Toyota and Honda are expanding their capacity to produce NiMH batteries to support their hybrid vehicle sales:

Link (http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=43162)

Toyota is moving more slowly on Lithium Ion batteries, as they don't yet have a plug-in hybrid that would require them.

Good news for GM :) Bad news for the consumer. :(

Was really hoping the the others would not be so far behind GM or would even beat them to the punch (the sooner the better) but were simply not announcing their plans well in advance like GM has with the Volt.

Apparently GM is only pushing most of the others farward kicking and screaming.

Toyota and Honda are expanding their capacity to produce NiMH batteries to support their hybrid vehicle sales:

Link (http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=43162)

Toyota is moving more slowly on Lithium Ion batteries, as they don't yet have a plug-in hybrid that would require them.

Toyota don't need one right now. Hymotion is already doing the Prius plug-in conversion. Takes about 10 minutes from what I hear.

Toyota don't need one right now. Hymotion is already doing the Prius plug-in conversion. Takes about 10 minutes from what I hear.

Toyota's myopia is Hymotion's gain - great to have an American company eating their lunch (or drinking their milkshake, for fans of There Will Be Blood).

Other than Nissan, which is really run by a foreigner, it seems the Japanese are waiting to see what others do, so that they can copy them later, saving themselves R&D money.

Other than Nissan, which is really run by a foreigner, it seems the Japanese are waiting to see what others do, so that they can copy them later, saving themselves R&D money.

Yawn, same old same old. Folks, please imagine him saying this in front of his computer during his daily home-grown Colbert routine. Almost the same but not as funny. Seriously Jason, haven't you offended enough people with this kind of crap? Did a Japanese person break your heart sometime in your past? Perhaps using Colbert logic you are Japanese!

Other than Nissan, which is really run by a foreigner, it seems the Japanese are waiting to see what others do, so that they can copy them later, saving themselves R&D money.

And the Prius would be a copy of which vehicle? The Insight is a copy of which vehicle? The Nissan Cube?

And the Prius would be a copy of which vehicle? The Insight is a copy of which vehicle? The Nissan Cube?

A mild hybrid is little more than a power steering unit placed in the drive train, so it's not that great a leap. Notice that GM is smart enough to focus their mild hybrid efforts on profitable vehicles like SUV's, instead of selling a million low price vehicles for a loss.

The mileage gains come from Toyota's Atkinson cycle engine, so Toyota actually missed an opportunity to sell that engine in its other vehicles.

With today’s variable valve timing mechanism it is relatively easy to turn an ICE into an Atkinson cycle design. Simply you delay the closure of intake valve timing. A 1500cc engine becomes 1000cc engine if you do not close the intake valve 1/3 way in compression cycle. Since the expansion stroke remains as that of a 1500cc engine, voila!, you have an Atkinson cycle engine. But, alas, you have the weight and friction loss of a 1500cc engine. Mazda uses this technique for its sub-compact “economy” model. Toyota’s brilliance is the use of the very nature (high torque) of the associated electric motor for start up, low speed runabout and acceleration (when called for) as well as for idling stop and energy recovery when coasting and braking. By looking at the excellent “actual” gas mileage of the Prius, we know this system works even though it is carrying around the extra weight of battery pack, generator and electric motor. The Prius system also includes ICE>generator>motor serial drive function. So, from this standpoint Toyota is way ahead of GM. With a better capacity/weight ratio battery, I think they can make the Volt type serial only hybrid model, if they want to.

A mild hybrid is little more than a power steering unit placed in the drive train, so it's not that great a leap. Notice that GM is smart enough to focus their mild hybrid efforts on profitable vehicles like SUV's, instead of selling a million low price vehicles for a loss.

Nice try. First, "mild hybrid" refers to a hybrid where the electric motor can't move the vehicle in any reasonable fashion by itself. The Prius goes 30 or 40mph on battery/electric, plenty of power for getting around in traffic. I've stood not heard them go by as they went by, because they were running on electric.

Second, "...profitable vehicles like SUV's..." Hilarious. They aren't profitable if GM doesn't sell any. Which, sadly, is the case.


The mileage gains come from Toyota's Atkinson cycle engine, so Toyota actually missed an opportunity to sell that engine in its other vehicles.

