I was channel surfing today, and happened to catch a movie called "Who Killed The Electric Car?"

Basically, it was a hatchet job which claims that GM and the Oil Industry conspired to kill the EV1 Electic Car, in order to sell more oil.  I watched it, and was amazed at the ignorance of the filmmakers.

I was actually able to drive an EV1 in 1997.  This was when I worked for Hughes Aerospace, which is a GM company.  They had several of them in the company motor pool, and I drove one several times in and around LA.

The things basically sucked.  They had a very slow acceleration, roughly the same as a Geo Metro (3 cylinders).  They also had an absolutely horrible AC system.  Now AC may not seem like a big deal, they are almost a requirement in LA during the summer.  On top of that, they were only 2 seats.  And because the trunk was entirely taken up by batteries, the cargo capacity was almost nill.  And on top of it, the range was only around 60 miles on a 12 hour recharge.  And the purchase of around $5,000 in batteries every 2 years.

And what was the cost of this "Dream Car Of The Future"?  Oh, around $50,000.  At the same time, you could buy a Jagual XJS or a fully loaded Lexis.  Let's see, you can get the equivelent of an electric Yugo, or you can get a luxury car.  Is it any wonder that these things were a failure?

I saw the movie. I found it very interesting. What the movie told me is that GM was NOT being honest about why they pulled the cars and why they destroyed them-after saying they were not going to do that. Why was GM so hush-hush about its reasoning? I do believe that GM had been paid off by the oil companies which explains why most of the cars they build now are such gas guzzlers. I'm sure you will come back saying that they have a few cars that get good gas mileage which I don't doubt but the majority of their vehicles do not-which is why people aren't buying them and they are having financial difficulty. 

I can't speak from personal experience but if the car did suck, they could have used the technology to build a better one. I'm assuming it was just the first generation of electric cars. 


Cat

I do believe that GM had been paid off by the oil companies which explains why most of the cars they build now are such gas guzzlers. I'm sure you will come back saying that they have a few cars that get good gas mileage which I don't doubt but the majority of their vehicles do not-which is why people aren't buying them and they are having financial difficulty.   


The reason why the cars were destroyed instead of sold is not to unusual.  Along with the sale would come an obligation to provide service and support.  I remember hearing somewhere that the car companies are required to provide support for at least 10 years.  Not to mention that GM also manufactured the batteries.  That means they would have had to build at least 5 sets of replacement batteries for each car sold.  That is a large investment on top of something that had already failed.

And I simply don't but the concept that the oil companies paid them off.  After all, even if a car came out tomorrow that ran on water, it would hardly put the oil companies out of business.  Because most cars have alifespan of 30+ years, the cars already built will still need gas.  Not to mention the trucks, trains, boats, airplanes, tractors, and other heavy vehicles.  It is impossible to make vehicles like that to run on anything but petrolium.

And this is not the first time that the oil companies have faced the loss of their major product.  The major oil companies all actually started in the kerosene business.  Their major products were kerosene and lubrication oil.  Then along came Thomas Edison's light bulb, and suddenly kerosene use was almost eliminated.  However, there was this curious waste product from the distilation of kerosene that had previously been thrown away.  Shortly after the light bulb was invented, the internal combustion engine was created, which just happened to work wonderfully when fed this "chemical waste".

And oil companies do not only make gasoline.  Electric cars will still need tires, which are mostly made from petrolium based rubber.  As do the hoses, electrical wiring, air bags, and many other items.

Just like 100 years ago, oil companies will still make huge amounts of money.  People also say that they are the ones keeping hydrogen vehicles off of the market.  However, who else in the country has the kind of distribution network in place to provide hydrogen to consumers?  Just as the telegraph companies were the first ones to get into telephones, oil companies would simply expand their supply and distribution network to provide hydrogen if it became economically fesable.

Besides, what would GM or Ford care about the oil companies?  These are not gas companies, and they would sell a car that ran on flatulance if the people would buy it and it made them money.  They already manufacture vehicles that run on ethanol to other countries.  The only reason that fuel has not caught on in the US is the inability to provide enough ethanol to make it a viable replacement.

I think the real cause is really the consumer.  For the most part, people really do not want to "live green".  That is why they buy Gigantomobiles that get 10 MPG instead of Rollerskates that get 45 MPG.  Sure Geo Metros got outstanding gas mileage, but how many people really want to have one in their driveway?

I watched it on cable recently, it was depressing to think that a car that could have revolutionize driving, and save the enviorment, was quickly forgotten and destroyed.

