GM and Electric Cars
GM claims to be reinventing the automobile. It's a shame they didn't think of that when they had the EV-1 running strong. Even now, I hold against GM that they killed the EV-1, and crushed nearly every one of those cars.
Here's an entry by one of the EV-1 workers
But I still hold it against them that they killed it. They could have been leading the free world in electric and hybrid vehicles by now, but they chose to destroy their lead in the name of oil.
The CEO said on leaving that killing the EV-1 was one of his central regrets.
Too bad, too little, too late. What about these? They could have been WAY ahead of Toyota -
EV1 Drivetrain Prototypes
EV1 shown plugged into charging station
General Motors revealed several prototype variants of the EV1 drivetrain at the 1998 Detroit Auto Show. The models included diesel/electric parallel hybrid, gas turbine/electric series hybrid, fuel cell/electric version and compressed natural gas low emission internal combustion engine version [18][19].
The new platform was a four-passenger variant of the EV1, lengthened by 19". For hybrid and electric vehicles, the battery pack was upgraded to 44 NiMH cells, arranged in "I" formation down the centerline, which could fully recharge in just 2 hours using onboard 220 V induction charger; additional power units were installed in the trunk, thus complementing the 3rd generation 137 hp AC Induction electric motor installed in the hood. Hybrid modifications retained the capability of all-electric ZEV propulsion for up to 40 miles (64.4 km).
EV1 CNG
The CNG variant was the only non-electric vehicle in the line-up, even though it employed the same up-stretched platform. It used a modified Suzuki 1.0 L turbocharged I3 all-aluminum OHC engine installed under the hood. Due to a very high octane rating of the CNG (supposedly allowing for a greater compression ratio), this small engine was able to deliver 72 hp at 5500 rpm.
The batteries were replaced with two CNG tanks capable of maximum operating pressure of 3000 psi. The tanks could be refueled from a single nozzle in only 4 minutes. In-tank solenoids shut off the fuel during refueling and engine idle, and a pressure relief device safeguarded against excessive temperature and pressure. With the help of continuously variable transmission, the car accelerated to 0-60 mph (96.6 km/h) in 11 seconds. The maximum range was 350 to 400 miles, and fuel economy was 60 mpg (in gasoline equivalent).
EV1 Series Hybrid
The series hybrid prototype had gas turbine engine APU placed in the trunk. A single-stage, single-shaft, recuperated gas turbine unit with a high-speed permanent-magnet AC generator was provided by Williams International; it weighed 220 lb (99.8 kg), measured 20 inches (50.8 cm) in diameter by 22 inches (55.9 cm) long and was running between 100,000 and 140,000 rpm. The turbine could run on multiple fuels, from reformulated gasoline to compressed natural gas. The APU started automatically when the battery charge dropped below 40% and delivered 40 kW of electrical energy, enough to achieve speeds up to 80 mph (128.8 km/h) and to return the car's 44 NiMH cells to a 50% charge level.
Fuel tank capable of 6.5 gallons (24.6 l) allowed for a highway range of more than 390 miles (627.6 km) and fuel economy of 60 to 100 mpg (3.9 to to 2.4 L/100 km) in hybrid mode, depending on the driving conditions. The car accelerated to 0-60 mph (96.6 km/h) in 9 seconds.
EV1 Parallel Hybrid
The parallel hybrid variant featured 1.3 L turbocharged DTI diesel engine from Isuzu delivering 75 hp, installed in the trunk along with an additional 6.5 hp DC motor/generator; the two motors drove rear wheels through electronically controlled transaxle. When combined with AC induction motor which powers front wheels, all three power units delivered a total output of 219 hp, accelerating the car to 0-60 mph (96.6 km/h) in 7 seconds. Single tank of diesel fuel could keep the car running for 550 miles with a fuel economy of 80 mpg.
A similar technology is used in the 2005 Opel Astra Diesel Hybrid concept.