You don't understand much, do you? The Atkinson cycle reduces the power available. The electric drivetrain makes up for the reduced power. This is where the "synergy" in "Hybrid Synergy Drive" comes into play; the two systems complement each other. An Atkinson engine in a conventional vehicle would offer poor performance.

The proof's in the pudding. 20K units/month, good prices, satisfied customers, Toyota made about $16 billion last year.

GM? Not so much.

dag,

I doubt you would be able to find out, as the Japanese bury their financial information within countless partnerships, subsidiaries, etc., but Toyota can't be making any money importing Prius' to the US and selling them for only $25K, even at a rate of 20K per month.

Toyota has a closing window of opportunity, as Tesla, Fisker, Aptera and GM bring out EV's with RE's. Toyota invested so much time and effort, will they ever see anything more than mere goodwill, while Hymotion profits of Prius conversions?

dag,

I doubt you would be able to find out, as the Japanese bury their financial information within countless partnerships, subsidiaries, etc., but Toyota can't be making any money importing Prius' to the US and selling them for only $25K, even at a rate of 20K per month.

If they weren't profitable for Toyota, they would be building Priuses in the same lame quantities that GM's building their hybrids.

I found a reference in Bloomberg, Toyota was selling them for more than unit cost back in 2002. And then they ramped up production. Dramatically. And then did it again. And again.

Thinking that Toyota's having trouble with the Prius is just more wishful thinking.

If they weren't profitable for Toyota, they would be building Priuses in the same lame quantities that GM's building their hybrids.

I found a reference in Bloomberg, Toyota was selling them for more than unit cost back in 2002. And then they ramped up production. Dramatically. And then did it again. And again.

Thinking that Toyota's having trouble with the Prius is just more wishful thinking.

Hmmm, citing a reference without linking it, then ignoring the recent drop of the dollar against world currencies - I own you.

Hmmm, citing a reference without linking it, then ignoring the recent drop of the dollar against world currencies - I own you.

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2002-toyota-prius.htm

Although the dollar has dropped dramatically against the Euro (which makes importing rebadged Opels such a brilliant idea), on 5/26/2004, the Yen was at 107.73.

Yesterday, it was at 105.489. You could have checked the facts before maknig a fool of yourself but I guess at the executive level, one doesn't worry about facts, one creates one's own reality.

You understand nothing and own less. Got a nice corner office at GM or what?

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/2002-toyota-prius.htm

Although the dollar has dropped dramatically against the Euro (which makes importing rebadged Opels such a brilliant idea), on 5/26/2004, the Yen was at 107.73.

Yesterday, it was at 105.489. You could have checked the facts before maknig a fool of yourself but I guess at the executive level, one doesn't worry about facts, one creates one's own reality.

You understand nothing and own less. Got a nice corner office at GM or what?

Why look it up when I can provoke you into doing it for me? As I said, I own you.

Why look it up when I can provoke you into doing it for me? As I said, I own you.

Only at the expense of looking like a fool.

And I look stuff up all the time... it's just one of the things that I do. And one of the things you don't do.

"Facts are stubborn things." - John Adams

"But they're essential to an argument grounded in reality." - dagwood55

First of all:

Guys, I thought we were all friends on this site. We are all facing the same challenges (high energy prices, the societal impacts on our transportation, purchasing power of the dollar, etc.) together. Let's leave our differences aside. We have to solve these problems together. We need to appreciate each others different strengths, which paradoxically, are often also weaknesses.

My thought on the NiMH issue: The EV-1 taught GM (and CARB) some lessons. One was to appreciated the weaknesses of existing (this includes NiMH used in the 99 EV-1) battery technologies. US automakers formed the United States Advanced Battery Consortium. Our universities, e.g. MIT, worked on new LiIon technologies. As a result of these long term sustained efforts over the last number of years, we have advanced battery technologies in the US beyond NimH. It's not that Toyota and Honda have an alternative assessment of battery tech, to my knowledge, they haven't made the commitment to research that GM/USA made over the last few years.

Amen, brother Tom! Why would that Japanese spend money on R&D, when they can just copy the results of American R&D?

Amen, brother Tom! Why would that Japanese spend money on R&D, when they can just copy the results of American R&D?

And, just to close the loop, which vehicles did they copy for the Prius and Insight? You didn't answer this question before, did you?

Nice view from that corner office?

And, just to close the loop, which vehicles did they copy for the Prius and Insight? You didn't answer this question before, did you?

