As we recently heard from Chevrolet manager Ed Peper, GM is working on a dedicated non-plugin hybrid vehicle that would get high EPA fuel efficiency ratings. This is a new approach from GM’s previous strategy to offer hybrid versions of standard gas models like the Malibu, which was discontinued due to poor sales.
Indeed GM has public plans to launch 14 hybrids by 2012 and 26 by 2014. The next question is whether these dedicated hybrid or hybrids should have unique and distinctive styling as does the Prius or the Inisght. Though the Prius’ design is clearly polarizing it obviously attracts some buyers who want to display to the world that they are driving a hybrid.
Ed Welburn is GM’s VP of Design and I had a chance to ask him this question on a web chat.
Do you think hybrid vehicles should have unique designs like the Prius and not simply be versions of standard cars like the Malibu was, and are you developing new unique dedicated hybrid designs for your 2 mode hybrid system and BAS+?
That is a subject that we debate in the studios every day. I believe it can be an advantage to give a hybrid vehicle a unique asthetic. Volt (an electric vehicle) has a unique asthetic because of its aerodynamic characteristic and the creative design ideas involved. But the debate goes on…
So it looks like this may be a hot button issue in the conference rooms of General Motors’ design studios. Maybe we should help them out with a poll.
Loading ...
+5
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:04 am)Different styling is not a bad thing. I don’t think they should all be Prius looking but I’m game for something original. Which I never liked the comment when some say the Volt needs to be seemless so the everyday person can drive it. Spice it up. If electric is out of the norm, how about styling as well.
(Quote)
-3
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:09 am)The answer(s) will raise more questions.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:10 am)I would like my hybrid to state it is a hybrid, but beyond that, the “unique” style is not important. Actually, I’m holding off on buying a hybrid so i can get an electric car… the Volt of course.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:12 am)I think it should look like a normal car, or if it does have a distinctive styling it should not look close to the two cars in your picture, they aren’t looking so great. What happened to cars that get you laid? Can’t it be hybrid and good-looking in the same time?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:20 am)Alex…you made me laugh. In my case I can’t wait to trade in my Prius. My backsteat has been pretty quiet.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:20 am)They HAVE to start thinking “Game Changing” stratigies. It’s no longer so much of an option to just push the same model out with different power tranes. Someone has to start thinking out of the box here to save their skins against the competition that is coming down the pike at them in these new startup companies. They may be small, but it’s more market share that GM is losing.
Come on Bob Lutz… Wow us!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:21 am)Inside the question of different styling is the question of whether GM’s own management thinks that electric cars are special. If they do, the cars’ styling needs to show it. If GM’s management thinks the cars are simply weak-kneed regular cars, best to keep the electric drive well hidden.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:29 am)If one were to accept the premise that hybrids should have unique styling, then GM would be looking at needing to come up with 26 unique bodies for hybrids by 2014, if the company were to meet its stated goal.
Of course, this (i.e. 26 unique styles) won’t happen, nor is it happening with Toyota or Honda. In both cases, the companies launched a unique body style that managed to give the entire brand a green halo.
The Volt will do this for GM, too.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:31 am)Form follows function for me.
Cd is the main thing on the outside, but you can do a lot with two-tone colors, pinstriping, etc.
(Off to work. Extremely busy day today. Back at 8pm)
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:32 am)Lyle asks Ed Peper Do you think hybrid vehicles should have unique designs like the Prius and not simply be versions of standard cars like the Malibu was?
———————————
The question might be asked about performance as well as appearance. I think GM thinks of “hybrid” as a mostly decorative model name used to seduce a certain subset of the population, not “hybrid” as something that makes a difference in how the car works. That is, I think they see hybrid as “LTZ” but definitely not “SS”.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:33 am)RWD with the storage upfront. FWD is okay especially if you drive in the snow. But, RWD is a lot more fun.
=D~
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:36 am)They should look like a normal vehicle. I hate the way prius/insight/hybrid cars look. Plus the association of having a car that looks like those = tree hugging hippy….which is ok if you want to be a tree hugging hippy, but I don’t.
Call me when they put the voltec system in an Avalanche, Corvette, or a Camaro. Without any badges either – I don’t want people to know what’s under the hood.
(Quote)
-15
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:36 am)(click to show comment)
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:38 am)I believe a distinct styling is appropriate, however, I don’t like big decals that say “Hybrid” on the side.
In the past, you could buy a standard car, like a Pontiac Grand Prix, and the base model was affordable and basic. For those who wanted the performance version, you got a bigger engine, a front spoiler, rear spoiler, bigger wheels, etc. I didn’t need a big decal on the side that said “Performance”.
I would think this could be the best approach for a hybrid. Use more aero effects, different wheel rims, a special paint scheme, and other styling cues that will let those who are informed know that this is a hybrid.
Because I’m sure many car owners want others to know they are driving a hybrid, they just don’t want to be blatant about it.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:38 am)Lets look at what worked so far:
The first Toyota Prius in the U.S. looked almost identical to the Toyota Echo. The echo was almost half the price as the Prius. The first gen Prius sold in small numbers.
The Honda Insight (the first one) was a 2 seater which limited its appeal despite its very distinctive styling.
The Second Toyota Prius sold like hotcakes and still does. It does not share any styling with any other model in the Toyota lineup.
The Honda Civic Hybrid never cought on, at least in the numbers of the Toyota Prius, same for the Honda Accord Hybrid.
The Ford Escape hybrid continues to sell about 22,000 or so units a year. Very small numbers.
The Toyota Camry Hybrid sells in very small numbers compared to the standard Camry and the Prius.
It seams to me the best way to sell hybrid is to create a unique model that is drastically different looking than any other product in the company lineup. This does 2 things. First it distinguishes the model so buyers will stand out. This is the primary reason the Prius sells. It screams, “LOOK AT ME, I”M GREEN” . Second, It allows the designers to optimize fuel economy above all else. The Toyota has an extreme aerodynamic design that makes it, frankly, funny looking. It rolls on skinny hard tires that don’t perform worth a damn compared to most other tires. The car handles poorly, has poor acceleration, and wanders all over the road on a windy day. These are not my observations but that of every road test I have ever read on the car. But it is very successful because it does one thing very well. It gets excellent fuel economy and advertises it with its looks. My advice to car makers….. Copy success.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:39 am)I don’t think that all the hybrid, E-REV, or BEV vehicles have to be completely new, but they should have some external changes to the original vehicle to make them more unique and standout from the crowd.
And hopefully, the Volt is just the first of the new vehicles that will use this drivetrain. Personally, I would be thrilled with a sporty two seater E-REV to replace my Crossfire. Or, to keep EVO happy, a sporty two seater BEV with a real range of 200 miles, but it has to have four wheels and a roof…..
But as Tag always says: LJGTVWOTR!
(Quote)
+6
Jul 15th, 2009 (6:58 am)The Prius and Insight look awful to me, and those are the only two hybrids that I can think of with a distinctive “hybrid style.”
Here’s a suggestion: just make them look good.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:02 am)It doesn’t matter – or, rather, it shouldn’t matter. Just get them (and, more importantly, good plug-in electric vehicles) on the roads all across America so we can begin to break our dependence on oil.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:05 am)Some should be unique, others not.
More importantly…
All should be Plug-in!
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:13 am)One advise to GM, don’t make one model and have 2 options like Honda Civic, Honda Civic Hybrid is a failure because it just look like a normal Honda Civic.
Make something look good but don’t offer ICE as an option.
(Quote)
+7
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:13 am)Gasoline cars would also benefit from the “teardrop design to reduce drag and improve Range and MPG,” but there aren’t any because people don’t want them. If electric cars are ever going to go mainstream, there needs to be a variety of styles, just like you see with gasoline cars.
In fact, the only reason electric cars makers are so fixated on aerodynamics, is because they are trying to squeeze every ounce of range out of today’s super-expensive batteries to make the cars affordable… It’s not because of any inherent need. I’m probably going to get blasted for saying this, but I hope batteries improve to the point that we can all get back to driving muscle cars, big SUVs, and full-sized sedans again. I hate that cheap looking egg styling that you see in the Prius.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:16 am)i like what i’m hearing in this thread. a few have said it, use the paint or small parts to set it apart. you could put a certain bumper on it that you only get in the hybrid version.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:17 am)Not if you can help it. Over the many years I have seen automobiles made, distinctive styling has been pretty much the norm. Let us get on with the VOLT and get off the stupid questions.
