–
By 2019, I believe we can eliminate most (more than 1/2) of our current foreign oil imports, get 5-10 million plug-ins on the road, and get bio-fuels up to 20% of our liquid fuel supply.
If you look at Obama’s plan:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/factsheet_energy_speech_080308.pdf
• By 2015, Put 1 million Plug‐In Hybrid cars on the road.
• By 2018, save more oil than we currently import from the Middle East and Venezuela combined
and then extrapolate that out to 2019, it’s not that far off.
For me, reducing foreign oil dependancy is the prime objective, mostly because everyone can agree on this. Reducing foreign oil:
• decreases pollution and CO2 emmissions
• improves the economy
• decreases funding for terrorist organizations that are trying to kill us
• decreases the influence of countries with political and religious systems that differ from ours
So no matter what your political persuation, reducing our foreign oil dependancy is very important. In fact, there is a political organization of conservatives, liberals, religious leaders, environmentalists, national security experts, and farmers – all pushing together to reduce foreign oil dependancy. Their solution relies on a combination of Flexible Fuel Vehicles and Plug-In Hybrids:
http://www.setamericafree.org/solution.html
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:29 am)Toyota’s PHEV will be based on the 2010 Prius, which can go highway speeds on electric power alone and Toyota has said that it is “PHEV-ready.”
______________________________
The electric motor/generator changes clearly confirm that…
MG2 size kW has been increased from 50 to 60.
MG1 maximum RPM has been increased from 10,000 to 13,500.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:30 am)How many pepole live or drive on a 8000 ft mountain? A heck of a lot less than live on the east and west coast and commute to work on almost level highway every day. If you live in Colorado on a mountain don’t buy the Volt.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:31 am)Dr. Dennis:
I want to thank you, once again, for all of your efforts in producing these posts for the faithful bloggers to chew over every single day. Amazing.
Today is great, with intense debate over the Ford vs. GM approach, and almost none of the mind numbing political back and forth of yesterday. Thanks bloggers.
I realy can’t see where the Ford version is going to be that much cheaper than the Volt. It’s all going to come down to strategic pricing for the early adopters anyway, so maybe just a little.
If Ford’s “plug-in-hybrid” is going to be based on the Escape, I’m not interested. No SUVs or “crossovers” for me. Too big, too heavy, and aerodynamics of a brick. Better the Volt, in which GM has taken their best shot at optimizing the package for best AER and mileage. It will make a lot stronger statement than an Escape.
But that’s jut me. As many have said, bring it on Ford, and let the market decide. Most likely, there is plenty of room for everybody.
#48 Daniel:
I agree, wholeheartedly.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:31 am)I believe Ford can make a reasonable vehicle with this technology. Some observations:
“what we’ve looked at because of the battery costs and the size of the battery, and the weight of the battery, and the fact that battery technology is going to continue to evolve, we believe that the blended hybrid is a better solution.”
Interpretation: We don’t know a lot about large battery packs, and feel they will be expensive, so we will take the less expensive route and wait for GM and/or others to bring down the cost of batteries.
—————————————–
Even though batteries will evolve, so will everything else. Someone will still need to take new battery technology, test it, and make it suitable for automotive applications. Just like GM has done. So in other words, they are only avoiding the inevitable if they want to make reliable EV’s.
“So if you’re in Colorado and you’re going up a steep grade for a very long time, and then you suddenly need to wide-open throttle around something, your state of charge of battery may be at a level even with the engine running full that to recharge that battery and maintain the highway speed and responsiveness you have a power fade issue. We also found if you wide-open-off, wide-open-off, that the 4th or 5th time into a wide open throttle, again because that engine can’t run fast enough and the chemistry of the battery can’t charge fast enough you may end up with limited power.”
Sounds to me like Nancy reads this website. This actually could be a problem. The Volt’s electric motor is rated at 111 kW, while the ICE-generator only produces 53 kW. If you do a long climb with a low battery pack to begin with, or spend your time doing drag races, sooner or later the battery pack will have nothing left to give, and you will only be able to get 53 KW into your 111 kW electric motor.
Is this a real problem? As others have mentioned, for a select few, yes, for the vast majority, no.
And the Ford Escape Hybrid is rated 34/31 with a 153 HP 4 cyl. How would this compare going up Pike’s Peak to the Vue 2-mode rated 28/31 with a 255 HP 6 cyl?
E-REV or blended, I guess it all comes down to your needs (and desires) in a vehicle.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:32 am)Sorry, I don’t get it. The Tesla has 0-60 of 3.9 seconds. So why is there a problem with acceleration from batteries alone?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:38 am)#77 Mitch Says: “Gas cars do not need range extenders because you can go to a gas station and “recharge” in about 5 minutes…”
————————————————————————————–
Yes.
And I’ll go one further. Gas stations are EVERYWHERE. Even in the most remote places of the U.S., you will find gas stations. It took over 50 years for gas stations to fully make their way into rural and remote locations. Changes to remote infrastructure take huge amounts of time.
So for the next 50 years, if you want to be able to go anywhere in the U.S., you’ll need a car that runs on gas. This is why the Volt is perfect for the foreseeable future – it runs on electricity, gas, or E85. You can go anywhere with it. I think that’s a big deal for most people.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:38 am)#54
Dave G Says:
#48 Daniel Says: “Not going out of your way to buy American-made products whenever at all possible, especially in this economy, is tantamount to slitting your own throat.”
————————————————————————————–
I’m more concerned about importing $700 billion of foreign oil a year from countries with totalitarian governments that hate the U.S., some of which are building atomic bombs, and others with terrorist groups that are trying to kill us. In the scheme of things, buying a 50 MPG Prius to save gas is better for our country than buying an American made SUV.
————————————————————————————–
GM and Ford manufacture an increasingly wide range of practical hybrid vehices from which you can choose. They also manufacture high-milage non-hybrid small cars.
