[fd9]

Q: How is the car different than the EV-1?
A: The EV-1 had....older technology batteries, and a 100 miles driving range.

Huh?

Can someone explain, in lamen's terms, why in '96 GM was able to build an electric car that had more than twice the driving range than this brand new Volt? By the time the Volt actually hits production, it will have been fifteen years since the EV1 was first produced. FIFTEEN years, more than enough time to advance battery technology, but look at where we're at now. We've actually gone backwards. Why?

 

[Texas]

Huh?

Can someone explain, in lamen's terms, why in '96 GM was able to build an electric car that had more than twice the driving range than this brand new Volt? By the time the Volt actually hits production, it will have been fifteen years since the EV1 was first produced. FIFTEEN years, more than enough time to advance battery technology, but look at where we're at now. We've actually gone backwards. Why?

Sure, I can help you. Go to the search button and type "EV1" or "who killed the electric car". You will get more than you require. Oh wait, I guess you are just ranting based on limited facts and no technical experience? Remember, the search button is your friend!

 

[Greenman]

Search Button May Not Be The Truth

I did a search on EV1 and mostly saw GM's reasons for killing the EV1. Being a big, greedy corporation, I dismiss their explanation as being inherently lacking in credibility.

For example, they claim that they couldn't make a profit. This sounds like Lutz right now. Profit on a car is a complex mix of upfront, fixed and variable costs. Per Wikipedia, the upfront investment was $500 million. This is sunk cost and of no importance to the decision to stay in the market with EV1. By all accounts, lessees loved the car and their was a backlog waiting.

Is it possible that they could lose money on every one? Yes, but I don't see how GM with its manufacturing expertise couldn't sell an EV1 at a reasonable price when today's EV manufacturers are able to do it. Battery technology may have changed but manufacturing and materials?

Didn't Rick Waggoner, one of America's most overly compensated executives, admit that this was one of the dumbest things he did?

Incredibly short-sighted and incompetent at best; greedy stupidity at worst.

 

[frankyB]

I'll give you a few more days to find out about Tesla and come here and make a similar post about Tesla (which I like BTW) and make a comment that sounds like this: "How come a boutique car builder car create a EV with 250 miles ranges and GM can't".

There is ton of information here if you take the time to read why it is. But the simple answer is we are not talking about the same thing, yeah all EV, but not same technology and not same goals.

The EV1 had it's own problem, the Volt is not perfect either, but seems to be one of the best compromised, for me series hybrids are the futur until technology has improved enough that we can do without it.

There is not perfect EV as there is not perfect ICE.

 

[willdryden]

The EV1 had it's own problem, the Volt is not perfect either, but seems to be one of the best compromised, for me series hybrids are the future until technology has improved enough that we can do without it.

There is not perfect EV as there is not perfect ICE.

That is true. There is no one configuration that will satisfy everybody. For me, an EV1 and a full sized van built on the Eflex system would do nicely though.

 

[frankyB]

That is true. There is no one configuration that will satisfy everybody. For me, an EV1 and a full sized van built on the Eflex system would do nicely though.

So you want an oversized/heavy battery, with reduced amount of recharge attached to a range extender on a body kit with high drag... and let me guess you won't pay no more then 30K$ for it

 

[JeffU]

EV education = EV demand and availability

Public demand will speed up Plug-in EV availability.
And public education on EVs is badly needed as we can all see.
There seems to be much more disinformation being put out about using solar powered homes to charge cars than truthful information.
My neighbor has a 3000 watt solar array on his home and drives a 2002 Toyota RAV4 EV.
He hasn't bought any electricity or gas for 3 years now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLwS1Ox63k0

Watch and learn.
Jeff

 

[kubel]

Huh?

Can someone explain, in lamen's terms, why in '96 GM was able to build an electric car that had more than twice the driving range than this brand new Volt? By the time the Volt actually hits production, it will have been fifteen years since the EV1 was first produced. FIFTEEN years, more than enough time to advance battery technology, but look at where we're at now. We've actually gone backwards. Why?

Simple: Range costs money.

People that criticize the Volt for going "backwards" often aren't aware of the cost of the "old" EV1. It cost GM $80,000 to produce a single EV1. GM wants to eventually sell the Volt for $30,000.

Battery technology really hasn't improved much since the late 1990's. Li-ion has arrived on the scene and can provide more range and more cycles, but the cost is still too high. So naturally, we can't throw in a 400-mile Li-ion pack and expect GM to sell it to us for $30,000.