Let’s have some distinctive enery and inovation out of GM and by the way, keep the distinctive big bonuses out of the distinctive executives pockets.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:18 am)Well, Chevy has always been a style leader. Style is what elicits the passion for cars in me.
I like beautiful things.
(Quote)
+6
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:24 am)Most cars look ugly to me. The ones I find attractive are too expensive and impractical. So I’ve just come to accept ugly cars, which means styling is kind of a non-issue.
The more important issue is aerodynamic performance. For this, why would there be any difference between the styling of the hybrid and the normal ICE? Both would benefit from a lower coefficient of drag.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:27 am)I think the Prius screams “LOOK AT ME, I’M UGLY!”
I usually avert my eyes when I see one coming down the road.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:28 am)The 2010 versions of the Prius, Insight, Honda Civic and Volt all look more or less the same. That is so in large part because they are about the same size and all aerodynamic A person who knows these cars can pick out one from another by styling details such as the tail light shapes. A person not so tuned in to cars will not be able to tell the difference.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:48 am)In deference to all the people who want to be “recognized” as driving a “green technology” car, a regulation should be passed that the color green is reserved for, well, er, green cars. Then as long as they were green everyone could see that they had an owner who thought that recognition was important (removes tongue from cheek).
Seriously, I think that the “look” should be important to function first and prestige second (or third , or fourth). Isn’t the point to normalize the whole idea of responsible cars? If that’s the case we should be looking to make more and more “normal” looking cars on EREV platforms (yes, even trucks and vans – where the ecconomies are even greater).
I need coffee – sorry.
Be well,
Tagamet
PS A GM fellow was on the business station yesterday about the Volt and they really gave him a hard time about no plugin stations being available in NYC. He again talked about “selected cities” for the roll out in 2010.
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS!
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:51 am)One of the comments we repeatedly hear is that people who buy a Prius are environmentalists and want a car that says they are “green.” They say that is why the accord and Camry Hybrids haven’t sold well. That might be true for some people, but my opinion is that the majority of people that want to buy a hybrid don’t care if it is the same style as the base car. They just want it to get “much” better mileage than the standard car. That didn’t happen with the Accord or Camry. If Honda had offered a 4 cylinder, 6 cylinder, and 4 cylinder hybrid that got twice the mileage of the 6 cylinder at the same price, their sales would have been through the roof.
The excitement over the Volt was originally two fold. It was a plug in hybrid, but it also was a hot looking concept car. If the car had looked as bland as the Prius, I am not sure it would have had the support to ever be developed.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (7:58 am)The fact is that no one answer is likely to be correct here … at least not for long. Popular culture flows this way and that way, just like hemlines and haircuts. Given this tendency, it’s probably a shrewd move to try and cover your bets as much as possible through differention and diversity of your product lines.
Regarding the minor “styling cues” ( like BillR mentions above ) – I agree with this completely. Interesting point: GM had a significant customer issue with their Pontiac G6 hardtop convertible – buyers of the car complained that most people didn’t realize they even HAD a convertible when the top was up, and this pissed them off ! I think this is called “conspicuous consumption” – like BillR noted, it doesn’t have to be blatant / “in-your-face” styling, but something fairly easy to spot, and attractive.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:05 am)The article asks,”Should hybrid vehicles have distinctive and unique designs that separate them visually from gas cars?”
I say No. But I wonder if I am reading it a different way.
I don’t want GM to back itself into another corner by having to make unique designs for hybrids. GM needs to build cars people want to buy.
I find the Prius to be very unattractive. But that’s me. If GM makes hybrids butt ugly, what is the point and who will buy them?
They should be as creative with their designs as possible.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:06 am)Agree – a raised letter logo would be fine and all that is needed. More concentration should be put into making the car as efficent as possible. Show me a car with ICE and a Hybrid side by side. If I like how it looks, great. If the ICE gets 23mpg/city and the Hybrid gets 26mpg/city – forget it, but if the Hybrid gets 34mpg/city then I’ll buy it. Once people realize they have a lot of extra change in their pocket change from saving so much gas, they will buy the Hybrid, even if it costs more per month in car payments. Most people don’t add up over all cost. We are a people of ‘now’ and we pay once a month for our car but sometimes several times a week at a gas station.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:12 am)Personally, I would not buy a hybrid car as an ecological status symbol.
Braggin’ rights for me come more from having something that people walk up to and say, “Wow, that’s one great looking car!” and then I could say, “Thanks. And I am getting about 300 miles to the gallon.” (Which is about what a Volt should do in my situation.)
But as a marketer, if I could determine that there is a large segment of the population who would buy a car because it has conspicuous hybrid aesthetics, it would be foolish not to address that market.
I note that, as I write this, the poll is running about 50/50 on this question, so maybe GM should do both. I find it interesting that this poll is divided about the same as our country’s political leanings. Hmmmmm.
(Quote)
+9
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:13 am)I dont think it needs to be a crazy outlandish design that screams “I”M ELECTRIC” (and from the future). It just needs to be recognized as a its own car. Meaning, don’t offer a non-electric version of the Volt alongside the electric version. You dont want people wondering when the see a Volt “Is that the electric version or just the ICE version”. They need to know when they recognize a Volt, its an EV, no questions. This is what makes the Prius a success in this catagory. Personally, I dont like the design, but everyone that sees one knows what it is. Its not like there’s a Prius that gets 15mpg with a V8 in it. You dont need to be within 10ft to read “HYBRID” on the side of it to know its a hybrid.
Sorry longer post than I was planning. My point is, make it a “unique” design, not an “extreme” design. The car just needs to be recognized in a lineup, that’s all.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:16 am)I don’t think that Hybrids ought to be styled distinctively. I think all cars should be more aerodynamic regardless of if they are ICE, EV or Hybrid. Personally, I think that other styling is a waste of time and fuel. Give me an EREV in the shape of Buckminster Fuller’s Dymaxion Car or an Aptera.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:21 am)True. I know lots of ppl who can’t tell the differnce between a Firebird, Camaro, or Corvette, untill they can read the words on it. It just depends what you are into. (Dont ask me which fork i’m suppose to use for my salad)
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:23 am)The Telsa S has a very low Cd and doesnt look like a Prius. I think there’s more options than you think.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:28 am)Even though I voted No (my personal answer), what I really wanted to answer was “Sometimes”. I think since GM is coming out with so many hybrids, there is room to satisfy both markets of people. The results (as of the time I responded) were 52% Yes, 45% No; which indicate to me that GM needs to do both.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:33 am)OT, but NZDAVID, are you ok? Major earthquake down there.
Hope you are well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:34 am)I voted no because I believe all vehicles with sport something like BAS+
in the very near future. High mileage vehicles (45 MPG+) are distinctive because a certain shape works best to lower drag.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:36 am)I agree that GM should think of hybrids as Super Sports models! Hybrids should be conceived and styled to be distinctive in both performance & appearance ….and as Ed Welburn is quoted above, to have “a unique asthetic because of its aerodynamic characteristic and the creative design ideas involved”.
I’d suggest GM (Ed Welburn) get all his studio chiefs & leading stylists together and give them photos of Tesla’s Model S sedan (detailed shots of the exterior and interior) as an excellent example of both a unique esthetic & creative design. Example photos are in this link….
http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/tesla-model-s-1/
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:45 am)You get more from regeneration with front drive (as the front wheels do most of the braking due to the nose pitching down as well as increased weight — the latter may not be relevant due to the more distributed weight in a car with a large battery).
That’s not to say that you couldn’t have both: A high-gear rear end, a low gear front drive (perhaps in-wheel motor/generators) and a controller that gradually shifts power between them with speed.
I’ve been told that RWD offers better handling at highway speeds, but lack the personal experience to confirm this.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:52 am)Unfortunately, distinctive can mean anything. The Volt looks far more conventionally styled than the EV1 and the Fisker Karma, Tesla Roadster and Tesla Model S are indistinguishable from ICE vehicles.
The Aptera Type 1e is radical looking in a Bauhaus way – form follows function, which is OK from a design standpoint. There are no superfluous shapes or appendages, so given its performance and price, it will succeed.
Let’s all admit how bad the EV1 looks next to the vehicles I listed.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:55 am)Hey, I’m with you there.