Buying a 37 MPG Cobalt or 35 MPG Focus is far better for our country than any Prius. Buying a GM or Ford hybrid vehicle is even better, but either way buying American pumps cash into GM’s and Ford’s efforts to build more advanced practical hybrids and more fuel-efficient convential vehicles.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:50 am)Keep in mind that, although for is taking their path tword Hybrid/electrics …
Many of their points will be moot, because remember, within about 1 year, GM will announce their plans & details on the following 2 current development projects:
A) – Full dual mode hybrid sedan(s). Compared to Prius, these will be similar or better milage, but “real” 5 & 6 passenger cars with performance . Plug in & non plug in models.
B) – The GM “series II” BAS mild hybrid system is just about ready to go.
They have already hinted that, with a lighter lithium battery, & a more powerful Elect motor, they will be all electric below about 20mph, & these may also achieve near current Prius milage, & in low cost vehicles like the Malibu. The system is also said to be able to add on to almost any engine combo, boosting output & reducing fuel consumption.
Remember, by time you can actually buy a Volt, which is soon, GM will probably be THE leader in Electrics & Hybrids, offering more & varied models than other mfgrs.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:54 am)#82 Noel Park said:
“I realy can’t see where the Ford version is going to be that much cheaper than the Volt.”
That is an excellent point. Some here have criticized the “GM approach” here with the Volt in that it will be too expensive and won’t sell. Don’t kid yourselves folks—a Plug-in Escape Hybrid is definitely NOT going to be a bargain either that will just magically fly off the shelves. Any and all new tech things such as hybrids or electrics are going to be expensive–no secret there. I think Ford has a good approach, but not a great approach. The Volt is a much more elegant answer to the All-Electric car conundrum, and the better path for most people’s situations. Most have figured the Volt to be in the $40,000 range. Now, if a PHEV Escape is guessed at say $35,000 (I think that’s a reasonable estimate), are you that far behind the Volt in reality? Not really–they’re both expensive, they’ll both probably be relatively low volume, and they’ll both be money losers for the first few years. Someone needs to explain to me how these facts make the PHEV Escape or even the PHEV Prius such a far more superior alternative to the Volt?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:59 am)By 2019, I believe we can eliminate most (more than 1/2) of our current foreign oil imports, get 5-10 million plug-ins on the road, and get bio-fuels up to 20% of our liquid fuel supply.
______________________________
That doesn’t actually answer the annual production goal question.
There 14,000,000 new vehicles sold here per year.
How many will there be of each type?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (11:59 am)I am sorry, but we all live in a “dream world” when it comes to making decisions on which vehicle is superior. Ford and Toyota will market their hybrid/gas vehicles as though they are the only vehicles standing between you and the big, bad oil cartel. Most people who buy new cars today do not really make an intelligent decision and evaluation of competing brands. No, they just drive down to their local Ford, Chevy, Toyota or Honda dealer (to name but a few) and buy from the same company that they believe makes the best cars in the world. We are convinced of the superiority of the brand we buy because we have always bought them.
What I am saying is that many, many buyers will be “sold” by the auto advertising before they even get into their vehicle to go to the dealer’s lot to buy a new car. Educating the masses is going to be a very difficult job for GM. I know plenty of people who would NEVER buy a GM vehicle simply because they believe in the superiority of their current brand. People are just biased when it comes to many decisions they have to make. It is bred into them from childhood and passed on from generation to generation. I find myself fighting this all the time from my own subconscious. IMO.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:04 pm)All this speculation could be laid to rest if GM would allow some independent drivers to drive the Volt from Bakersfield to LA.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:12 pm)Hey at least they are all talking about using more electricity to power our cars…I like it.
This is why they make both chocolate AND vanilla milkshakes…
of course, only time will tell who ends up drinking who’s milkshake…
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:13 pm)Only 662 Day’s to go………….
That is if we give GM until Nov 30th 2010.
No Pressure GM.
So ‘Idiots’ stop saying just sell me 1 then GM..
662 Day’s to go…
662
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:13 pm)#72 k-dawg Says: “Where do you get 10 miles AER? I see that no where from Ford. I think you are making an assumption.”
————————————————————————————–
Yes. Since Ford didn’t really specify the PHEV range, I’m assuming the Escape will have range similar to other announced PHEVs.
To have significantly more range, the battery pack ends up being quite large, which would probably change the body and or chassis to accommodate it, or perhaps cut into the interior space, none of which are good options for an existing car design.
By contrast, a car maker can easily change a full hybrid to a PHEV-10 by swapping the existing NiMH pack for a new Li/Ion pack of the same size, which doubles the energy storage.
So this is why I’m assuming the plug-in version of the Ford Escape will be something close to a PHEV-10.
If Ford announces some new plug-in car design, with a new chassis or body style to accommodate a larger battery, then I would assume a larger PHEV boost range.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:22 pm)#82 Noel Park,
“Someone needs to explain to me how these facts make the PHEV Escape or even the PHEV Prius such a far more superior alternative to the Volt?”
_____________________________________________________
Upgradable. Expandable.
A “regular” and much cheaper hybrid from ford or Toyota is now upgradeable to a plug in hybrid. If the OEM’s start offering plug-in upgrade options for their hybrids, this will be a big selling point for a more affordable car.
Cars are becoming more like computers, and, like computers, I think expandable and upgradable are going to become key sales words in the automotive industry.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:25 pm)#86 Daniel – When the US makes a 50 MPG car, I’ll buy one.
35 MPG? 37 MPG? I guess it’s sort of impressive – for the big 3, maybe. Toyota has had a 50 MPG car for 10 years, and all Ford and GM did was fiddle around and watch Rome burn while Toyota sold, sold, sold. You would think that they would buy one, reverse-engineer it, and rebadge it as their own, but noooooo. They sold SUV’s – right up to 2008. I give the big 3 a B- for catching up, but minus several million for foresight. Idiots!
BTW, I’m waiting to test drive a Honda Insight. Good mileage, nice tech, priced right, uses regular gas, and has Honda legendary reliability. The big 3 need not complain to me about market forces – they need to make a better (+50 MPG) product. Competition – that’s what America is about.
———————————————————–
GM – would you kindly put the Volt in the showrooms soon? I need a new car NOW, not in 23 months – and the Volt gets a lot more than 50 MPG. Thank you.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:34 pm)@ Gary:
Ha! What I love about my 100% wind powered pure BEV is the increasingly intense sound the motor makes and the huge instant torque and off the line acceleration I feel as I beat muscle cars that cost five to twenty times more, from stop signs and red lights. That feels real good.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:38 pm)#63 Dave G said:
Why do you think the Volt will cost so much to build in volume? Once mass production kicks in, what parts of the Volt are intrinsically expensive.