Contrary to popular belief, we aren't facing energy supply problems. We are facing energy storage problems. There exist no cheap and energy dense storage device like a gas tank. Batteries and ultracapictors do exist and they can store very cheap and very clean energy from the grid, but they are extremely expensive. See my signature.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Can someone explain why in '96 GM was able to build an electric car that had more than twice the driving range than this brand new Volt?
By the time the Volt actually hits production, it will have been fifteen years since the EV1 was first produced.
FIFTEEN years, more than enough time to advance battery technology, but look at where we're at now. We've actually gone backwards.
Why?

Because Chevron-Texaco bought all the patents from EC Ovonics for Nickel Metal Hydride batteries, then initiated the COBASYS lawsuits so as to prevent them from being used in pure battery electric vehicles.

This is known as 'capturing' technology, and the reason why Chevron-Texaco did it was because they felt threatened by it.
It certainly was'nt a dead technology, why would an oil company buy all the patents & initiate a lawsuit to prevent a 'dead' technology from being used in pure battery electric vehicles?

Yes fd9 we have gone backwards, thanks to the oil companies & their life-partners, the car companies.

 

[willdryden]

So you want an oversized/heavy battery, with reduced amount of recharge attached to a range extender on a body kit with high drag... and let me guess you won't pay no more then 30K$ for it

Since the current Express Cargo 3500 runs 40 - 50K, I would expect my version to run between 50 and 60K depending on options.

 

[bedrock8x]

It cost GM 100K+ for each EV1 copy because of light weight material used, aluminum body panels and magnesium suspension components. Even in volume production it would cost more than 60K, so there is no market at this price point for any EV. Not the big corporate conspiracy that killed the EV1.

The Volt will be built with conventional material, steel.

Huh?

Can someone explain, in lamen's terms, why in '96 GM was able to build an electric car that had more than twice the driving range than this brand new Volt? By the time the Volt actually hits production, it will have been fifteen years since the EV1 was first produced. FIFTEEN years, more than enough time to advance battery technology, but look at where we're at now. We've actually gone backwards. Why?

 

[darthvader420]

The RAV4EV was built with conventional materials too, and it somehow manages to get equal or better range than the EV1. See the Chevron/Cobasys lawsuits mentioned on page one, that's why you can't buy that car anymore.

 

[DaV8or]

Somebody needs to create a website called www.ev1moveon.org so we can stop talking about this [email protected]#king car and look to the future! At that site it should point out that if you can't get over the huge betrayal to the entire human race committed by GM and Texaco, then you should just go over to the Prius fan sites, Toyota/Honda fan sites or Green whatever fan sites and leave us on the Volt site the hell alone without all the whimpering about the past. Over at those other sites you will be very well received.

Those of us here are excited about the Volt. We believe that it is revolutionary and relevant to today. If you think it's all just a big swindle, I don't care. Let me find out "the truth" on my own time. I really don't need you to regurgitate some blah, blah, blah that you got from a silly bit of entertainment and some hokey websites! GM accidentally created a martyr out of the EV-1. When the Jews (Big Oil Companies) saw the threat of the massiah (EV-1) , they saw only one way out. Convince the Romans (GM) to tack that sh!t to the cross! What the hell ever! the EV-1 was not ever, nor is it now my savior!

Please prostilitize elsewhere and let us enjoy our misguided Volt fantasy while it lasts.

 

[darthvader420]

I never said the Volt is vapourware or a misguided fantasy. I'm actually very excited about the Volt. But when I see people trying to defend GM's past behaviour I feel the urge to step in and inform them. The Volt is still years away so there's not much else to talk about atm.

And the oil execs are not jews, they are rich Texans. Get real Dave. Your attempts to trivialize my arguments by comparing them to run of the mill conspiracy theories are pretty weak.

Dave, I post here so much because of people like you spreading around bullshit talking points with no basis in reality. The EV1 was not the be all and end all. The NiMH battery technology did however show great promise before it was buried.

 

[kubel]

See the Chevron/Cobasys lawsuits mentioned on page one, that's why you can't buy that car anymore.

Not true! Cobasys still makes NiMH and is selling them to GM for use in their hybrids, to Verizon, and to the US Army- but they only fill large-volume orders. If you aren't ordering a large volume, you can get NiMH from Nilar and a few other companies here in the US, and yes, they are large-format. This myth that NiMH is a locked up technology and that's why you can't get EVs is baseless. The reason why we don't have EVs is because there is low demand, partly because lots of batteries are expensive, and also because they are impractical for many people. The only thing that kept EVs afloat was the zero emission mandate that several states adopted. Once that was killed, so were the EVs.