Have you heard of the Tesla Roadster? It's a high-performance electric sports car that will do 0-60 in about 4 seconds. I once saw a clip on YouTube where they put one up against a 500-hp Dodge Viper and the Tesla blew its doors off in the quarter-mile. The manufacturer also claims that it'll get about 250 miles on a single charge. Currently they're asking just north of $100,000 for one.

I think this is absolutely the right way to go, and would love to see the Tesla race competitively, in perhaps SCCA club racing or something. Motorsport is the best way to rapidly advance automotive technology. All the technology on modern cars which we now take for granted (fuel-injection, 4-wheel disc brakes, overhead-cam engines, etc.) was originally developed for racing and was only found on the most exotic race cars 40 years ago.

Right now they are very expensive but if Tesla Motors does succeed I'm sure the price will come down, and hopefully they will eventually be able to mass-produce more mainstream family cars that are affordable to the average person.

The other thing they got right was the styling. It's one sexy beast!

http://trippmd.com/images/cars/Tesla/TeslaRoadster2007Red01Small.jpg

Whereas with earlier electric cars, it seemed like the styling was meant to say, "Hey, everyone, look at me! I'm driving an electric car! I'm green!"

http://i.treehugger.com/files/th_images/electric_cars.jpg

When in reality, what they really said was, "Hey, everyone, look at me! I'm a dork!"  ;D ;D ;D

Whereas with earlier electric cars, it seemed like the styling was meant to say, "Hey, everyone, look at me! I'm driving an electric car! I'm green!"

http://i.treehugger.com/files/th_images/electric_cars.jpg

When in reality, what they really said was, "Hey, everyone, look at me! I'm a dork!"  ;D ;D ;D


ROFL!!!!!  And that is also a big reason why they failed.

Personally, I still think the way to go in the near future is hybred and biofuels.  The technology for both vehicles is here now, and can be easily obtained.  Hydrogen is still decades away, because of the problems with handling what is essentially an explosive fuel.

Personally, my next vehicle if I can is going to be with a diesel engine.  With very little work, I will then be able to run on anything from Diesel fuel to kerosene to vegitable oil.  I just wish I could find a diesel engine to fit in my old Econoline 200.  Because vegitable oil is much cheaper, and hopefully I am going to be needing it again in the near future.

ROFL!!!!!  And that is also a big reason why they failed.

Personally, I still think the way to go in the near future is hybred and biofuels.  The technology for both vehicles is here now, and can be easily obtained.  Hydrogen is still decades away, because of the problems with handling what is essentially an explosive fuel.

Personally, my next vehicle if I can is going to be with a diesel engine.  With very little work, I will then be able to run on anything from Diesel fuel to kerosene to vegitable oil.  I just wish I could find a diesel engine to fit in my old Econoline 200.  Because vegitable oil is much cheaper, and hopefully I am going to be needing it again in the near future.


My sister and her husband recently bought a 2002(?) VW Beetle TDI, which has a turbodiesel engine and is supposed to be capable of 50 mpg. (On a trip from Nebraska to North Dakota last week, I think they said they averaged 37 mpg.)

Unfortunately, VW quit selling the diesel Bugs in the US in 2003(?) due to increased emissions standards. My sister and her husband have always been into Beetles, and the TDI Bugs have become much more desirable lately because of their economy and because at least around here anyway, diesel averages about 50 cents less a gallon than regular gas. They found theirs on eBay and my brother-in-law had to fly clear down to Texas to pick it up and drive it back to Nebraska.

do they talk with a GM rep in the movie? what does he say?

Sounds like an interesting documentary, although I haven't yet seen it.

Yeah, I read some articles c. 1998 that were hyping it up as the "car of the future" and even though it sounded good on paper, I doubted it would happen. For much of the same reasons Mushroom pointed out (i.e. tremendously high cost, no trunk space).

Honestly, other than previous decade cars getting less and less common, I don't see transportation getting much different until at least the mid-late 21st Century.

Honestly, other than previous decade cars getting less and less common, I don't see transportation getting much different until at least the mid-late 21st Century.


Mr. Fusion will solve all our problems.

http://www.outatime.it/public/40-mr_fusion.jpg

Say what you want about GM killing off the EV1, but it sounds like they're gonna take another crack at it:

http://z.about.com/d/cars/1/7/2/b/Chevrolet_Volt_Concept.jpg

This is the Chevrolet Volt concept. It's more of a hybrid, but it runs strictly on electricity on trips under 40 miles, then a small gas engine kicks in which keeps the batteries charged and can extend the range up to 640 miles. (With the gas engine going it's supposed to get about 50 mpg.)