#66 jackflash said:
GM will be at the forefront of the next gen auto and have an advantage over the competition. So when the cost per unit comes in line with the competition it will be a no brainer for the consumer.
=====================
I think there is some confusion here. GM does not have any proprietary technology or knowledge that allows for their exclusive benefit of scale. The only thing stopping other car companies from doing the same thing as GM, is that they think it is is a bad idea.
Everybody and their dog can make a E-REV. Little Fisker has one (in production), Tesla has a prototype ready to roll and just wants their gov’t check (like GMs) to put it in production. The lamest of all Detroit auto, Chrysler seems to be able to spit out working E-REV prototypes in their sleep…and are bringing one to market in the most magical of years, 2010. (a date, I don’t believe them on either)
If Toyota, Honda, Subaru, whoever wanted in this market they could be in it virtually overnight…even if a ‘non-car’ company wanted in this business (who knows why), they could be in ‘GM’s segment’ almost instantly, heck anyone could buy the entire Chrysler E-REV set-up for a $1.09 and be a player.
Worse still, if a real company like GE, who can also make batteries, and has a billion engineers on staff ever decided to get involved and put REAL money behind it, they would have GM’s lunch.
The tech/future here is not in the platform…it is the battery. The company that can both produce the battery, and for the lowest cost per kW is going to be the eventual winner/leader…and GM has decided to not get involved in this aspect of the EV at all.
Compounding GM’s ‘future problems’ to compete against its peers (even with the ‘benefits of scale’), will be the fact they will also have to make minimum payments on about 200 billion dollars. /that adds a few bucks per car
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:42 pm)@ Grump
MPG is a useless metric for comparison of anything with electric drive. Please use # kWh / 100 miles, the DOE/EPA standard.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:45 pm)Nothing to say . . . just wanted to post at the century mark.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (12:57 pm)#89 john1701a Says: “There 14,000,000 new vehicles sold here per year. How many will there be of each type?”
————————————————————————————–
Most of this depends on predicting prices 10 years out. My crystal balls aren’t better than anyone else’s, but if I had to guess, I would say oil prices will go up by a factor of 3 or 4, and battery prices will be 1/3 of what they are today. I say this because:
1) World oil has peaked, and world demand is rising.
2) Nobody has mass produced big Li/Ion battery packs before. Today, Li/Ion is only mass produced for small expensive devices, like cell phones, laptops, and digital cameras. So there has been no hard pressure really to lower Li/Ion prices until now. Once manufacturing engineers go to work on this problem, I bet we’ll see Li/Ion prices decline rapidly. I think we’ll also see ways of recycling worn out Li/Ion batteries, so Lithium supply will not be a big issue.
Then it comes down to timing. Regular HEVs will be the first wave, no doubt on that. But if Li/Ion prices come down fast, then EREVs should surpass HEV sales fairly quickly, provided that car makers have the right products. If it happens as quickly as I’m thinking, I would guess that of the 14 million cars sold in 2019, perhaps 5 million would be EREVs, and 3 million would be HEVs. PHEVs and BEVs will sold in much smaller numbers. There will also be a trend towards more fuel efficient regular gas engine vehicles and away from SUVs. I think sport wagons and micro-vans will become popular.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:05 pm)umm,talking microprocessors after 8085, 8086 came first ,was not a hit, then came 8088 and then 8088 became hit and 8086 also. because people understood and like the 16 bit computing power. Volt is like 8088, Its a Bridge for people from ICE to EV. I am sure some nano-technology capacitors will come up to replace the battery which will be like go plug-in for 2 minutes – full charged and can drive a 500 miles with it.
S ford is right, GM is also right. EVs are future – ford is correct. but the variables are miles per charge,charging time and cost.
GM is correct because they reduce cost on battery and designed an EV which take power from traditional technology where people are comfortable. This is a bridge car.Only thing i dont agree is the 1.4 L Ice engine, I think an 800 cc engine should do the work and it will be more efficient – ask suzuki – they have a lot 800cc engines.
The key player is Battery technology : GM should be prepared to take out the ICE and generator part when a 500 mile drive on single change in 2 minutes battery/capacitor is available. Then Volu -( i changed t with next u for ultra capacitor) will be less expensive – may be 10-15 k car and no maintenance. Its like your fan or mixer.
Bridge Loans can make only Bridge Cars
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:09 pm)#96 The Grump Says:
#86 Daniel – When the US makes a 50 MPG car, I’ll buy one.
————————————————————————————–
I somewhat doubt the veracity of that statement; but hey, whatever floats your boat.
#96 The Grump Says:
Competition – that’s what America is about.
————————————————————————————–
Remember that when your job, or that of a family member or a friend gets outsourced to India because the labor is so much cheaper, or because cut-rate imports that aren’t equal in quality but are much cheaper in price force layoffs, or, if you run your own company, force you out of business.
I wouldn’t wish it on anyone; but hey, it’s competition, right?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:11 pm)Black Gold is trading at $39.46/barrel as of 12:25pm today.
Nothing can kill the EV faster than cheap oil.
Even if the Volt sold 5 MILLION copies on November 1, 2010 we would still be totally dependent of OIL ! (aka Black Gold, Texas Tea)
Oil is not going away. Deal with It.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:13 pm)#95 carcus1 Says: “A “regular” and much cheaper hybrid from ford or Toyota is now upgradeable to a plug in hybrid. If the OEM’s start offering plug-in upgrade options for their hybrids, this will be a big selling point for a more affordable car.”
————————————————————————————–
Initially, people will think as you do, and just look at the fact that it has a plug as being the significant part. But soon after that, people will realize that it’s not the plug, but the electric range that makes the difference.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:17 pm)#81 Rockyroad says,
How many pepole live or drive on a 8000 ft mountain? A heck of a lot less than live on the east and west coast and commute to work on almost level highway every day. If you live in Colorado on a mountain don’t buy the Volt.