What more did they want? Hellfire and brimstone, GM - you could have been where Toyota is now - but you chose Hummers instead of Hybrids. Idiots.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/15/A
R2006061502052_pf.htmlThe first wave of cars, including the Smithsonian's, could travel 52 miles on a charge of four to six hours; the second-generation cars used a nickel metal hydride battery, which increased the range to about 125 miles. Cars were leased, rather than sold, by Saturn dealers, with monthly costs from $350 to more than $500.
...
GM's Barthmuss compares the launch of the EV1 with the debut of the iPod, only with far fewer customers. "We, in our heart of hearts, believe we did the right thing," he says. "The EV1 experience demonstrated to California regulators that battery technology was not going to advance further. It was only going to appeal to a small number of people."
So why did Rick Waggoner think it was a bad decision?
http://understory.ran.org/2006/06/29/gms-wagoner-admits-ev1-debacle/
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/6/28/174247/184
So Rick Wagoner, CEO of General Motors, is asked in the June issue of Motor Trend magazine (not online) which decision he most regrets as CEO. His answer is appropriate, what with a certain documentary coming out soon, and it's under the fold.
Rick Wagoner's most-regretted decision:
Axing the EV1 electric-car program and not putting the right resources into hybrids. It didn't affect profitability, but it did affect image.
Gee, if only someone had warned Wagoner that fuel efficiency was going to be an important factor for consumers in the future. If only someone had asked -- begged, even -- to preserve the EV1. Certainly Wagoner wouldn't have ignored a public outcry like that!
What's truly upsetting is that by Wagoner's own admission here, cutting the EV1 didn't affect profitability. If Wagoner is to be believed, GM would have been no worse off today (admittedly, no great shakes there) if they'd kept the EV1 going.
So why cut it? Honda has kept the barely-produced Insight along as a branding exercise. Why wouldn't GM want the same with the EV1, considering the number of lovable celebs who were out hawking it?
People tend to call us paranoid when we suggest that GM killed its own revolutionary design in a gross act of corporate malfeasance -- collusion with oil companies and a fear of obsolescence. It may be just a slip of the tongue, but if Wagoner means what he says, then the conventional explanation -- the EV1 was a money loser -- just became inoperative.
What does that leave?
What, indeed?
Or, why should I trust GM now?
Here's an entry by one of the EV-1 workers
But I still hold it against them that they killed it. They could have been leading the free world in electric and hybrid vehicles by now, but they chose to destroy their lead in the name of oil.
The CEO said on leaving that killing the EV-1 was one of his central regrets.
Too bad, too little, too late. What about these? They could have been WAY ahead of Toyota -
EV1 Drivetrain Prototypes
EV1 shown plugged into charging station
General Motors revealed several prototype variants of the EV1 drivetrain at the 1998 Detroit Auto Show. The models included diesel/electric parallel hybrid, gas turbine/electric series hybrid, fuel cell/electric version and compressed natural gas low emission internal combustion engine version [18][19].
The new platform was a four-passenger variant of the EV1, lengthened by 19". For hybrid and electric vehicles, the battery pack was upgraded to 44 NiMH cells, arranged in "I" formation down the centerline, which could fully recharge in just 2 hours using onboard 220 V induction charger; additional power units were installed in the trunk, thus complementing the 3rd generation 137 hp AC Induction electric motor installed in the hood. Hybrid modifications retained the capability of all-electric ZEV propulsion for up to 40 miles (64.4 km).
EV1 CNG
The CNG variant was the only non-electric vehicle in the line-up, even though it employed the same up-stretched platform. It used a modified Suzuki 1.0 L turbocharged I3 all-aluminum OHC engine installed under the hood. Due to a very high octane rating of the CNG (supposedly allowing for a greater compression ratio), this small engine was able to deliver 72 hp at 5500 rpm.
The batteries were replaced with two CNG tanks capable of maximum operating pressure of 3000 psi. The tanks could be refueled from a single nozzle in only 4 minutes. In-tank solenoids shut off the fuel during refueling and engine idle, and a pressure relief device safeguarded against excessive temperature and pressure. With the help of continuously variable transmission, the car accelerated to 0-60 mph (96.6 km/h) in 11 seconds. The maximum range was 350 to 400 miles, and fuel economy was 60 mpg (in gasoline equivalent).