Nice view from that corner office?

You are right, creating a dead-end configuration with, at best, slim margins, at the expense of their more profitable vehicles, is definitely a Japanese original.

GM worked to protect their profitable vehicles with mild hybrid systems, then leapfrogged the Prius with an E-REV. The E-REV can then be developed into a PFCV and BEV. Genius!

You are right, creating a dead-end configuration with, at best, slim margins, at the expense of their more profitable vehicles, is definitely a Japanese original.

GM worked to protect their profitable vehicles with mild hybrid systems, then leapfrogged the Prius with an E-REV. The E-REV can then be developed into a PFCV and BEV. Genius!

I like the economy of your posts; two big mistakes for the price of one.

Toyota is undoubtedly making plenty of money on the Prius (they made $16 billion last year) and, even if their margins were slim, the dealers are very happy to sell a car which is a high-margin item for them.

And "GM leapfrogged" is incorrect twice, GM is still trying to get a product out the door. Nor did GM "leapfrog," as GM has sunk a ton of cash into the two-mode hybrid. Which is, to date, a dismal failure.

You'd get partial credit for "leapfrog," if GM hadn't already wasted a ton of cash developing what you allege is a "dead end." But they did. In fact, as you point out, they've developed two "dead ends."

Unless, of course, you're wrong. Hmmm... who to trust? GM engineering or you? Oof. Tough call.

An expensive tech is foolish to build into a low margin vehicle. GM designed it for their high profit vehicle. For low margin vehicles, GM has opted for the series hybrid, which, as battery prices come down, can be scaled up for their larger vehicles.

I don't expect you to understand any of this, as you are no more trained / educated than a mere broom pusher.

"An expensive tech is foolish to build into a low margin vehicle. GM designed it for their high profit vehicle. For low margin vehicles, GM has opted for the series hybrid, which, as battery prices come down, can be scaled up for their larger vehicles." - Hendler

Your shamelessness is impressive, too. The error under consideration in your post wasn't about the intent of GM's various mistaken strategies, it was about your failure to include all of GM's systems in your roundup of GM's systems. I'd reminded you, previously, about the two-modes. You don't catch on very fast, do you?

Also, we'll see about the suitability of the series hybrid for low-margin vehicles. If it's a good system for low-margin vehicles, we should see a Volt that's very inexpensive on the street, shouldn't we? On the other hand, if it's suitable for low-margin vehicles, why is GM begging for tax credits? Or is GM introducing something really new... a $48K low-margin vehicle?

"GM worked to protect their profitable vehicles with mild hybrid systems, then leapfrogged the Prius with an E-REV. The E-REV can then be developed into a PFCV and BEV. Genius!" - Hendler

No mention of their expensive two-mode in that. And that's a lot of wasted money in parallel hybrids, a system you sneeringly refer to as a dead-end system when the system at hand is Toyota's.

More importantly, GM designed an expensive tech... which does not sell. Their strategy is a mistake, a failure. It invalidates your point.

And it makes your "Genius!" remark look pretty stupid, too. Genius in the auto business would have got some profit going on what they developed. GM builds only limited quantities of any of their current hybrids. The BAS appears to have a waiting line but GM only dribbles them out reluctantly. The two-modes are built in only limited quantities, which is just as well, because the public is greeting them with deafening indifference.

"I don't expect you to understand any of this, as you are no more trained / educated than a mere broom pusher." - Hendler

I'm trained well enough to detect bologna. What I lack, apparently, is the arrogance to make it to the executive level.

dag,

All your tired rants could have been said about Toyota, which took years before they "claimed" a profit.

Using your labels, you are an obvious Prius and NiMH fanboy, both will be footnotes in the broader history of the electrication of the automobile. It will be writ:

"In the late '90's through the mid 2010's, Toyota offered a vehicle called the Prius which they claimed to be a hybrid, but test and analysis has confirmed that the efficiency gains actually resulted from their Atkinson cycle engine and not the claimed "electrification" of their drivetrain from regenerative breaking."

Only plug-in series hybrids offer a means and a path of eliminating petroleum use.

"Only plug-in series hybrids offer a means and a path of eliminating petroleum use." - Hendler

I thought you were "visionary?" I can think of other ways of eliminating petroleum use.