—————
Agreed. I think it is a non issue.
Just like for me with my 101 mile commute. The Volt is not made for me either. But as time goes on, things will get better.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:19 pm)Tony is still smiling…
http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/volt_in_red.jpg
=D~
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:25 pm)#104 Texas Tea Says: “Oil is not going away. Deal with It.”
————————————————————————————–
It’s not about making oil go away, it’s about breaking oil’s monopoly.
Jim Woolsey, Former CIA Director and leader of http://www.setamericafree.org, makes a great analogy in his speeches. Here are his words:
“Salt was the only way to preserve meat until the very late 1800’s. It had a monopoly. Believe it or not, countries went to war over salt mines. If you had a salt mine, you could dominate your neighbor. It was a very big deal.
“Today – salt on the table out there. Do you know where it came from? Are we salt independent? Do you care? Does anybody care, unless they’re in the salt business? Of course not. It’s a useful commodity that does some things, and we buy and sell it in international commerce. Nobody dominates their neighbor anymore because they have a salt mine.
“We need to do that to oil. And we can do it with electricity the way electricity affected salt monopolies in the late 1800’s. We can, we should, and we must, as a major national priority, destroy oil’s monopoly. Absolutely, totally, completely, destroy oil’s monopoly.”
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:27 pm)#52 Statik says “Ford (in this particular instance), unlike GM plans/builds future cars with reason, logic and accountability.”
I fear you’re letting your inner stock picker take control. Moreover, you’re speaking like an accountant not someone in new product development. GM has made a brilliant choice in focusing on the next technology rather than what is available at the moment. Additionally, GM has better PHEV technology than Ford. No question about that. GM has also deployed that technology in a logical way — putting it in larger vehicles like the Escalade and the Silverado where it makes sense, not in small vehicles like the Fusion where it doesn’t.
The fact that this logical deployment has been a flop is really a comment on how much sense PHEV technology makes. IOW not much. It costs too much for the limited return in gas savings. If you question that, just check out the failure of the of the hybrid Camry and Civic. Unless there is a greed badge consumers simply won’t pay that much extra for so little.
Ford is not now and will not over the next ten years be a player in the electrification of transportation. Hopefully it will make money and sell vehicles. But it is not going to play a significant role in electrifying transportation. And it’s PHEV offerings will be greenwashing losers.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:35 pm)Imagine a continuum, a scale: draw it in your mind (since we can’t post images here).
On the left, is probably the Hummer. On the right, a BEV. Somewhere in the middle, most of us have placed the Volt.
As we move from the left side to the right, we come from the tanks down through mid-size to the little cars like Fit and Yaris, to the assist hybrids, the full hybrids, the plug-in hybrids, the Volt and finally the BEV.
I think if we could look 5 – 10 years ahead, most of us would be shocked (yes, I meant to do that) by the amount of space there actually is on that scale for all sorts of vehicle types.
I happen to think there is room between the EREV and BEV for a car which uses a much smaller engine to stretch the battery-only range while powering accessories. We may see BEV types extended out in terms of range/cost/size/battery chemistry classes.
Many of you know that there is now such a thing as a hybrid locomotive: it would have been impossible to do using Lithium Ion; there’s just not enough power/energy for the cost: it uses ZEBRA (Sodium Nickel Chloride) batteries instead. In case you are wondering, these batteries have already made it into a few full-size city busses.
When it comes to battery chemistry for vehicles, there could well be a race in from the edges: Teeny tiny laptop batteries on the small end moving up in size to power some pretty small vehicles, batteries on the huge end moving down in size to power full-size vehicles.
It could well be a toss-up to predict who will win out in the mid-size vehicle range for variations of these chemistries (provided all the problems for both at this size can be solved). When that happens, or when something like EEStor turns out to be real, ICE-only cars will simply vanish off the scale: but the scale itself won’t be going anywhere.
Even when all road vehicles are electric drive, there will still be a spread of types based on AER, how and when electricity is loaded into them (it it is), how electricity is generated on-board (in those cases where it is), and in what quantity each source is provided.
Interesting times ahead.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:35 pm)#52 Statik
Once again you have nailed it with your analysis. It is not what we really want to hear, but I must agree with you on most if not all points. GM certainly has their job cut out for them. The only way for the Volt to be highly successful is for fuel cost to soar tremendously (which is possible) and/or for battery cost to plummet. One other way is for the efficiency of the battery to be vastly improved which could give the Volt much increased all electric mileage (possible, but less likely anytime soon). Doom and gloom is not here yet for the Volt and many things will work in GM’s favor, but not as soon as GM needs it to. GM needs to be working on a full BEV program as well as vastly improving their two-mode hybrid system and introducing it to the Cruze, Malibu and Impala. That would give them a more viable line-up if, and this is a big if, they can cut the cost of the two-mode hybrid while increasing its mileage gain. Big ifs for any company to overcome. I don’t see GM concentrating on either the two-mode for the sedans or the BEV program. Maybe they are and they are not telling anyone. While Ford and Toyota suck up all the good hybrid news and show their green colors, GM is working on the Volt and telling very little to make people have great faith in their ability to pull this off. I’m just hoping they can do it and Ford can do their thing, too. The more choices the better. And choice is what it is about when it comes time to make a purchase. Or is it?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:41 pm)As Dan Petit #35 says…
Using GPS you can supplement the Volt’s software prediction algorithms. Thus maximizing range and minimizing power fade. The GPS can know if there are hills nearby, it even knows the speed limit of nearby roads. If there is only flat terrain and 30 and 40 mph roads within 2 mile radius, you are unlikely to need to accelerate from 0 to 80 mph within the next 2 miles, and thus can bias towards range rather than power.
With the right software you can take it further, like, if you are on a route that the computer knows that you travel 4 out out of 7 days, and it knows that on that route there are no hills it can bias towards range. Indeed someone at GM has talked about it knowing the distance to “home” — easy to automatically identify as a any frequent charging location.
There is so much that you can do with computer algorithms to squeeze a little more range and/or reserve performance out of it, that until you have written and tested such a system it is ill informed to say that E-REV is not as good.
Also many of these computer algorithms can be bolt-on, they can be developed up to later stages of Volt development, until the final testing freeze.