Lutz, in a web chat, was quoted on the Chevy Volt Facebook page as saying “By the way, you should know that all of us who have driven the Volt view it as a thrilling performance car, and you can easily burn rubber with it…without burning any gas!”.
http://www.facebook.com/chevroletvolt
Entry dated Mon, July 13, 2009.
And, I liked sitting higher when I had my GMC Jimmy. I’d love to have an EREV version.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:56 am)From the article
Do you think hybrid vehicles should have unique designs like the Prius…?
Ed Welburn: “… I believe it can be an advantage to give a hybrid vehicle a unique asthetic. Volt (an electric vehicle) has a unique asthetic because of its aerodynamic characteristic and the creative design ideas involved. ”
—————————-
Clearly either he didn’t understand the question, or he has no concept of what a unique asthetic look is…because the Volt couldn’t have more ‘hum-drum’ styling than it does now if they tried, it is going to be the boringest/plainest car in their 2011 model lineup (or whenever the Aveo/Wave gets canned, lol).
If ever a car needed a ‘full body wrap’ with 24 inch letters saying “Electric Car” to let people know what it was…then this is it.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (8:56 am)The Tesla S beats the crap out of the Volt in the looks department. The Volt reminds me of an old Pontiac.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:06 am)Exactly my thinking too.
Unique design so there is no confusion about what the car is.
Mid size Voltec Chevy Bel Air with an ‘evolved’ 55′ look… oooooo
(maybe that’s just me though)
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:07 am)LOL!
guess we need a Voltec station wagon then!
with curtains….
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:14 am)Maybe for the 10th anniversary of the Volt release, they could field a Volt that looks like the concept and exceeds the “original” Volt’s performance….. comfortably under $30,000 (evil grin).
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS
(Quote)
+5
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:15 am)Nice post kdawg,
I think you are right about the styling not having to be the ‘batmobile’ if you are driving a electric car and/or a hybrid. Something distinguishable as unique is more than enough, but (you knew there was a but coming) only if that hybrid/electric vehicle has/brings value.
What I mean is, (when looking at hybrids for example), the Prius looks like a nerd’s shoe, it has nothing going for it, but mechancially it is the ‘bee’s knees,’ or the ‘cat’s whiskers’ if you will (and happened to live in the late 1920s). The Prius has fundamental properties (50MPG+, eco-green cred) that make it a winner to the car buying public, and design is not one of them. As long as you can identify it easily as its own product, then job done.
However, if another manufacturer puts out a product that is not in the same league as the Prius, but is intending to compete against it, they can make it unique…but are probably just throwing away R&D dollars. Design is secondary in this market (at least it is atm).
Basically, I guess I am saying, if you have a product that you feel can stand on its own and compete on a fundamental basis in the hybrid segment (and eventually the electric segment) then it needs to have its own ‘look,’ to be unique…but if you look at the ending benchmarks and the price you are going to sell it for, and it falls short, don’t bother.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:20 am)Based on the recent history of hybrid sales, GM had better make the styling unique.
On the other hand, having more unique model lines is more expensive to support.
It shouldn’t be necessary to make hybrids look unique, but at the present time it clearly is. Practicality gets you nothing if the public doesn’t buy it.
I’m tempted to say ‘turn the question around’: Have dedicated, unique full gasser cars (preferably somewhat ugly), and make the rest good looking hybrids. Judging from the styling in some specific Prius model years, people have had the idea that you have to ’suffer publicly’ in order to ‘make a difference.’ I think this is at least part of the ‘look at me, I’m green’ philosophy. I say, reward the behavior that you want.
Or better yet, make them all hybrids and eliminate comparison issues (except to other manufacturers’ cars!).
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:24 am)You have a definate point there.
I think that the prius (like the look or not) absolutely makes it clear that it’s driver is trying to “save the planet”.
I think that message sells as many cars as the actual savings (real or imagined)
People often buy a car to make a statement.
Dudley Moore pointed that out in a movie years ago…
“Buy a Jaguar, get a hand job”
This ABSOLUTELY rings true!
That which motivates one to buy a Camaro or Ferrari is not the same message as the person who buys a prius or yes even the Volt.
The car NEEDS to be distinctive.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:27 am)The last time I worried about the looks of cars I was in High School and bell bottom pants were the rage
.. if the Volt is the Future I want to see more fins.. and big ones.
Now, this is a car!
http://www.radrides.com/saltflats.php
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:28 am)Come now Tag…
British Racing green is the ONLY proper colour for a smoky old Jag… (I can’t help it, I absolutely love old Jag’s… it’s a sickness!)
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:31 am)The need for higher efficiency will dictate design. A welcome change.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:32 am)The Tesla Roadster, Tesla Model S, and Fisker Karma, and Aptera all look great.
The Tesla cars are all electric, so they’re not practical for me. I will never buy a BEV.
The Fisker Karma is too expensive.
Aptera has an EREV version for $30K, but with only 3 wheels, I don’t think this will work very well in the snow. If I lived in California, or some other place with no snow, I would seriously consider the Aptera.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:35 am)I believe you are in the minority on that one.
Most people just need a car to do their day to day ’stuff’ without complication. Many folks will reject ‘weird’ cars outright.
As interesting as the Aptera is, it remains weird.
Most people will say hey that’s cool, or it’s spacey and then they’ll go buy something ‘normal’ looking.
THAT is where the Volt comes in.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:35 am)Behold the Mercedes Benz Bionic Car:
http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2008/03/01-mercedes-benz-bionic-car-at-the-moma/
“With a drag coefficient (cd figure) of 0.19, the Mercedes-Benz bionic car is one of the world’s most aerodynamic compact cars in its class. Today, this figure still stands as a benchmark for the aerodynamic optimization of car bodies.”
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:39 am)Aptera is an excellent example of what I want for an electric vehicle. A beautiful design that definitely follows its function. The Aptera is also just a trike and classified as a motorcycle, not exactly a main stream vehicle. What makes the Aptera so interesting is that it essentially looks like a light sport aircraft fuselage with out tail feathers & wings.
What makes the Prius so ugly is the tall cabin, tiny wheels, and stage coach profile. The Prius is easily the ugliest car on the road, what makes it so attractive to certain individuals is the vehicle’s smug level. Sure they could have spent less to get similar mileage with a diesel Jetta/Golf but they wanted to show others that they “care” about the environment. The new freaky people/nature Prius commercials are an excellent example of how Toyota hawks it’s wares to the masses. Sure people are buying a hideous vehicle but the “green” perception is much more valuable. I myself can’t imagine buying a car that is obviously repulsive but I buy it anyway because I care what other people think of my vehicle.
As for the poll, Yes GM should build electric vehicles that stand out. Should GM build an electric car that mirrors the Prius/Insight franchise, certainly not! Look to Speed Week at Bonneville for inspiration, not your Japanese competition.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:41 am)So just throw a turbine on the hood and a battery in the trunk and you’re great to go. (g)
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:42 am)AWD would be reasonably easy to add in the future.
The 2012 Voltback?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:49 am)Troy and company make some beauties!
Maybe That is an idea… get some of these top designers, Troy, Foose, etc… to offer styling input.
I’m still pulling for my Volt SuperSpark!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:52 am)Although they are pointed at completely different markets you do have a point.
The “S” is going to compete with the MB E class and the BMW 5 series (both with fantastic diesel options) rather than the Volt though.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:53 am)Exactly. Note also that the EV-1 had a cd of .19, and we should not leave out the appliance “look” of the original Honda Insight.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:53 am)I think they should do both. They should have one distinctive looking car. And they should make a hybrid version of the Camaro. And probably the Corvette while they’re at it…
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:53 am)I’m sorry, the Aptera is a sperm bubble on wheels. It screams pocket protector lame. So no, I don’t think the EV-1 looks worse than that. I have to disagree, I believe the Aptera will be a sales failure. There just aren’t enough people out there with that kind of cash willing to ride around in an angry tadpole.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:56 am)Tag said:
“In deference to all the people who want to be “recognized” as driving a “green technology” car, a regulation should be passed that the color green is reserved for, well, er, green cars. ”
—————–
“I want everyone to remember *why* they need us!”
http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/img/pto_OS_characters_06.jpg
/couldn’t resist
(just funnin’ with you Tag)
(Quote)
+4
Jul 15th, 2009 (9:58 am)Gm + distinctive styling = Aztek
Be careful what you ask for.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:00 am)The Volts driving experience needs to be very similar to a conventional car.