"Using your labels, you are an obvious Prius and NiMH fanboy..." - Hendler

Well, I must admit, I am a fan of that which works and and is affordable for most Americans. Since "works" and "affordable" applies to the Prius with its NiMH battery, I suppose the shoe fits. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

"Eliminating petroleum use." - Hendler

Spoken like someone who is truly executive-level and completely detached from reality.

Why? When? At what cost? What are the other alternatives?

Petroleum is useful. Even if the Volt was a success, the national auto fleet is something like 200 million vehicles. Petroleum use isn't going to vanish overnight. Nor does the Volt itself aim to eliminate petroleum use... outside its 40-mile battery range, you're back on the juice.

GM has a complete lineup of lackluster cars that suck gas like there's no tomorrow. Had GM been as visionary as Toyota, the '04 hybrid Cobalt would get 48/45, we'd be 4 or 5 years into delivery of that Cobalt, there'd be significant national petroleum consumption reduction and the resulting drop in demand would be moderating prices, reducing funds available to terrorists and preventing some erosion of our balance of trade. And GM might be profitable and dealers might be smacking their lips over high demand for GM's hybrid Cobalt and Toyota wouldn't be #1 in worldwide sales.

All of which wouldn't make up for your inability to remember basic facts about the hybrid marketplace, to wit, GM has taken a scattergun approach to hybrids, has invested in three lines of hybrids to date (including the type you repeatedly label as a "dead end," the parallel hybrid) and two are already dismal failures in the marketplace.

I'm not expecting a radical change on their third attempt. If a horse comes in lame and dead last in the first two of three races, I'm not putting a lot of money on it to win in the third.

"Only plug-in series hybrids offer a means and a path of eliminating petroleum use." - Hendler

I thought you were "visionary?" I can think of other ways of eliminating petroleum use.

Actually, Jason, Peak Oil is another good means of reducing supply.


"Using your labels, you are an obvious Prius and NiMH fanboy..." - Hendler

Well, I must admit, I am a fan of that which works and and is affordable for most Americans. Since "works" and "affordable" applies to the Prius with its NiMH battery, I suppose the shoe fits. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

"Eliminating petroleum use." - Hendler

Spoken like someone who is truly executive-level and completely detached from reality.

Why? When? At what cost? What are the other alternatives?

Petroleum is useful. Even if the Volt was a success, the national auto fleet is something like 200 million vehicles. Petroleum use isn't going to vanish overnight. Nor does the Volt itself aim to eliminate petroleum use... outside its 40-mile battery range, you're back on the juice.

GM has a complete lineup of lackluster cars that suck gas like there's no tomorrow. Had GM been as visionary as Toyota, the '04 hybrid Cobalt would get 48/45, we'd be 4 or 5 years into delivery of that Cobalt, there'd be significant national petroleum consumption reduction and the resulting drop in demand would be moderating prices, reducing funds available to terrorists and preventing some erosion of our balance of trade. And GM might be profitable and dealers might be smacking their lips over high demand for GM's hybrid Cobalt and Toyota wouldn't be #1 in worldwide sales.

All of which wouldn't make up for your inability to remember basic facts about the hybrid marketplace, to wit, GM has taken a scattergun approach to hybrids, has invested in three lines of hybrids to date (including the type you repeatedly label as a "dead end," the parallel hybrid) and two are already dismal failures in the marketplace.

I'm not expecting a radical change on their third attempt. If a horse comes in lame and dead last in the first two of three races, I'm not putting a lot of money on it to win in the third.

I would point out that you need to replace all ICE vehicles in a very short order, so I predict ANYTHING with a battery will sell.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4092

You can drill away as the UK did with a totally market based approach & it still won't help much. Good luck with your summer driving season!

Actually, Jason, Peak Oil is another good means of reducing supply.

I agree that petroleum consumption will go down, but will we adapt in a way that maintains our economy and lifestyle, or not? If we move forward with a REEV concept, then the gradual adoption, then proliferation of EV based vehicles will happen smoothly, maintaining our economy and lifestyle. If we keep buying parallel hybrids, like the Prius, we won't properly transition to EV's, and our economy and lifestyles will be hurt.


I would point out that you need to replace all ICE vehicles in a very short order, so I predict ANYTHING with a battery will sell.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4092

You can drill away as the UK did with a totally market based approach & it still won't help much. Good luck with your summer driving season!

REEV's are the best way to move from ICE to EV, so that there is minimal shock to all sectors of our economy.