If Dan and I have both thought about this, then I’m sure engineers at GM have. The only thing that would likely hold them back is a KISS principle and management’s ability to manage additional software modules.
The aim is to not have a Volt that performs (100% power) for 100% of the time (although it should be reliable 100% of the time). The aim is 80% of driving being gas free, possibly more since the demographic that buys the Volt may have driving habits with shorter than average daily drives. Similarly we can live with 80% of the power available 80% of the time!
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:43 pm)I can forsee a time in the next 5 to 10 years where a family in the suburbs (not metro areas) will have an HEV SUV like the Tahoe Hybrid and an E-REV like the Volt.
The Tahoe Hybrid gives you the ability to transport 8 passengers, has 4WD for snow, boat launch, etc., and can tow utility trailers or carry 4×8 sheets of plywood in the back. Very versatile vehicle with excellent ride qualilty. With Li-Ion batteries, improved aero, and an updated engine (HCCI, smaller displacement, etc.), this vehicle may well get a 25/28 EPA rating.
The second family vehicle is the Volt, Converj, or similar. This is your insurance policy. At $2 to $3 per gallon, the Tahoe is fine and used quite frequently. But if oil prices go whacky again, the E-REV becomes the high use vehicle, and the Tahoe is used only when necessary.
This gives people the comfort and utility they have come to expect from their vehicles, yet provides insurance against the big swings in oil prices. It may not be the absolute in gas mileage, but history has proven that consumers are not shopping based on gas mileage alone.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:47 pm)Why do people believe a new technology must behave exactly like the old one. If everybody thinks like Ford EREVs or BEVs will never make it.
Or do they think to come one day and say: “Hey we made it! We’ve engineered a electric vehicle that exactly behaves like a ICE vehicle. You can hear all the noise that the engine generates and feel all the vibrations. And by the way to have a easy conversion you can still go to the gas station and fill in a couple of gallons gas. Oh yes, that’s a vehicle people want to buy!”
People have to change their mind ito be able to change the technology!
By the way I want my VCR back, when I insert the videocassette it starts exactly where I ejected it. The DVD-Player doesn’t!
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:49 pm)RE 112, my prior post, similarly
Ford can solve the 80% problem with their solution, and possibly with less risk and at lower cost. They need to get the electric only speed up. If they get the electric only speed up to maybe 55mph or 65 mph, then maybe we can still go electric only 80% of the time. However, at only 47 mph top electric only it is not quite there for me. I’d be happy with their 30 mile range, but not the 47 mph limit.
It’s all an engineering compromise.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (1:59 pm)#109,
The DonC doth protest too much, methinks.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:02 pm)Rashiid
Turbo diesel generator crushes that non-issue permanently. Electric does fine in mountains, anyway. I live at 8,000 feet in the Rocky Mountains and have 2 EVs and go over 12,000 foot passes regularly (I’ve seen mules being tested on them, BTW). No problem. Just more FUD.
Here’s the note for the manual: If you drive like a total hoon (see Jeremy Clarkson), your performance will suffer, true for all vehicles.
G
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:12 pm)#98 statik,
Again, you prove that you are an accountant and not an engineer.
“I think there is some confusion here. GM does not have any proprietary technology or knowledge that allows for their exclusive benefit of scale. The only thing stopping other car companies from doing the same thing as GM, is that they think it is is a bad idea.”
In actuality, GM has a great deal of proprietary technology. The Volt is an updated EV1, the car everyone in Chris Pain’s movie cried about (note, I haven’t seen it). We all know the secret to making the Volt work, it’s the battery. GM has spent millions of dollars analyzing over 100 battery chemistries, testing batteries 24/7, and developing software to make the battery pack last for 10 years, 150,000 miles. This is probably the big accomplishment for this program.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/01/23/gm-qa-with-bob-kruse-on-the-chevy-volts-batteries/
“Everybody and their dog can make a E-REV.” “If Toyota, Honda, Subaru, whoever wanted in this market they could be in it virtually overnight…even if a ‘non-car’ company wanted in this business (who knows why), they could be in ‘GM’s segment’ almost instantly, heck anyone could buy the entire Chrysler E-REV set-up for a $1.09 and be a player.”
It’s so simple, I’m surprised you haven’t bought Zenn with all your cash and gone into the business. So what kind of engineering and manufacturing business are you in? The automobile press knows that a new car takes 5 or 6 years to develop, and GM is doing a parallel development (car and battery simultaneously) in 4 years. Everyone but you and charlie tuna think the schedule isn’t agressive.
“Worse still, if a real company like GE, who can also make batteries, and has a billion engineers on staff ever decided to get involved and put REAL money behind it, they would have GM’s lunch.”
Having worked for GE as an engineer for over 20 years, you make me laugh. Jack Welch always prided himself on the fact that GE had 500,000 employees when he took over, and less than 200,000 when he left. Where are those billions of engineers on staff?
“Compounding GM’s ‘future problems’ to compete against its peers (even with the ‘benefits of scale’), will be the fact they will also have to make minimum payments on about 200 billion dollars. /that adds a few bucks per car.”
Now here’s a comment that probably fits within your realm of experience. It’s probably best, however, to leave the technical end of things to those with more knowledge and experience.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:12 pm)By the way,
Lyle, this was quite a scoop.
Your interview draws some EREV vs. PHEV battle lines that weren’t visible before.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:15 pm)You people are acting like intelligent adults today.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:20 pm)#109 DonC said:
“I fear you’re letting your inner stock picker take control. Moreover, you’re speaking like an accountant not someone in new product development. GM has made a brilliant choice in focusing on the next technology rather than what is available at the moment.”
===================
It is true, I come at virtually everything from a ‘how fiscally viable is this product/company…what is the risk vs. reward’
As for GM being brilliant focusing on the next technology rather than the current technology, I think we disagree somewhat…I really don’t understand with them currently offering 70+ different vehicles, (including the re-introduction of the global RWD platform to NA this year) why they could not/have not have spit out a couple strong hybrids over the past decade. (and still resist them)
/it baffles me
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:30 pm)#110 Jackson Says: “I happen to think there is room between the EREV and BEV for a car which uses a much smaller engine to stretch the battery-only range while powering accessories.”