If a ‘normal’ (meaning non-enthusiast) driver can’t just get in, turn the key, put it in drive and go… the car will fail because people will not buy it.
The body structure and looks need to be attractive, efficent, and user friendly. I think a unique look is important to make it stand out in a rather crowded car market.
Yes I think a hopped up 300+ hp Voltec Camaro would be fantastic! but first we need the mainstream Volt to succeed.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:04 am)Larry, the only stupid question is the one not asked, right?
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:05 am)I agree that different styling isn’t a bad thing. But I don’t think it’s necessary either.
What the hybrid needs is best-in-class mileage. That probably means roughly 50+mpg for a small car, 40+mpg for a mid-sized car, and 36+mpg for everything else.
Speaking for myself, I can say that if it’s likely that I’m going to eat the hybrid premium, then I’m buying great MPG numbers. Just like that extra horsepower doesn’t make financial sense for those Camaro buyers, but they go for it anyway — this is the same deal, but with the knobs set on “efficient”. The MPG numbers may make the decision to buy the car, but in order to sell me another one in 5-10 years, the car also needs to be reliable and have useful people/cargo space inside. A grownup-sized hatckback with folding rear seats is surprisingly good this way.
When the hybrid premium will dependably save the buyer money, then looks won’t really matter. Fleet customers and households that think ahead will be lining up for them.
(P.S. I’m continually amazed that police cars, taxis, and other fleet vehicles that spend a lot of time idling and require a lot of auxiliary power (like a small truck-crane that was helping to replace a flat roof near my office) aren’t already hybrids.)
(Quote)
-1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:08 am)Heh heh!
I admit to being ‘conflicted’ on this point, I just love all the moving oily bits in an old Jag straight 6…
If one ‘did’ find an e-type with a dead driveline it sure would make a pretty electric though…
(with the little generator in the trunk of course…)
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:08 am)Herm, re:
http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2008/03/01-mercedes-benz-bionic-car-at-the-moma/
If I ever have to drive something that looks like that I’m going to get a donkey to get to work.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:09 am)Sidenote to everyone holding shares of ‘old GM’
Your ticker/name has changed today after being halted on friday because of ‘new GM’ coming into existence. They are now “Motors Liquidation Co”.
Apparently, the ‘enthusiasm’ for old GM left with the name, it is trading off about 50% today. Currently off .52 to .63 (-45%)
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=MTLQQ.PK
I kind of like the name ‘Motors Liquidation Co.’ maybe they should have stuck with that…heck it seems to work for anyone selling rugs, furniture or oil paintings
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:09 am)Basically, no. The Prius and Insight copy look that way because they a study in efficient packaging with the confines of the wind tunnel. In other words, put as much people and stuff into the smallest box possible that still slips through the wind with ease. This negates a lot of styling features, shapes and forms that could get you laid.
So this is why I chose “yes” to the poll. If the point of building a hybrid is to get as high mileage as you can for a certain mission statement, then by that definition the car must look different than the more typical sedan. This is why the Fusion, Camry, Altima, etc. sedan hybrids don’t get mileage as good as the Prius.
On the other hand, if the purpose is to just improve the mileage on a standard sedan, then the hybrid version can’t look much different. The point here is that these types of buyers want to preserve the “traditional” look but get better mileage. So this is why you find manufacturers doing both.
The poll really needed a “both” option. Because in this market, that is what manufactures need. The purpose built hybrid is a growing and important niche market and then there is also demand for traditional sedans with hybrid drive. GM needs to do both.
(Quote)
-1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:12 am)Remember that the Prius has the ridiculous shifter that looks like a birth defect. People got used to it. Even the new generation has the same thing.
I don’t really see the point of it though. So Prius can feel as though they’re smarter than average, since they can figure out how to drive it?
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:13 am)Hey, they were perfect….to be in “Judge Dredd”. And, I think now is the perfect time for Aztek Gen 2.0 to be introduced:
“New ‘Judge Dredd’ Movie Coming”
http://www.cinematical.com/2008/12/21/new-judge-dredd-movie-coming/
/the perfect tie-in
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:15 am)I’m totally on board with the love of a Jaguar and all the oily bits and pieces. Maybe we could do a reverse spin on the Prius PV collector running the fan. The Jag’s ICE could also power the radio. Wait, er, it already does. So doesn’t that make a Jag a Green vehicle?
Sorry, too much Sotomayer hearings…
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:15 am)You may just have hit the nail on the head.
I DO think that you need to have unique models like the Volt, but I think that ’styled’ models can co-exist.
I like the idea of a strong hybrid/Voltec Colorado pickup ‘work truck’ at a reasonable price.
There used to be S10 pickups everywhere because they were cheap to buy and easy to live with.
On a model like this I think a couple “I’m green” stickers would be sufficient.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:17 am)Holy crap! It’s a tall first gen honda insight!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:18 am)I’ve observed that it really depends on with whom you’re trying to get laid as to what kind of car you require to help your case…
I do agree with VOLTinME (ouch!) that a wagon would have practical benefits — both for the act, and also the year after (in case someone gets pregnant).
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:19 am)Chevy Orlando uses the same platform as the Cruze and Volt:
http://www.chevrolet.com/pages/open/default/future/orlando.do
Add shag rug & velvet curtains – you’re all set.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:24 am)Sure, but the performance (defined as MPG for a hybrid buyer) really does need to be there. Putting a Type R sticker and aftermarket shocks on a Caviler doesn’t make it a contender at the autocross meet, any more than putting a hybrid badge on the Malibu made it a green car.
Disclaimer: One of my friends actually did turn a J-Body into a performance car for autocross, but it took him thousands of dollars and several years to do it.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:24 am)Either the smaller or left most fork is for the salad…
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:24 am)Well… If the Volt is the plainest car in the Chevy lineup then things look GREAT for the future!
Absolutely I’d like to see a midsize “S” competitor come out of the styling department.
GM! Blow our socks off! PLEASE!
I MUCH prefer the production Volt over the concept.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:25 am)I agree, and wonder why GM Chevy could not come up with something more like the S in physical design?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:26 am)I chose yes for what I would call value anxiety. If a car buyer is looking at a hybrid car and likes it, and there is an identical non hybrid that costs less, sometimes a lot less, value anxiety says…
Hey car buyer don’t be a sucker, get the cheaper one, it looks the same, drives the same and costs thousands less. You can buy a lot of gas with that money and have a smaller car payment too.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:30 am)The opel flextreme concept is a good example for future look. Aztek was also futuristic looking ( GM didn’t have enough USP to sell that product – like a hybrid train, published drag coaffs , green image,high mpg etc) . Aptera, prius etc shares the same looks.
Future is all about efficiency optimized designs than grill based designs. It should be like a grill can be fixed without dropping the efficiency.
It doesn’t mean that all cars should look same – purpose also plays a big role.
So its like Theme, Purpose, comfort, efficient, class, brand etc ( there will be more params but brand comes only last – I don’t need to be proud that i brought a x company car, i will be proud for i brought a car which suites my purpose and my style than car company style).
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:30 am)I know many ‘normal’ folks who rented a Prius and HATED the thing.
One took it back and asked for a real car.
To go mainstream it has to feel mainstream.
This will leave some enthusiast types unhappy, but isn’t the real goal to get off as much oil as possible?
For this to happen Mary-Jane or Billy-Bob (Pat-Q-Public) have to feel absolutely comfortable driving the car.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:31 am)I think the Aztek looks good. Yellow with black is the best color combo. Plenty of room for batteries. A great vehicle to convert to EV.
Just checked the resale value. An Aztek in average condition with 150,000 miles will trade for $1700 and sell for $3000. Add the battery and conversion brackets. $15,000 or so?
=D~
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:32 am)Dave’s shaggin’ wagon…
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:33 am)Exactly, who wants to drive a fish down the road?
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:33 am)LOL!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:34 am)No.
Mr. WindTunnel will most likely dictate the “Style”.
It did for the Volt drastically, the Prius and Insight as well as EV-1.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:34 am)More than this….
GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson said despite numerous warnings and statements from GM that the stock was likely worthless, GMGMQ continued to climb.
“We were concerned, Motors Liquidation was concerned, I think the regulator was concerned that people were trading the stock not understanding what it was,” Wilkinson said.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Old-GM-shares-drop-in-value-apf-3989992891.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=6&asset=&ccode=
=D~
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:37 am)Gonna try and post something…
Might get modded.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:37 am)REPORT: Tata Nano passes European crash testing
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/15/report-tata-nano-passes-european-crash-testing/
Tata, isn’t that a strippers car?????