GM is said to want to have this car in production by 2010. If this is indeed true, and it's not too terribly expensive, I may bite.

http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/

do they talk with a GM rep in the movie? what does he say?




Pretty much that the fault is with the consumer, for not buying the car, which means it could be mass produced.

I'm sure I'll get disagreements for this, but I hope things stay relatively the same as far as transportation and daily life. With all due respect, everybody always seems to want this "futuristic" world, but I think that's grossly overrated. Things are fine the way it is. Change sucks, lol.

Sure, blocky '80s cars will probably be pretty rare by c. 2015 (with anything before that being almost the way, say an old Hot Rod is now). But other than those little changes, I don't see anything much else going on. With as much as it would take to regulate everything and pass laws, retrofit roads and everything else "behind the scenes", ground vehicles won't be going away anytime soon.

Even the automobile itself took about 30-40 years to go from something only rich people had, to there being highways and paved roads across the entire country. Like 1890 to 1930 was probably the full transition, and it wasn't even common enough for everyone to afford one until c. 1945. And there wasn't anything else of its kind before it (horse and buggy doesn't count as a contemporary!), so just think how long it would take for flying cars to dominate. Not in any of our lifetimes, probably.

Don't think for a moment that its not possible to build a decent and practical electric car.

GM didn't kill the electric car because they never built one worth a damn to begin with. The oil companies had nothing to do with it. The EV-1 was poorly built using very old electric car technology (from the early 80's) right from the start. GM got government funding and grants to build it years before it made it to the road, otherwise it would've never seen the light of day.

GM is notorious for building "the car of the future" and never putting it into production. All show and no go. There's not enough digits on my hands and toes of the examples of "cars" GM, Ford or Chrysler has put together to gauge the publics reaction to a auto with revolutionary features, they KNOW they have no plans to build.

Remember the revolutionary Chrysler Turbine? How about that Corvette Wankel Rotary they were going to build? Ford had a prototype that featured NUCLEAR power (too bad they didn't put that in the Pinto, huh?) Both Cadillac and Oldsmobile had air bags ready in cars back in '71. Ford had optional seat belts available as far back as '57 but no one ordered them. The Big Three had cold feet from getting burned on giving the public the good stuff before its time.

Its frustrating because its painfully obvious that GM has the engineering talent to build a very successful competent electric car, but they simply don't want to, or find a way to make it profitable...lets get real people, car companies despite what they want you to think are VERY conservative, they will not make changes to tried and true unless there is some serious $$ to be made. Putting out an electric car with new and unexpected costs doesn't sound good to the stockholders on Grand Ave, and the public has shown it will gladly pay for $4/gal gas & still has a ridiculous desire for SUV's and high horsepower trucks, so it doesn't happen.

Don't get me wrong, as a car guy, I don't really like electric cars, they just don't have the same feel and soul of a living breathing engine. But I know that a viable electric car can be built, and the public really could use one, its just gonna take some company other than sleeping giant GM to do it.

Electric vehicles are all fine and dandy, except one major thing: how are they recharged? Probably by a line fed from your garage, which in turn gets its power through the power grid via a coal burning plant. Steam plants have at best an 18% raw fuel to usable energy conversion rate. Gasoline engines aren't much better, but they are better. Not that buying a huge generator for your house is cheaper than buying power from the electric company...

Electric vehicles will have their day, but that day is not today.

Hybrids don't make much sense to me. Many, if not all, are produced at a loss to the manufacturer, and are horribly complicated, in essence having twice the parts of a gas or electric vehicle. I can't imagine the cost of upkeep on a hybrid over any decent amount of time.


Sure Geo Metros got outstanding gas mileage, but how many people really want to have one in their driveway?


I had one and was quite fond of it. 40 MPG was the worst I got, also the best (3cyl, 5 speed manual). I drove the piss out of it, but, driven to its limits, it actually has good acceleration. Tight parking? No problem. Really cold day? No problem: the very small block heated quickly, providing me with warmth in the cabin (cracked heads on some models/years was a problem though). The only problems I had in 30k miles was worn out tires and a failed brake light switch. The car was quiet, had good AC, decent room, responsive handling, parts were cheap, and maintenance was a breeze (how many people can say that about their vehicles?).

