Coy GM to announce er, something electrical tomorrow

[wtmusic]

"The mysterious 230 campaign (or is it 23 plus a plug?) that GM is apparently running right now might have something to do with a new vehicle. While speculation is abuzz across the net, including in our previous post on the multimedia ad project, we just spotted a short note from the new GM titled: "GM President and CEO Fritz Henderson to Provide Update on 'New GM.'" Here's what it says:

DETROIT - General Motors President and CEO Fritz Henderson will conduct a public webcast on Tuesday, August 11, to update consumers and media about the 'New GM' and its product, brand and customer-outreach strategies. Mr. Henderson is also expected to make a product announcement during this time."

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/08/10/gms-secretive-230-ad-campaign-gets-a-potential-hint/

Dumping their serial hybrid Volt config for an all-electric one? :shrug:

[phantom power]

1. Dr. Chandra, will I dream?

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. I sincerely doubt they will "dump" the "Volt" in favor of a "pure EV"

Even if they do introduce a "pure EV" I don't think they'll "dump" the "Volt" (they've simply got too much invested in it.)

The "Volt" should be less expensive than a "pure EV," unless the pure EV has a relatively small battery capacity.

A pure EV would save on complexity (i.e. no ICE, no fuel system, no generator and accompanying power management systems.) However, increasing the battery capacity would quickly make it cost more.

One of the things which doomed the "EV-1" (I'm sorry, but please face facts) was the public perception that it had a limited range.

[wtmusic]

3. Ah, you caught me in a generous mood this morning

and public perception of limited range did play a part...in 2001.

Now, check out the poll that AutoBlogGreen is running which shows the limited-range Nissan Leaf with almost as many takers as the Volt:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/08/09/poll-leaf-volt-or-neither-which-do-you-prefer/

Is GM responding to Nissan's announcement? Tune in tomorrow...

[madokie]

4. Here is the results on the poll

LEAF vs Volt:
You decide Who needs a range extender? Give me the Leaf 904 (40.4%)
I don't want to be stranded! I'll take the Volt 941 (42.1%)
I'll stick to a hybrid 132 (5.9%)
I like electric drive, but I'll wait for a fuel cell 146 (6.5%)
Batteries are for cranking the engine

[OKIsItJustMe]

5. I would hardly take a poll of the readers of "AutoBlogGreen" as representative of the general public

It's interesting, you know, "Considering only people who really care about such things, which car would they prefer?"

But, this is a little bit like judging who will win the general election based on a poll of the readers of a political blog.

[wtmusic]

6. The "general public" won't consider buying either car.

This is both cars' focus group. The survey is valid.

[OKIsItJustMe]

7. Sure they will

I know a number of people who bought Priuses, who never frequent "AutoBlogGreen."

If readers of "AutoBlogGreen" are the only potential customers, EV's are in trouble.

[Greyskye]

9. I've frequented AutoBlogGreen before.

And we own a Prius. :shrug: I don't think your logic is too strong. And he didn't say that they were the "only potential customers", he said it was a focus group. I like what I've seen of both the Volt and LEAF. It all comes down to what the vehicles are like in the real world.

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. "The 'general public' won't consider buying either car."

Sure they will. The first Prius I ever rode in was owned by my (rather "right-wing") cousin, who did not buy it for "green" reasons. She saw that gasoline prices were rising, and was intrigued by the technology.

(Last year, she traded it in on a small SUV.) :-(

[rollingrock]

13. That's not what killed the EV-1

the EV-1 had a decent range for many folks living in the big city, and would have been successful in several major metropolitan markets. The lack of a marketing campaign, of which there was none to speak of, is what killed the EV-1. Also the lack of R&D funding, which would have improved the range even more, was the nail in the coffin. You can't sell something if you don't even try to advertise it. That's why we're so inundated with car commercials every time we switch on the TV.

[wtmusic]

14. Good luck.

OKIsItJustMe has more dogma than you have time. Trust me.

[OKIsItJustMe]

15. Yeah, trust wtmusic…

…but it's not http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma">dogma.

I simply don't buy the conspiracy theory:
http://energyoutlook.blogspot.com/2006/06/whiff-of-conspiracy.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6153394-7.html
http://www.greencar.com/articles/5-things-need-gm-ev1.php
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/sunraycer3.htm
http://www.autozine.org/Graveyard/html/GM/EV1.html

And what I said was: "One of the things which doomed the "EV-1" (I'm sorry, but please face facts) was the public perception that it had a limited range."