————————————————————————————–
I agree. If you cut the engine output almost in half, and increase the battery energy storage by 20%, the car would still perform the same 95% of the time.
But I think GM was smart to start off a little more conservative. I’m sure there are optimizations yet to be made.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:30 pm)Statik…just blame Bob Lutz
…right?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:37 pm)#118, BillR1 “The Volt is an updated EV1″
Not even close. The EV1 was an uncompromising effort to build a lightweight, low-drag car to maximize range and it went a pretty fair distance on antiquated lead-acid technology. NiMH EV1s did even better. The Volt is a converted ICE-driven Delta platform with a hole in the chassis for the battery. GM carries enough fuel and a big enough “range extender” that they don’t have to spend a lot of time engineering a wizardmobile. The big BTU content of a gallon of gas means that the Volt can be relatively crude but stilll effective.
#118, BillR1, “GM has spent millions of dollars analyzing over 100 battery chemistries, testing batteries 24/7,…”
That sound like something a battery company should do and a pointlesss waste of time for an auto company. Hand out the spec and the first manufacturer to deliver the battery to that spec, wins. Yes, some testing is necessary but it’s not GM’s job to take on the burden of battery development. Unless they plan to make money selling batteries to others (doesn’t look like that will happen).
#118, BillR1, Argues with “Everybody and their dog can make a E-REV.”
Ford and Toyota can build one by REMOVING parts from their hybrids and adding a little more capability to the electrical components. The software necessary to operate it would be simpler. That would leave Toyota with a lighter vehicle than GM is offering, with noticeably lower drag and Ford with a worthy PHEV that looks like a regular car. Both Toyota and Ford would be starting from platforms that are currently winners (a million Priuses no the road and a Fusion hybrid that beats the Camry hybrid on fuel economy).
Neither Ford nor Toyota is stupid (Ford’s run by people bright enough that they haven’t had to take bailout bucks, at least not yet and Toyota’s success in hybrids speaks for itself).
GM is outvoted by 2 to 1 and the 2 have a better track record in existing hybrids. I’d say that leaves open the door to the possibility that GM is wrong.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:38 pm)…friggin Bob Lutz
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:44 pm)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:45 pm)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:49 pm)#77 Mitch
Umm, duh. Obviously it wouldn’t be for cross country travel at first. Every car doesn’t have to do every purpose. Thats why we have hundreds of models of cars. For an in town car something with a 100 mile range would be perfect a large amount of people.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:50 pm)#121 statik Says: “It is true, I come at virtually everything from a ‘how fiscally viable is this product/company…what is the risk vs. reward’ ”
————————————————————————————–
If you look back over recent history, most breakthrough products didn’t make financial sense when they were first developed.
Rewind the clock 11 years. 1998. People are taking their music CDs and transferring them onto their computer, processing it into some wacky format called MP3, and then downloading onto a portable playback device. What geeks! Niche market.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:51 pm)Its all excuses. Just don’t drive like a maniac and you wont have a problem with the Volt having limited power. The whole arguement about not having enough power is easy to fix… simply have a large ICE engine… Problem solved. Thing is though you don’t really need that bigger motor is you don’t demand absolute power every freaking instant you own the car. So big freaking deal I want to speed up a hill one a year and it doesn’t do 75. I can live with that. If not all you need is a bigger motor. Excuses.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:54 pm)
Feb 6th, 2009 (2:58 pm)Ok here is a question for all of you in the know about the Volt.
What happens when you go down from Pikes Peak? We know in a traditional car when you go down you are naturally slowed down as a result of the transmission being engaged. How does this work with the Volt. Would you simply be coasting down a steep grade? Would you need to brake more often that with a traditional ICE vehicle? Would that braking energy be restored in the battery?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:02 pm)Ford said GM’s Two-mode hybrid system is only a PR execise. Now, they came back again and this time against Chevy Volt. What is amazing in this is that Nancy Gioia is 100% that Ford is right and GM wrong! Wow!
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:02 pm)#124 charlie h Says: “Ford and Toyota can build (an EREV) by REMOVING parts from their hybrids and adding a little more capability to the electrical components. The software necessary to operate it would be simpler.”
————————————————————————————–
You may be underestimating the complexity of “adding a little more capability to the electrical components”. For example, the control software for induction electric motors is far more complex than permanent magnet motors:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog4/?p=45
Also, the software to manage a large battery pack is far from trivial. Lots of intellectual property there.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:03 pm)“I agree. If you cut the engine output almost in half, and increase the battery energy storage by 20%, the car would still perform the same 95% of the time.”
Thank you, Dave G. (#122):
And, I expect you’d pay quite a bit more for that remaining 5%.
Unfortunately, I got lost on the way to my own conclusion (#110), and failed to make the comment completely topical by pointing out that there’s a lot of room at the electrified-car table for both GM’s and Ford’s approaches, as well as others most of us haven’t considered.
The serial hybrid is the right direction, but it could take awhile for that fact to become apparent. Ford and Toyota may become “winners” in the nearer term.
Neither is it written that the Volt will be THE great breakthrough serial hybrid (more because of the financial state of GM than the Voltec concept, itself).
The Volt may well be the right idea at the wrong time, though there is cause for hope.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:08 pm)Charlie h
Ford’s run by people bright enough that they haven’t had to take bailout bucks, at least not yet
agreed..but remember that Ford had to mortgage everything to be in this position including the blue oval..
Just pointing it out…
#128 Mark
EXACTLY..this is why EREV makes sense..remember YOU said we dont need range extender…right now we do…no need for 2 cars.. you would need a BEV for local and an ICE for longer drives..2 x $20,000 econo boxes, or 1 volt…
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:09 pm)#132 Jethro Bodine Says: “What happens when you go down from Pikes Peak? We know in a traditional car when you go down you are naturally slowed down as a result of the transmission being engaged. How does this work with the Volt?”