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:38 am)Apparently, the ‘enthusiasm’ for old GM left with the name, it is trading off about 50% today. Currently off .52 to .63 (-45%)
________________________
Although hope springs eternal, when traveling on the river of de-nial finally loses it’s luster, a glimmer from the dawning rays of reality will begin to dampen the remaining enthusiasm.
Translation: Let it go people, what aggregate value could be left in the pieces “even GM doesn’t want” in the middle of the carpocalypse?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:39 am)Design will certainly be unable to escape the need for higher efficiency.
I wonder if advanced computational fluid dynamics can ‘come to the rescue’ with shapes that are aesthetically pleasing for the motoring public, but also offer low drag.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:41 am)Hey statik, you lucky dogs up there….
REPORT: Ontario announces incentives for plug-in vehicles, up to $10K
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/15/report-ontario-announces-incentives-for-plug-in-vehicles-up-to/
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:41 am)“I kind of like the name ‘Motors Liquidation Co.’ maybe they should have stuck with that…heck it seems to work for anyone selling rugs, furniture or oil paintings.”
All they need is annoying, loud radio commercials.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:46 am)Absolutely.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:47 am)I’m of two minds …
For cars, I think it’s important that they be unique and recognizable. They don’t have to be anything wild, just a distinct model. If they are the same as other ICE vehicles, that really encourages you to do the $$ math to see if you’re saving by switching … and you won’t. If you’re going to pay a premium, don’t you want something different?
However, for SUVs and maybe small trucks, I wouldn’t care as much about having a distinct model. There I’m just looking for the better gas mileage, and here where I live, the ability to drive in High Occupancy lanes without a passenger.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:49 am)LOL!
Good morning Cap’n!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:50 am)There’s a really dangerous joke floating around somewhere in that last line …
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:53 am)If the form serves the function then yes. But I don’t think there has to be a “hybrid look” template like the Insight and Prius seem to follow.
An example of what I think is a cool hybrid is the Honda CR-Z, which is now definitely set to come out in 2010. That is just a cool looking car, hybrid or no. Honda will make a killing with that car.
http://automobiles.honda.com/cr-z/
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:57 am)COOL!…
Now I just have to get our Premier to do the same in Alberta!
Ain’t holding my breath though!
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:57 am)Way back some time ago I voiced my disdain for the geniuses that took the amazing concept Volt, inside and out and made a much more mundane 40K$ machine that maybe the Dinette Set public would buy. I was run over and then backed over by the thunderous admonishment that the concept was not aerodynamic enough… and that “WE” have discussed this and “WE” NOT AMUSED with this tread worn topic anymore… move along, nothing to see here… Well, I think Lyle has some misgivings about the way the Volt has shaped up, so to speak and thus his sideshot musings on hy-brids. Very witty Lyle!
The Volt is not your average point A to point B albeit 40 miles electric only machine. MuddyRoverRob is right on the mark and seems rather, ah, lonely, LOL!, about the image being important.
And about the projected image: I say, Al GORTheads, read on…
The sanctimonious religious chorus of the Save the Planet crowd has long since grown shrill and discordant, for me at least. Global warming has transmogrified it’s tune due to curious growing glaciers… into curiouser, Global Climate Change and The Geico Cavemen must have caused the last Ice Age to go away with global warming. I do NOT want to drive something that has to scream as a, rolling bumper sticker, “Think Globally…” and pay 40K bizillion for the rare privilege! I simply want a sexy option to giving my hard earned dollars to something other than buying costly swimming pools of gasoline and get some nice pretty smiles too! My fiance would frown on Dudley Moore’s, ah, attention.
Best Regards! Higgins
PS: I am waiting any day for the Lads to arrive form China.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:58 am)Yup.
(Quote)
+4
Jul 15th, 2009 (10:58 am)Lie to other people but don’t lie to yourself.
The critics of the Prius want to dismiss the success of the Prius as being based on something superficial like the looks alone. The truth is just the opposite. The Prius is much much more than just its looks, much much more than just the hybrid technology. This much much more is why the Prius is really good deal for the people who brought one and why it has such a high satisfaction rating. This much much more is also what gets left behind in the HSD Camry and why it doesn’t sell as well. When Toyota considered making the Prius its own brand this much much more was also going to be left out and therefore the Prius brand would have been a flop.
This much much more comes from the fact the Prius wasn’t originally about hybrid technology alone. The Prius was a project; a learn-from-real-world-experimentation project. Toyota wanted to fix problems in the current automobiles with technology from the near future. All of this technology was meant to be just over the horizon. Toyota was hoping to learn from the manufacturing, marketing, and real world usage so they would be ready when the future comes.
Among some of this much much more is: The speedometer being moved to the center console, The gear shift being moved off the steering column, The foot space in front seat being kept clear so the driver can slide over and get out the other side, The seats being made easy to take apart for recycling. The Prius has had a special HC trap, a thermos to store the hot radiator fluid, a bladder in the gas tank. Almost everything I have listed here no longer exists in the current Prius and therefore should be considered failed experiments. But they did exist and they have nothing to do with hybrid technology and nothing to do with looks.
So how can failed experiments be the key the Prius success? Some people like the technology itself and can’t buy it anywhere else. Some people like idea of the honest attempt; they are voting for the better future even if it doesn’t exist yet. Airplanes and tanks have had bladders for decades; there is something cool about have such extreme tech. The Prius sells to the well educated working class; there’s something cool about knowing why tanks and planes have bladders and having an excuse to explain it.
The successful experiments are obvious because they get used outside the Prius. The looks of the original 1990’s Prius was common place in 2003. Lots of small car shared it. It was cutting edge when the Prius was first designed. We are now five years after the 2004 redesign and the look is still fairly unique. This makes the current look a failure. The truth is the looks of the Prius is not a selling point. People buy the Prius in spite of what it looks like not because of it.
It is okay to lie to other people. If you don’t like Toyota or the Prius says anything you can think of to lead them away from buying. But don’t lie to yourself. Don’t encourage GM to make yet another marketing mistake by believing the Prius is only successful because of its looks.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:00 am)If GM still hasn’t answered this question then they need to fire their marketing people and start over. It’s not a difficult question.
The first issue is whether you have have a break through technology like the Prius or the Volt which you want to market in a halo vehicle. If you do then obviously you need a unique — but not unconventional — design.
The calculus becomes more complex if you’re looking at a technology which boots mileage but isn’t break-through. Then it depends on the cost of the hybrid technology and the cost of gas. If the costs are such that the price of adding the technology will justify a relatively quick payback, as in a year or at most two, then offering it as an option to a standard base vehicle will work just fine. But if it won’t, then you need a unique design if you’re going to successfully market it.
This is just very basic. People will pay more for two reasons: one is to impress others; the other is to get conveniences for their own use. Consequently, if the costs of the hybrid technology are higher than would be justified by the savings on gasoline, then you had better find a way to make the technology part of the exoskeleton so that the customer can send a message to others.
The reason the hybrid Escalade is such a joke is that GM put a fuel saving technology in a vehicle that screams “Look at me, I’m wealthy and can buy gasoline by the barrel”. Now if the hybrid technology had been priced so it made financial sense to buy the hybrid option, everyone would have applauded. But it wasn’t so everyone laughed.
FWIW the decision to roll out hybrid technology in the Escalade strikes me as what you get out of an insular and turgid bureaucracy that is totally self-absorbed and out of touch with customers. I’d say it was a good example of why the Auto Task Force has said that what GM needs more than anything else is a culture shift.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:02 am)Back to #12 and the image issue that MuddyRobRover had to say with his non too lonely pal Dudley Moore and something for the Al GORTheads and not wanting to drive a rolling Earth First bumpersticker with 4 wheels.———-Higgins
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:08 am)Yes. Styling has always been an important factor for owners to express themselves through their automobile. Hybrid owners are no different – they want the world to know that they are doing their part to help save the planet; to reduce dependency on foreign oil; etc. etc.
So, it is no surprise that Toyota Prius far outsold the Honda Civic hybrid thanks in large part to its distinctive styling. The Civic hybrid looked no different from a standard ICE Civic. No snob appeal there.