At the time, I was very interested in the idea of an EV, but I freely admit, the range limitation was a serious drawback in my estimation. (Not that they ever came to my area…)

[wtmusic]

16. Um, yeah it is.

From your link:

"The term "dogmatic" is often used disparagingly to refer to any belief that is held stubbornly and without evidence."

You must get in the habit of reading those links before you post.

[OKIsItJustMe]

17. I see, that was a joke!

I am well aware of what dogma means, and I actually did read the link.

I am skeptical of almost all popular "conspiracy theories."

[wtmusic]

18. What about the conspiracy theory that says the EV-1 wasn't viable

and its demise actually wasn't the result of collusion between big oil and automakers?

Pretty wild, huh? :crazy:

[OKIsItJustMe]

19. That would not be a "conspiracy theory" since it does not involve a conspiracy

The "conspiracy theory" in this case is the theory that big oil and the automakers "conspired" to keep EV's off the roads. (But then you knew that.)

In the interests of full disclosure, I also don't believe:

• The CIA killed JFK
• The CIA killed RFK
• The Apollo moon landings were faked
• 9/11 was an inside job
• The "DaVinci Code" is real
• "Global Warming" is a conspiracy to sabotage the "American way of life."

to name but a few…

[wtmusic]

21. That's JUST what evil bastards like Chris Paine want you to think.

Alexandra Paul, Collette Divine, Ed Begley...the REAL players. Pulling all the strings.

[OKIsItJustMe]

22. No, I don't think they're involved in a conspiracy either

Three actors, and an actor/director, well meaning, no doubt. However, none of them impress me as experts on the auto industry.

However, let's assume (just for the sake of argument) that they all know the "real truth." If Paine (like you) really believed that GM was involved in a conspiracy, why would he be saying such nice things about GM so soon afterwards?

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1669723_1669725_1670578,00.html

Green Motors

By BRYAN WALSH

No one would mistake Chris Paine for a General Motors shill. In his 2006 documentary Who Killed the Electric Car?, the filmmaker laid out a damning case against GM for unplugging the EV1, the electric vehicle it manufactured in the 1990s and then discontinued in 2003, preferring instead to produce high-margin but gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs. "They were a technological leader, and they fumbled that leadership away," Paine says. Ask him about the U.S. carmaker now, though, and Paine sounds almost admiring. "Their new hybrids are making a difference, and their plug-in technology is a real advance," he says. "GM is making some really good moves now."

…

It sounds to me like he thinks GM made a marketing blunder (something I'm willing to agree with, and I believe GM is as well.) GM had some good technology, and they really didn't exploit it. They pretty much had a prototype "Volt" on their hands (an EV-1 with an engine to recharge the batteries) but they didn't pursue it.

[wtmusic]

20. delete

[Javaman]

8. let me guess. To GM it will be "Revolutionary" while to the rest of us

who have a clue will deem this just more corporate/madison ave "green" fanfare bullshit.

I could do without the big "announcements".

[tinrobot]

11. An EV with a 230 mile range?

I can only hope.

[OKIsItJustMe]

12. I sincerely doubt it

If so, they've done a tremendous job of keeping it secret. No, I think this explanation is more likely:

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090807/CARNEWS/908079985

What is 230? We bet it's GM's moonshot--the Chevrolet Volt's mpg rating

By DALE JEWETT

The number 230, with an image of an electric plug outlet as the "0," is popping up in a lot of places lately--such as the virtual ad on the backstop of televised baseball games and around the Web. It also has 8-11, for Aug. 11.

…

What is 230? We bet it's the mpg rating of the Chevy Volt--a number that General Motors hopes will put the Toyota Prius and other hybrids on the trailer.

…

Now, to the EPA test. The fuel-economy ratings on the sticker come from a series of tests (schedules, in government speak) that simulate driving in the city and on the highway, with the air conditioner engaged and in high-speed and cold-temperature conditions.

Here are the distances for each test:

-- City: 11.04 miles at a 21.2 mph average.

-- Highway: 10.26 miles at 48.3 mph average.

That's a total of 21.3 miles--which means the Volt won't burn a drop of fuel if the battery pack delivers slightly more than half its promised range. And it points out that the government's fuel-economy test may not be the best measurement for electric-intensive powertrains.

…

Whatever it is, I'd say it's effective advertising. It's certainly got people "talking."