————————————————————————————–
You’ll have to use the brake pedal a lot, but the Volt will have very strong regenerative braking, so you won’t heat up the brake pads.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:10 pm)#68 Zero X Owner
Thanks for a very insightful comment. I really enjoyed reading it. Now, whether your view is correct only time will tell. I hold somewhat the same view as do many others here. The future should be bright for both Ford and GM if they can weather the next 3 years. Ford has a better plan for the immediate future with their hybrids, but GM is going for the “Hail Mary” pass. If successful, touchdowns will occur.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:10 pm)#118 BillR said:
…lots of things
————————————–
Just figured I would acknowledge your post. It was long and you put a lot of thought into it, which I can appreciate, even if I don’t agree.
At the end of the day, we all have got opinions.
================================
BillR1 said:
“It’s so simple, I’m surprised you haven’t bought Zenn with all your cash and gone into the business. So what kind of engineering and manufacturing business are you in?…It’s probably best, however, to leave the technical end of things to those with more knowledge and experience”
Personally, my roots are in the clothing manufacturing business, although 90% of my time goes into investing now, which (unlike investing) gives me no insight into the auto business, lol. Other than I know I could get a hat made in NA by about 20 different sources 15 years ago…today, nobody. The same trend is happening for autos now, and with be further exasperated as the car is commoditized by the transfer of the ICE system to the battery.
If a Zenn was road legal in Ontario, I would probably own one, but I have no desire to get into this business, anymore than I would desire to be in the airline business or give out subprime loans…after all as you say, I like to invest, and the NA automobile industry is a dog.
While I love the Volt, and I would very much like for GM to just build the thing already, investing has taught me to disassociate my personal desire of a product from the reality that it (or GM) will ever be successful in any tangible/fiscal way…and that 99% of the ‘promises’ about the future, end of being nothing but air.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:13 pm)#124 Charlie,
The Volt is an updated EV1. Just do some research. I posted a technical comparison in the forum, T-shaped battery, inverter with AC motor, low rolling resistance tires, lightweight aluminum wheels, etc. Even GM calls the Volt a natural extention of the EV1.
Regarding batteries and hybrids, not everyone could do it, or they would. Toymota is on record as stating Li-Ion batteries are not ready (the ones from Japan burst into flames). GM has done their homework. They know that that battery pack is expensive, and to replace one at mid-life in an auto may cost $20,000 retail (even with NiMH). So the key is to design a battery that can last the life of the vehicle, and that is exactly what GM is doing.
No other manufacturer is even close.
But keep on dreaming that your E-REV from the land of the rising sun is just around the corner and will have a 10 year, 150,000 mile battery warranty.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:17 pm)You know, we all have been saying that reducing our dependence on foreign oil reduces money for terrorists. This is not absolutely true. It does not take much to support true terrorists and there will be many other countries purchasing crude oil that will continue funding terrorists.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:24 pm)Ford is merely asserting a thought that has occurred to many before. There is a maximum size range with present technology for the EREV series approach. I thought that it would max out at about the segment “D” level auto, like a Caddy DTS or big Buick.
For larger vehicle and trucks, those with a hauling and towing expectation, the parallel-series designs in PHEV format would predominate. Such has been the case, as big SUVs and Pickups have this design in a HEV implementation version, and maintain full hauling/towing capacity.
Certainly Ford is crowing about what it has and denigrating what it doesn’t have; but what is new about that? Reality is that there is probably both versions in our futures, as Dr. Frank at UC Davis has demonstrated before. EREV is the most efficient, but does not fit all needs. Series-Parallel designs have their place,even if less efficient. We will have both.
As for those comments that Ford has made a poor copy of the Toyota HSD they are wrong. Ford has developed a better but not perfect version. It is proved by the relative mileages achieved by the hybrid Camry and hybrid Ford Fusion. Ford won hands down, for these near identically sized cars.
But neither design is as good as the dual-mode design, that has been developed by the GM, Daimler Chrysler, and BMW. That design was meant to appear in four different models of which we have seen only one, and will soon see the second of the four. The first was engineered for the heaviest RWD vehicles and is overkill for sedans. The FWD version of that large size is or will soon appear in a Vue SUV, still a heavy vehicle. In a year or two, the smaller downsized version wil appear probably in the DTS and C-300 , S class and 7 Series sedans in both RWD and FWD versions.
With the efficiency improvements intrinsic in the dual-mode hybrid design, I could see a GM “Big Caddy” delivering 40+ mpg in both city and highway driving, Very similar to the Ford Fusion smaller platform, except the highway mileage would improve and the size would be one size up.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:25 pm)#128 MarkJ Says: “Every car doesn’t have to do every purpose. Thats why we have hundreds of models of cars. For an in town car something with a 100 mile range would be perfect a large amount of people.”
————————————————————————————–
I live in New Jersey, and it costs a lot of money just to insure an extra car. It’s far less expensive to buy cars that are capable of everything we need.
Yes, I could rent a car for longer trips, provided I know about the trip ahead of time. For example, what if I find out that my brother, who lives 230 miles away, just went into the emergency room, and it’s 11pm, so all the rental places are closed. There are many other examples. There are way too many “what-ifs” for me to ever buy a pure BEV. I don’t think I’m alone here.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:27 pm)#121 statik Says: “It is true, I come at virtually everything from a ‘how fiscally viable is this product/company…what is the risk vs. reward’ ”
————————————————————————————–
#129 Dave G Says:
“If you look back over recent history, most breakthrough products didn’t make financial sense when they were first developed.
Rewind the clock 11 years. 1998. People are taking their music CDs and transferring them onto their computer, processing it into some wacky format called MP3, and then downloading onto a portable playback device. What geeks! Niche market.
==============================
I hear what you are saying. Yes, there are examples of great success, and yes, I can allow for the fact that GM ‘could’ stumble across a winning formula, but I have to keep that possible success in a realistic context.
How many abject failures have there been for each example of great success? 1,000 to 1? 10,000 to 1? Obviously, a innovative, game changing and successful breakthrough is a very rare occurance, especially in relation to the amount of attempts to develop one.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:44 pm)Ford and GM are both right, depending on the situation. If you live in a remote area of the mountain West, then the Ford hybrid approach is superior. If you live in a remote area of flat flat Kansas, then Ford’s advantage quickly disappears. If you live in an apartment without a garage, then a standard hybrid approach is best. If you have a private garage and do overwhelmingy city driving, then the Volt is vastly superior. We live in a diverse country and we are best served by a diverse list of alternatives. I wish both Ford and GM well.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (3:56 pm)#95 carcus1:
Actually, I didn’t say that. I think you got me confused with someone else’s comment. Guilt by association, LOL? Anyway, don’t give me credit for anything I didn’t say. I can get in quite enough trouble on my own!