Now, Honda has figured this out as demonstrated by their new hybrid model. Unfortunately however, they chose to use the Pontiac Aztek as an inspiration for its looks.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:09 am)That’s what also makes it useful. It has great interior room. With the back seats folded down, it can carry a surprising volume of stuff, and also reasonably bulky objects like flat-pack furniture. It’s much harder to load that kind of thing into a sedan. With the back seats up, the back seats are reasonably comfortable for two adults when making a trip across town.
There’s no accounting for taste, and I kind of like the looks of the Prius. But that’s partly because I really wish I had a Star Trek shuttlecraft parked in my driveway. Your tastes appear to be different.
I drive a Prius, but it’s not because I want to make a statement. It’s because it’s a useful car with great mileage, excellent maintenance-record, and a lot more utility than you would normally extract from a vehicle of that size.
You’re also overlooking the geek-factor. The Prius is a technological tour de force, and those of us who, for instance, work in IT for a living like that kind of thing.
And, yes, using less gasoline is better for the environment and makes it more likely that my friends will get home from Iraq sooner rather than later. But there are no bumper stickers on the Prius I drove to work this morning, because we aren’t trying to make any statements.
I owned a 2001 VW Getta GLS TDI for a year. It was a beautiful car, and I loved it — great ride, great torque, interesting to work on, and there are reasonably-priced enthusiast-level scantools and a great amount of enthusiast-information on sites like http://www.tdiclub.com . But I spent over $5k on maintenance during the year I owned it, due to a string of bad transmission rebuilds. I finally sold it when I no longer did a lot of highway driving.
My girlfriend (now fiancee) is the one who had the Prius, and I’ve helped her maintain it for the last 70k miles, and I drive it frequently (it’s our household’s main daily-driver). So far, we’ve spent a total of about $75 for one of those HID light bulbs, and also put a set of tires (a wear item) on it.
Then you shouldn’t buy a Prius! Nobody in their right mind thinks that everyone should drive a Prius — it’s a small car with funky looks and a non-sporty ride. Also, it’s a household transportation appliance, and not everyone wants that out of their car. But this is what I want out of a car now, so it’s a perfect match for my needs.
Remember, Prius drivers are saving gas for you to burn in whatever car you choose to drive, so there’s no need to be a dick about this.
I also think the Aptera is a neat vehicle, and I’m a private pilot so I really appreciate their aviation-style looks. But, alas, it has two seats and limited cargo capacity, so it may only meet the same needs as the 2005 Kawasaki Vulcan that I used to own. I’m still looking forward to drooling over the first one that I see in-person.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:10 am)It’s a good day, I get to voice my opinion AND get to talk about Jaguars!
Of course Gen1 Volts will have most (OK, all and then some) of the fuel cost savings taken out by the price, later Generations will show 150 – 200 MPG average fuel consumption (for city folks anyway) and people will buy FOR the cost savings.
Much like the now cost reduced Prius does now.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:11 am)GM’s own study shows that fuel efficiency is in….no matter what the car looks like. Instead of spending money on great looks and styling…maybe one could purchase a personality.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/responsibility/environment/news/2008/challenge_050808.jsp
“-Fuel- efficient — The new chick magnet? Close to nine in 10 women (88 percent) say they’d rather chat up someone with the latest fuel-efficient car versus the latest sports car.
-How to win friends and influence people. Eighty percent of American car buyers would find someone with the latest model fuel-efficient car more interesting to talk to at a party than someone with the latest model sports car.
-Not green? That’s a fashion don’t. More than four out of 10 (45 percent) 18-43 year-olds say it’s a fashion faux-pas nowadays to have a car that is not green or environmentally friendly.
-Project roadway. More than seven in 10 (73 percent) car buyers say if there were a reality TV show like “Project Runway” that was not about fashion design, but instead about designing the best-looking fuel-efficient and emissions-free car, they’d definitely watch.”
Personally, I could care less how a car looks on the outside…duh, I’ll be sitting on the inside. Nor do I care what others think about my ride.
The solution to GM’s problem is simple (to say): build quality, build efficient, build inexpensive. Primarily, you’ll need to have a very good econobox to start: if your ‘worst product’ is efficient, reliable and cheap, it only makes everything above that level look even better, and therefore, worth the extra $$$. How much can you really do with the looks of a container on 4 wheels? Why is it that important?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:15 am)Dav8tor,
With all due respect, if you put an EV1 next to an Aptera, you will see the EV1 is oddly proportioned, making it dorkier looking. The Aptera looks like a small airplane sans wings.
I personally want a conventional looking vehicle, as I requie its utility. I am not a hyper-miling commuter.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:19 am)Agreed – Lyle needs a “both” option on the poll – that’s why I could not cast a vote on this poll.
As for design, the smaller, fuel efficient models are designed using aerodynamics, out of necessity. For larger hybrids aimed at older car buyers, they can stick to tried-and true designs. I would like to see a Pontiac Bonneville-sized hybrid – one where both front seat passengers have enough elbow room, without elbowing each other.
Sure, it wouldn’t get 50+ MPG, but any hybrid purchased is one less ICE driven car purchased. We need to save gas where we can, and the way to do that is to know your customer. Sell them what they want, just in a hybrid version. Make them confortable in a hybrid, then worry about tweaking the MPG rating when battery tech improves the battery range.
That’s my opinion. That, and $4.00, will get you a latte at Starbucks:)
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:21 am)Cover those TaTa’s!!!!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:23 am)Yes indeed, a goode day! Love Jags myself as if I would not. LOL!
And agree that this is just the start, silent at that but when at the market picking produce there is a certain attraction to product that is not limp or dull. I recall a particular grocery scene in the movie Animal House. My guess is that there is a future out there for something other than the egg shaped autocar.
Regards again.———Higgins
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:25 am)Everybody cares about the environment in a survey.
When it comes down to brass tacks and signing the purchase agreement on a car (which is a large investment for most). I’m willing to bet most people will think twice about buying an unattractive car if there is a good looking alternative.
Granted the 5 door hatch bodystyle has never been the most ’sexy’ one available, but it is one of the most practical. I think the Volt is a better than average looking car of this style.
If you don’t care about the look of your investments EcoGeek that’s fine but most of us do.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:26 am)Man that looks like a refined 2dr Insight. If it were a BEV with 100MPC or 75MPC that can rip off the line, I’d take one.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:26 am)http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090708/electric_ontario_090714/20090715?s_name=Autos
Hers is a link for Canadians who want to go eletric. The Ont goverment will pay up to 10000 for the purchase of an eletric car.
The comments after the story shows that alot of people don’t understand the tech. yet
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:27 am)This gets to the heart of the question and one of my largest beefs against car makers – Why can’t you have it all? A beautiful car with you choice of drivetrains. Just because I want fuel efficiency doesn’t mean I want to drive an ugly or no options car.
Make the best (Camaro-Malibu-Equinox) with a voltec option – just like a V-8 premium price – I would pay for extra for the Voltec price on a beautiful car. ( this could also reduce development costs)
(Quote)
+3
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:29 am)If the design attracts buyers, it should not matter if it is ICE, Hybrid, Electric or other.
The electrification of the car is the future — which means that at some point we should have Hybrid/VOLTEC SUVs, Pick Ups, and sports cars — having distinctive styling is a waste of effort if you already have a winner.
The Malibu Hybrid failed not because it had the same styling of the Malibu, but because the MPG was so similar to the ICE that the payback for the additional cost was measured in decades.
Like Toyota — who puts the HSD into anything that makes sense, Chevy and others should focus on marketing the advanced technology and then put it into vehicles that are already winners.
At some point in the future I would expect a VOLTEC option for ANY car in the GM stable. Can you imagine a VOLTEC Camaro — with next gen batteries or ULTRACAPS that perform as well as a V8 without burning a drop of gas??? That is where we need to go.
As someone who is 6′4″ and over 250 lbs — I don’t want to have to squeeze myself into a subcompact to realize the future. Give me a full-size VOLTEC equipped vehicle with 20 miles all battery range and 35 miles to the gallon in ICE mode and I’d still buy it. I’d just like to have the option.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:32 am)An excellent response!
I’m going Volt, but I enjoyed and appreciate your comments!
(Many of which will apply to the volt as well! Although I’m hoping for a sporty-ish ride with my Volt.)
Thanks Luke!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:32 am)“the purchase of an eletric car.”
I thought they meant “Plug-in cars”?
Se my previous post #40
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:42 am)Gotta agree… if it’s not special certainly don’t make it look special. (They made the right call on the Malibu Hybrid styling.)
