I do have some concerns about going too low in the range department in the early PHEV/EREV years, esp for the companies doing blended range. The market will ultimately have to parse where that point is. I’m not wild about the 7-mile PHEV Prius, for example, that a few universities are testing. USA Today test drove the car and got 4 real world miles out of it. Unless there is basically cost parity with the regular Prius for such a thing, consumers are not going to perceive enough value to make it worth the incremental cost. In turn, this could reflect poorly not just on that product, but the technology in general, esp as Toyota is perceived (for now) as the hybrid leader- “if Toyota can’t make a good PHEV…”

We’ve learned through experience that PH/EV drivers are not as pragmatic as many assume them to be, and there has always been an emotional component to vehicle purchasing. But consumers do have to have a sense of value about whatever it is they’re paying more for, even if it’s not economic value.

I think foil bearings can be reliable, but turbine costs need o be brought down. On the hand, turbines haven’t been built in the mass qty that the auto market sees. Perhaps volume would costs down enough.

Right on! Back in the 70′s if a bad driver in California was on the road, it seemed to me they either wore a hat or drove a Buick.

Returning to sound: I drove a SRX in 2nd the other day at 3500 rpm @ 35 mph. Not a pleasant sound experience. If the VOLT reaches 5600 rpm, I can understand why GM refused to demo the ICE.

I thought the last time that turbines were considered for automobiles they were rejected due to poor fuel efficiency. What’s changed?

How do small diesels (say, a VW Jetta TDI powerplant) look for generator fuel efficiency, when tuned for such?