EV1 Series Hybrid
The series hybrid prototype had gas turbine engine APU placed in the trunk. A single-stage, single-shaft, recuperated gas turbine unit with a high-speed permanent-magnet AC generator was provided by Williams International; it weighed 220 lb (99.8 kg), measured 20 inches (50.8 cm) in diameter by 22 inches (55.9 cm) long and was running between 100,000 and 140,000 rpm. The turbine could run on multiple fuels, from reformulated gasoline to compressed natural gas. The APU started automatically when the battery charge dropped below 40% and delivered 40 kW of electrical energy, enough to achieve speeds up to 80 mph (128.8 km/h) and to return the car's 44 NiMH cells to a 50% charge level.
Fuel tank capable of 6.5 gallons (24.6 l) allowed for a highway range of more than 390 miles (627.6 km) and fuel economy of 60 to 100 mpg (3.9 to to 2.4 L/100 km) in hybrid mode, depending on the driving conditions. The car accelerated to 0-60 mph (96.6 km/h) in 9 seconds.
EV1 Parallel Hybrid
The parallel hybrid variant featured 1.3 L turbocharged DTI diesel engine from Isuzu delivering 75 hp, installed in the trunk along with an additional 6.5 hp DC motor/generator; the two motors drove rear wheels through electronically controlled transaxle. When combined with AC induction motor which powers front wheels, all three power units delivered a total output of 219 hp, accelerating the car to 0-60 mph (96.6 km/h) in 7 seconds. Single tank of diesel fuel could keep the car running for 550 miles with a fuel economy of 80 mpg.
A similar technology is used in the 2005 Opel Astra Diesel Hybrid concept.
What more did they want? Hellfire and brimstone, GM - you could have been where Toyota is now - but you chose Hummers instead of Hybrids. Idiots.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/15/A
R2006061502052_pf.htmlThe first wave of cars, including the Smithsonian's, could travel 52 miles on a charge of four to six hours; the second-generation cars used a nickel metal hydride battery, which increased the range to about 125 miles. Cars were leased, rather than sold, by Saturn dealers, with monthly costs from $350 to more than $500.
...
GM's Barthmuss compares the launch of the EV1 with the debut of the iPod, only with far fewer customers. "We, in our heart of hearts, believe we did the right thing," he says. "The EV1 experience demonstrated to California regulators that battery technology was not going to advance further. It was only going to appeal to a small number of people."
So why did Rick Waggoner think it was a bad decision?
http://understory.ran.org/2006/06/29/gms-wagoner-admits-ev1-debacle/
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/6/28/174247/184
So Rick Wagoner, CEO of General Motors, is asked in the June issue of Motor Trend magazine (not online) which decision he most regrets as CEO. His answer is appropriate, what with a certain documentary coming out soon, and it's under the fold.
Rick Wagoner's most-regretted decision:
Axing the EV1 electric-car program and not putting the right resources into hybrids. It didn't affect profitability, but it did affect image.
Gee, if only someone had warned Wagoner that fuel efficiency was going to be an important factor for consumers in the future. If only someone had asked -- begged, even -- to preserve the EV1. Certainly Wagoner wouldn't have ignored a public outcry like that!
What's truly upsetting is that by Wagoner's own admission here, cutting the EV1 didn't affect profitability. If Wagoner is to be believed, GM would have been no worse off today (admittedly, no great shakes there) if they'd kept the EV1 going.
So why cut it? Honda has kept the barely-produced Insight along as a branding exercise. Why wouldn't GM want the same with the EV1, considering the number of lovable celebs who were out hawking it?
People tend to call us paranoid when we suggest that GM killed its own revolutionary design in a gross act of corporate malfeasance -- collusion with oil companies and a fear of obsolescence. It may be just a slip of the tongue, but if Wagoner means what he says, then the conventional explanation -- the EV1 was a money loser -- just became inoperative.
What does that leave?
What, indeed?
Or, why should I trust GM now?