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:42 am)There is too much credit given to the wind tunnel. This is BS. There are many ways to lower the drag and you can still have many distinctive featrues. Formula 1 cars are aerodynamic. NASCAR bodies are aerodynamic. A corvette is aerodynamic. All of these are different looking. There are many ways to cheat the wind.
A truely aerodynamic shape would not have room for people or cargo. It would be a minial tear drop around the engine.
(Quote)
-10
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:43 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:43 am)A seemingly easy and reletively easy fix to this would be to crank out a bunch of dual mode silverado work trucks in the high 20’s or low 30’s.
It’s basically the same platform as the Tahoe/Escalade.
Make the hybrid option sensible to the customer and they will buy them.
I think they used the top of the line trucks at first because the tech is/was so expensive, it’s out there, it works, now cost reduce it and get it out in quantity.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:55 am)Certainly!
I still see the Volt being $28k usd in just a few years and there will be a midsize Voltec (Nova?, Bel Air?) in the mid $30’s. That one could look very “S” like.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (11:58 am)Personaly I would like to see more Drive trains in a car. What I mean is it would be great if people had a choice an ICE or a hybrid or 10 mile Plug in Hybrid or voltec. Each have it’s own price. This would work good in SUVs and trucks not so much in small cars.
If you are all about towing and mostly hwy driving take the ICE. If you tow on the weekend but drive little during the week take the 10 mile Plug in, if you drive mostly in the city and some longer trips go for the Voltec.
I did not include pure electric because I don’t think they are a good choice.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:02 pm)The issue isn’t the distinctive styling. The issue is the incremental cost of the hybrid version vs. the non-hybrid version. Customers are being asked to pony up thousands of dollars on hybrid versions and the payback timeframe is often up to 10 years. Longer than they’ll likely own the car. To the extent that other aspects of a car have to be changed to bring the cost down to be comparable to a “regular” car, then “distinctive styling” is just a side affect — not the issue itself. Many people think the dedicated hybrid designs are somewhat ugly (Toyota Prius comes to mind, of course) so the styling is not what’s making it successful. The price of the Prius is comparable to other “mid-size” cars — that’s what makes it successful.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:12 pm)Isn’t that a Hurse?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:16 pm)First there was the typewriter, then the electric typewriter, then just the typewriter again and the electric was assumed. First there was the automobile, then the electric automobile, then it will just be the automobile again and the electric will be assumed. Mainstream vehicles should have mainstream design and ultimately the drive train will no longer matter and the electric will be assumed.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:19 pm)I voted “NO” because IMO there will be no NON-electric/hybrid vehicles in a few years. All cars should be designed with fuel efficiency and aerodynamic issues in the forefront so there could be little difference in styling between a BEV or hybrid or old-style gasser.
The days of conspicuously wasting our scarse resources are gone, hopefully never to return.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:21 pm)I think there are two different ways you can look at this discussion. From a pure philosophical standpoint, and from a pragmatic, marketing standpoint. Personally, I find a lot of Prius drivers to be a bit obnoxious in their desire to stand out and exude a “holier than thou” attitude with their vehicle. There’s no technical reason (other than possibly aerodynamics) that a hybrid needs to look any different than a “regular” car. But let’s just look at the sales of some recent hybrids:
Prius: Runaway hit
Accord Hybrid: Flop
Malibu Hybrid: Flop
Camry Hybrid: Moderately Successful
Fusion Hybrid: Successful
Insight: Successful
Seems the Camry and Fusion might be the exception to the rule of hybrids needing to look “different” to sell well. I think it comes down to whether they buyers are insecure, conspicuous greenies, and want the whole world to know how environmentally-conscious they are, or those that quietly want to do their part to move us toward energy independence. I personally like the styling of the Volt on its own merits.
I’d say from a marketing standpoint, it’s probably a safer bet to make a hybrid model (especially a dedicated model) look unique, if the Prius’ success is anything to go by.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:23 pm)If GM does intend to provide hybrid versions of “regular” cars, they should no longer tie the option to it’s must luxurious trim. LS, LT, LTZ (or whatever) should change to HS, HT, HTZ trim levels for the hybrid version (or VS, VT VTZ if it is a Voltec version).
By and large, the leather-seat climate-control crowd isn’t the ‘use less gas / save the planet’ crowd.
(This allows Cap’n Jack to get his “stripper”)
.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:28 pm)“Why can’t you have it all? A beautiful car with you choice of drivetrains. Just because I want fuel efficiency doesn’t mean I want to drive an ugly or no options car.”
By the same token, you should be able to get the drivetrain you want without all the bells and whistles. One reason GM’s larger hybrids failed is that you apparently couldn’t get them without leather interior and every conceivable luxury item thrown in (at a much higher premium than might have been the case otherwise).
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:33 pm)Don’t you mean the “cat’s pajama’s” with a one two skuh-do?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:39 pm)We must realize marketing has had a lot to do with our tastes in design. The time has come for functional styling to be dominant. It will then be marketings responsibility to educate the consumer on the benefits of this new revolution. I do not doubt that the young designers and engineers will have new aesthetics of design that will create new tastes. I can’t wait.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:48 pm)Like it or don’t, it’s a practical, aerodynamic car with a large interior volume. Not everybody needs their car to be a fashion statement.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:51 pm)I think the bottom line in the design debate is the bottom line. People don’t have to have a generic same style car to tell everyone its a hybrid, they can get license plates, bumper stickers etc if they really want to boast. I think the other hybrids that failed IE Honda may be more to do with TCO than looks. You don’t want to wait until end of life to recoupe your up front investment also those versions, if I am not mistaken, tanked before gas was $4.50/gallon. They may have seen the same demand as Prius back then had they been in show rooms and made economic sense. If the car is hot and appealing the long term gas efficiency & TCO environmental sides are icing on the cake. Without a good looking car it is not going to be in heavy demand & will be niche. A good looking EREV when gas is $4.50 a gallon that is cost effective, will command the market especially if people think prices will last to give them a quick payback. The green badge does not buy as much as some think. Some people still crunch numbers before they go shopping, I don’t believe most people in this economy will pluck down 20 G’s on a whim without doing the homework, but then again….
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:51 pm)“This is just very basic. People will pay more for two reasons: one is to impress others; the other is to get conveniences for their own use.”
Safety (perceived or real) is another reason people are willing to pay more (specifically, the myth of “bigger is safer” which helped rationalize so many SUV sales). Reality is that you can now get reasonably safe cars at virtually every price level if you do your research.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (12:55 pm)______________________________________________________
Lyle’s Question:
“Should Hybrid Cars Have Distincitve Styling?”
—-
Answer:
Should Diesel Cars Have Distincitve Styling?
Should Ethanol Cars Have Distinctive Styling?
Should Natural Gas Cars Have Distinctive Styling?
Should Magic Star Dust (EEStor) Cars Have Distinctive Styling?
Should Cars with ABS Breaking Have Distinctive Styling?
Should Cars with OnStar Have Distinctive Styling?
Why subordinate a car’s styling cues to the car’s type of power train?
_____________________________________________________
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:02 pm)It is all about the aerodynamics. If you want to personalize, you can use paint, small body shape changes, graphics, window placement, and other variations that do not affect the aerodynamics (or only in a very small way).
Like it or not, cars are going to look the same as they converge upon the best aerodynamic designs. If you don’t like, then you can pay lots of money extra money on gas and more batteries for bad aerodynamic shape, but that is pretty stupid in my opinion.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:06 pm)REPORT: Ontario announces incentives for plug-in vehicles, up to $10K
_____________________________
Anyone know what the current prices are for moving vans and thermal underwear!!!!!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:08 pm)I find these people who desire none aerodynamic designs quite odd. If you asked them would you pay $50/month (and increasing every year) to have your car made into whatever shape you want, I doubt most people would say yes. But that is exactly what they are saying when they buy non aerodynamically shaped cars!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:08 pm)Man, life’s too serious to be so short. Or vice versa, depending on how you look at it!!!!
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:11 pm)Who wants to kill the electric car?
Fiat does…
Fiat’s electric Fiat Palio Weekend in production in Brazil; estimated cost $70,000 (U.S.)
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/15/fiats-electric-fiat-palio-weekend-in-production-in-brazil-esti/
At $70,000.00, 85MPC and max 65mph, the car is DOA!