NiMH is still around, still being produced today, yet you don't see very many pure EVs using them. Why? It has nothing to do with Cobasys. It's because Li-ion is superior. That's why we see them in laptops, PDAs, MP3 players, cameras, etc... Next time you take out your laptop battery, take a look at the battery label. Says Li-ion, right? They are more energy dense, both by volume and by weight, and they are now cheap enough that their benefits outweigh (or should I say underweigh) the additional cost. And that's the same reason why we see them in all the next-generation EVs and EREVs.

There is no conspiracy theory.

 

[BillInInd]

Not true! Cobasys still makes NiMH and is selling them to GM for use in their hybrids, to Verizon, and to the US Army- but they only fill large-volume orders. If you aren't ordering a large volume, you can get NiMH from Nilar and a few other companies here in the US, and yes, they are large-format. This myth that NiMH is a locked up technology and that's why you can't get EVs is baseless. The reason why we don't have EVs is because there is low demand, partly because lots of batteries are expensive, and also because they are impractical for many people. The only thing that kept EVs afloat was the zero emission mandate that several states adopted. Once that was killed, so were the EVs.

NiMH is still around, still being produced today, yet you don't see very many pure EVs using them. Why? It has nothing to do with Cobasys. It's because Li-ion is superior. That's why we see them in laptops, PDAs, MP3 players, cameras, etc... Next time you take out your laptop battery, take a look at the battery label. Says Li-ion, right? They are more energy dense, both by volume and by weight, and they are now cheap enough that their benefits outweigh (or should I say underweigh) the additional cost. And that's the same reason why we see them in all the next-generation EVs and EREVs.

There is no conspiracy theory.

I guess it should be mentioned that Nilar has changed the way they make the NiMH battery enough to where they are skating just by the patent. I don't know if there technology stands to the patent design.

I do know that Nilar has been so overwhelmed by orders that they are no longer taking any new orders.

 

[LyleL]

When it's laid out how GM had established electric drive technology in the 90's but refused to create a series hybrid, when at the same time Toyota was producing the parallel hybrid. Isn't that a suppression or just a choice (by all three joined at the hip domestic automakers)? Let's not dwell on just the parts of an electric car (battery), let's look at all projects private and government sponsored to see if the EV1 was the only opportunity squandered.

Check out my post that details how GM took full advantage their electric propulsion research - NOT. http://gm-volt.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10097&postcount=13

 

[DaV8or]

Let's not dwell on just the parts of an electric car (battery), let's look at all projects private and government sponsored to see if the EV1 was the only opportunity squandered.

Why? Do you have a time machine? Are you planning to go back and change the way things transpired? If not, I can't say as to why it's worth dwelling on the past. The time is right now and things are moving forward.

 

[LyleL]

Quote:
Originally Posted by LyleL
Let's not dwell on just the parts of an electric car (battery), let's look at all projects private and government sponsored to see if the EV1 was the only opportunity squandered.
DaV8or said: Why? Do you have a time machine? Are you planning to go back and change the way things transpired? If not, I can't say as to why it's worth dwelling on the past. The time is right now and things are moving forward.

__________________


“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” George Santayana

Never looking at history is like forgetting about what Enron did and not enact any laws to prohibit future behavior, but just say, oh that was yesterday, today is now... let's just move on.

Never looking at history would be the similar to, forgiving all criminals of their past, because today is now, let's just move forward.

Never looking at history is like being an alzheimers patient that can't remember what happened yesterday, those people are a danger to themselves and others and need special care.

Past behavior (history) can predict future behavior.

I learn from my own past experiences and if wise, from the experiences of others. Are you suggesting that all past learning experiences (history) should be discarded and only live in the moment?

We wouldn't have much in the way of technology if we ignored the past work (history) of others. The airplane, radio, television, computers, medicine, building construction, cars all depend on the creative ideas of others and behavioral choices done in the past. We have to learn from the past work and events of others to become an expert or at least be certified in a particular work field (i.e. engineer).

History (past life events) lays a foundation upon which if we are wise, we can use to make better choices in the future to improve our lives. Ignore history and we learn nothing.

 

[Altazi]

Methinks there is a subtle difference between dwelling on the past, and remembering the past.