#96 The Grump:
Can’t argue with that.
#120 ThombDbhomb:
Scary, ain’t it?
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:05 pm)#143 Dave G
What if I want need to drive down a 4×4 trail and I have a Corvette? What if I need to move a couch with a Geo Metro? There is a million what ifs of course. No vehicle can be capable of “everything we need” You buy a vehicle that will do the job most of the time for your needs. But don’t kid yourself thinking one vehicle can do it all.
For a metro driver commuter car, a non range extended EV is perfectly viable.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:13 pm)#145 Jim in PA Says: “If you live in a remote area of the mountain West, then the Ford hybrid approach is superior. If you live in a remote area of flat flat Kansas, then Ford’s advantage quickly disappears.”
————————————————————————————–
You seem to imply that Ford has an advantage on steep grades. This is not the case. See post #12 for details.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:14 pm)#147 MarkJ,
We disagree.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:18 pm)@141 N Riley:
Plus the fact that the #1 country in 2008 that the US imported oil from was Canada.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
My goal is to reduce dependence on oil, foreign or domestic.
Also, I think there is no “one size fits all” EREV or BEV, parallel or series, etc. I think the competition will benefit us all.
Personally though, the electric drive EREV of GM and Chrysler will work best for me.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:21 pm)#142 stas peterson Says: “Ford is merely asserting a thought that has occurred to many before. There is a maximum size range with present technology for the EREV series approach. I thought that it would max out at about the segment “D” level auto, like a Caddy DTS or big Buick.”
————————————————————————————–
This is a good point. GM has admitted that EREV doesn’t scale to SUVs with current battery technology.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:26 pm)Dave G (#143):
“I live in New Jersey”
I’m sorry.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:32 pm)Ford seems to have the right idear.
Lean more on the Gas power until the Battery gets cheaper.
In the long run Ford will have better profit margins with this approach.
GM are you listening ??
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:33 pm)#141 N Riley Says: “You know, we all have been saying that reducing our dependence on foreign oil reduces money for terrorists. This is not absolutely true. It does not take much to support true terrorists and there will be many other countries purchasing crude oil that will continue funding terrorists.”
————————————————————————————–
Remember that the U.S. currently consumes 25% of world oil production. If the U.S. consumed a lot less oil, world oil prices would fall sharply, which means a lot less money for terrorists, and a lot less money for governments that are hostile towards the U.S..
As for how much it takes to support true terrorists, the idea is this: If you are a suicide bomber, they will support your family for life, probably much better than you ever could have provided. Not so cheap.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:35 pm)150 fredevad,
“Personally though, the electric drive EREV of GM and Chrysler will work best for me.”
I agree completely, you can’t do any better than using zero gas and that’s the whole point! We have to get off of our oil addiction and GM and Chrysler are offering cars that will use zero gas. I drive less than 40 miles a day so the only time a might possibly use any gas is on the weekends.
I think Ford might be missing the boat on this one.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:37 pm)#87 Jp
Where are getting this information? I have not heard it yet. Of course, that in itself does not mean anything. I don’t hear of very much sometimes. But, if true, this would be really great for GM. They need vehicles like this to be able to stay in the market, else they are going to edged out by Ford and Toyota. Enough said.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:41 pm)#88 Schmeltz
Seems like the last time I actually priced a regular Ford Escape Hybrid it was around $35,000. That is without a plug and larger battery. If you look at Ford’s web-site, you can’t get a price on-line for a Escape Hybrid. They just send your information to a local dealer to give you a quote. Sounds like they are not all that proud of the price and don’t want to scare you away until the dealer gets his hands on you.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:41 pm)For all those that live in New Jersey, we are deeply saddened by your predicament. At least you can still dream about living in New York one day.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (4:46 pm)#152 Jackson Says: (regarding living in New Jersey) “I’m sorry.”
————————————————————————————–
Actually, living in NJ is pretty nice. I’m 45 minutes from Manhattan, 1 hour from the Appalachian Trail, and 1.5 hours from the Atlantic shore. Our suburban neighborhood is nice. Schools are good. We also have a nice park with woods next door.
The main problem is all the people. New Jersey has the highest population density in the nation. Lots of people. Lots of traffic.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (5:02 pm)Just read some some of my own link from (#150), this sounds to me like by the time we buy our gas at the pumps, there is no distinction between foreign and domestic oil and seems to further confirm (#141) N Riley’s comment. In the end, it’s all just mixed together.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/experts/contactexperts.htm
Wow. Seems we need these cars more than ever.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (5:06 pm)#98 statik says “Everybody and their dog can make a E-REV. Little Fisker has one (in production), Tesla has a prototype ready to roll and just wants their gov’t check (like GMs) to put it in production.”
Yikes! You are missing things on the tech side. BillR is really right on point here. Serial hybrids are hard to make. BEVs are quite simple by comparison. FWIW Fisker is sourcing its engine from GM, and it can only meet its launch date, if, and only if, it skips the testing phase where all the components come together. (IOW don’t hold your breadth for the Karma to be launched on time.) Tesla was stunned and caught off guard by the Volt. Originally the story was that all their cars would be pure electric, but the change of mind on that issue along with their new found desire for Detroit based talent should suggest where their collective corporate heads are at the moment.
I will say this though. Anyone and their dog can make a BEV. This is no big deal. You could probably make one in your garage. However, to make a BEV that you can use in all types of weather and for years without significant battery problems is a completely different question. The Volt is truly a remarkable piece of technology.
BillR and Charlie h on the question of whether the Volt is the successor to the EV1:
Objectively you’d have to say “yes.” As Bill points out the basic design is quite similar. Moreover, GM did build a plug in serial hybrid with specs which mirror the Volt’s.
(Quote)
Feb 6th, 2009 (5:16 pm)