OK, maybe they will sell 100 but phuk dude, 70K?!?!?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:11 pm)The concept was very ugly.. I bet GM did some marketing surveys and found out quickly.. and out came the aerodynamics-of-a-brick comment and excuse.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:12 pm)If this Volt-VAN’s a-rockin’
don’t come a-knockin’
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:13 pm)Sure the Aztek looks good, as long as you never have to look at it from the rear. It looks like they gave up half way through designing it.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:17 pm)/your old
(=
(Quote)
-1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:19 pm)it passed?.. that has to be a lie!, no way..some commie euros got paid to pass it. It will be a disaster if it comes to the US, people will line up around the block to buy it no matter what it looks like.
Good joke btw
(Quote)
+2
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:19 pm)Your last sentence almost gets it– it’s not JUST an aerodynamic shape we’re after. The problem is getting a low Cd in a car with a large interior volume. A corvette can’t haul the people or stuff that a Prius can, and it still has a higher Cd than the Prius.
If all you want is aerodynamics, you get a harpoon of a vehicle. If you want useful interior space, an exterior footprint that fits in a parking space, (as opposed to a thirty-foot tube with everyone lying down headfirst in a row), AND aerodynamics… you get a Kammback.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:23 pm)Right on!
Gen 2 and 3 Volts will be profitable.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:27 pm)Dave K said:
GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson said despite numerous warnings and statements from GM that the stock was likely worthless, GMGMQ continued to climb.
————–
Further proof that GM press releases…also worthless.
The trading in ‘old GM’ was certainly baffling to say the least. Nobody. at least on Wall Street or to people who follow these sorts of things, could understood why its name gave some kind of teflon-like resistance to reality.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:29 pm)Because of the current rather substantial price premium to GET the hybrid bits, that’s why.
In 5 – 10 years I’ll be onside with you, but until then it just has to look the part or people will not buy in large enough numbers.
(Magic Star Dust! AWESOME!)
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:32 pm)CaptJackSparrow said:
Hey statik, you lucky dogs up there….
REPORT: Ontario announces incentives for plug-in vehicles, up to $10K
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/15/report-ontario-announces-incentives-for-plug-in-vehicles-up-to/
==============================
Yeah, it had been pretty much assumed it would come along at some point. Canada and US are very interchangeable when it comes to the auto industry, lol.
$10,000 = $8,984 USD
Huzzah for a rebounding dollar!
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=CADUSD=X&t=1d&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=
/now if we can just get oil back to $150/barrel, that would $10,000 would be worth $11,000 US.
(Quote)
-2
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:34 pm)GM vehicles need to be Passionate, Have Soul and “move” people to want them. That’s what made all the GM classics you see at auctions going for amazing money.
That’s what GM needs.
Hybrids need to follow the same…not be a Geek with skinny Girl Scout wheels and tires…cheap econo-box look.
Lutz is back (thank God) he will be doing adds like Iaccoca when he saved Chrysler “If you can find a better car, buy it”
Lutz is quoted “The Gloves Are Off”
As I said a few months ago…when many said no….
The Camaro has a market. It’s selling faster than they can build them.
304 horse and 29 MPG…Sweet!
GM is back. That’s a real nice “I Told You So”
Go Bobby!
Bring out an efficient Z/28 it’s already designed and done.
Bring out the C7 Vette that’s in the Transformer movie peeking out of the back of a trailer and do not change it!
Converj, CTS Coupe, Efficient crossovers…
Hell build Chrysler’s V-10 Tamohawk Viper Engine bike and watch it sell like no other bike in the world. Just do it with efficiency. http://morningcup.files.wordpress.com/2006/08/dodge_tomahawk_front.jpg
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:37 pm)I think too much is made of the looks of the Prius being a sales driver. The car is a runaway success because it is a practical four-seater with the best available mileage. The original Insight got better mileage, but didn’t meet most people’s minimums for a car (hold four adults, move some boxes now and then).
If somebody produced a car that seats four adults with useful cargo space, costs $22k, and gets 55mpg… it will dethrone the Prius in a heartbeat. It has succeeded in spite of its looks, not because of them– because it is the most efficient car that meets most people’s needs.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:39 pm)Aero tuning is a very interesting combination of art and science.
It’s pretty clear that GM and Honda are emulating the winning 5 door hatch design of the prius because the prius sells.
Take a step back and take a really clear look at it the current aero ’shape’, (prius) it is totally marketing driven.
IF the tesla S ever hits the road it’ll spark a shift to slippy sedan shapes, (I had an early slippy shaped Taurus years ago… this isn’t new) until the next ‘thing’ comes along. Who knows, maybe people will decide they like the M-B fish car look.
What is silly is acting like Lord Kelvin and saying the answers have all been found. They have not.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:39 pm)Here are the ’specifics’ of our version of electric subsidization:
—–
“Ontario’s target is to become a world leader in building and driving electric cars.”
—aims to have one out of every 20 vehicles driven in Ontario to be electrically powered by 2020.
—rebates of between $4,000 and $10,000 for plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles purchased after July 1, 2010
—unique, fancy ‘green’ license plates (thats for you Tag), that lets us drive in HOV lanes regardless of passengers, drive on lawns, run over pedestrians, and get 15% of Rolling Stones tickets while feeling really smug about ourselves. We even have a website already to vote for the ‘hottest’ plates:
http://voting.pcsunit.com/green-plates/index-en.php
No details on the breakdown on how the rebates work, but it is expected to be similar to the US system. (Also the EVs can’t be NEVs, only highway capable qualify)
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:42 pm)I don’t know where these car company CEO’s grew up or what planet they live on, but they have to know the whole reason they sell cars is largely based on looks. Sure there are a minority of people out there that buy cars based on usefulness, such as pickup trucks or work vans. But I would be willing to bet most people out there buy their car based on looks and how many people can fit in it. That said, I would buy a Toyota prius… if it wasn’t the prius.
What I am getting at is if, toyota really wanted to sell massive numbers of that car, they would do what they do with their gas burning cars. They would take the essence of the car and make three to four different versions of it. A two door that looked sleak and sexy, a family car/ be it a suv or four door, and a pick up truck. Why on earth they think that the vast majority of people would buy that ugly looking wanna be bug like car is beyond me. If they want to tap into the market of people who arn’t necessarily environmentally conscious but buy cars that they want, toyota would/should get smart and design a new body style that (is not necessarily a radical design) and market it to people as a money machine not a green machine…. they would sell millions in my opinion.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:42 pm)SUH-WEEET looking ride.
I’ll never be able to afford a $57,000 car I’m afraid but it is one good looking vehicle.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:42 pm)Nice post Don, I was trying to say that myself earlier, but you said it much better.
/I agree all around.
+1
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:44 pm)Safety is interesting because, while you’d think it would be purely personal, Volvo managed to make it into a statement. But now that any number of cars are as safe as a Volvo, that the brand really has no purpose as far as I can tell.
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:45 pm)A lot of people care quite a bit about what their car looks like. Think about it–people are willing to pay premiums for looks in just about everything else. Houses, furniture, clothing, etc. Even food. So, why not for their cars?
That said, there’s no reason they can’t design good-looking aerodynamic cars. I think the converj is absolutely stunning. Ditto for the fisker karma. But I also think the Prius and the current Volt are attractive, so what do I know?
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:51 pm)Sounds like you weren’t around here when they changed the “look”.
Be well,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS
(Quote)
+1
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:52 pm)Are you a GM car salesman?
(Quote)
Jul 15th, 2009 (1:53 pm)Yeah, we have a ditty on it at #40, but I have to comment on the article you linked to, re: Zen comments at the bottom:
From the article:
“We are developing a highway-capable vehicle, called the cityZenn, with a planned prototype introduction later this year with a full commercial vehicle for 2010, that will be all electric, unlike the Chevy Volt or the Toyota Prius, with an anticipated range of about 400 kilometres and a top speed of 125 kilometres an hour, and will be chargeable in minutes (with a special recharging unit),” Scrimgeour told CTV News Channel.
—
Translation:
Its coming in 2008, no 2009, no 2010…trust us, its coming this time, we really mean it…and it still just as fantastical! Good news is that it still gets 400km(250miles) to a charge, goes up to 80 mph, and charges in minutes!!! Just like we said it would years ago…points for consistency for us! Huzzah! Zenn and EEStor will rule the world! …but could we maybe have a couple hundred million more to help ’smooth’ and ‘expedite’ the process?
(Quote)