Of course, I also had a Kawasaki 250 Ninja at the time. Despite its lack of displacement, with my airbox, exhaust and carb modifications, but gearing it way up (I dropped the rear sprocket from 45 teeth to 37), it still could do 0-60 in less than six seconds. It also got between 56-62 MPG. It was sporty, cheap, light, maneuverable and reliable (and cheap insurance), but seriously uncomfortable on rides longer than two hours.

Ant

I'm not too sure whether electric cars are the way to go.  I'm not too sure if ethenal is the way to go either. But, we need to find vehicles that run on something other than petroleum products.


Cat

I'm not too sure whether electric cars are the way to go.  I'm not too sure if ethenal is the way to go either. But, we need to find vehicles that run on something other than petroleum products.


Cat
I don't care if a car runs on batsheesh as long as it has a range of at least 300 miles (while cruising at 80 mph) and has enough power to quickly get me around a tractor-trailer on a two-lane highway.  :D

I had one and was quite fond of it. 40 MPG was the worst I got, also the best (3cyl, 5 speed manual). I drove the piss out of it, but, driven to its limits, it actually has good acceleration. Tight parking? No problem. Really cold day? No problem: the very small block heated quickly, providing me with warmth in the cabin (cracked heads on some models/years was a problem though). The only problems I had in 30k miles was worn out tires and a failed brake light switch. The car was quiet, had good AC, decent room, responsive handling, parts were cheap, and maintenance was a breeze (how many people can say that about their vehicles?).


Hey, I had one myself.  I actually had the Chevy Sprint, which is the exact same car (both the Metro and Swift are just a rebranded Suzuki Swift).  And accelleration was good, as long as the ground was flat or downhill.  My daily commute at the time was 100 miles each way, through a mountain pass.  In some areas I would run all-out down a hill (reaching 75), only to be crawling at 45 by the time I got to the top of the next hill.

And I actually drove it from LA to Boise one time.  Now that was a nightmare trip from hell, let me tell you!  Going over all those mountains really sucked, and there were times I was actually being passed by trucks because I was so slow (30-35 mph).

I'm not too sure whether electric cars are the way to go.  I'm not too sure if ethenal is the way to go either. But, we need to find vehicles that run on something other than petroleum products.


These cares are already out there, and available to anybody.

If you truely want to "go green", it is as simply as buying a diesel powered vehicle.  With some very inexpensive modifications ($200-500), you can modify it to run on vegitable oil.  At that point, you can run on anything from Wesson to used french fry oil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetable_oil_used_as_fuel

What I would love to see is some kind of prototype vehicle that combines the advantages of both biodiesel and hybred vehicles. 

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/f/f2/250px-Stonecutters_song.jpg

we do! we do!

These cares are already out there, and available to anybody.

If you truely want to "go green", it is as simply as buying a diesel powered vehicle.  With some very inexpensive modifications ($200-500), you can modify it to run on vegitable oil.  At that point, you can run on anything from Wesson to used french fry oil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetable_oil_used_as_fuel

What I would love to see is some kind of prototype vehicle that combines the advantages of both biodiesel and hybred vehicles. 



I have heard of the cars that run on used cooking oil. I think it is a great idea and wish that more car manufacturers would make these cars-rather than people having to convert the cars themselves.

I do agree that a hybrid of a hybrid/biodiesel would be pretty cool.



Cat

I have heard of the cars that run on used cooking oil. I think it is a great idea and wish that more car manufacturers would make these cars-rather than people having to convert the cars themselves.

I do agree that a hybrid of a hybrid/biodiesel would be pretty cool.


The conversion is really not even nessicary.  The only things you need to have changed is to add 2 or more filters to remove water and other impurities in the cooking oil fuel.  The other is a pre-heater for use in cold weather (cooking oil has a higher combustion point then diesel fuel).  And Volkswagon diesels are already certified to run on 100% biodiesel, with no added modifications.  And if you have a vehicle with a diesel engine, there is nothing wrong with adding vegitable oils to your fuel.  The only time such filters and heaters are needed is when you run on 100% vegitable oil.

One of the main reasons why this and ethanol are not used as fuels is the simple fact that there is not enough of a supply.  Cooking oil is cheap compated to fossil fuels at the moment, but we use over 1,000 times more pertolium then we do vegitable oils.  It would take the entire output of the Midewst to produce enough corn oil to replace gasoline.  It would take twice as much land to produce enough ethanol.