Electric cars off to a big start in the wrong direction. IMHO

[Seasoned Oak]

For all the GM bashers out there,Toyota is coming out with their answer to the volt ,here it is with its 15 mile range for $47000
http://seekingalpha.com/article/147324-toyota-plans-to-mass-produce-plug-in-prius-in-2012

 

[Dune]

We should be using petroleum as a chemical feedstock not a fuel. I believe that one day we'll look back and say "I can't believe that we actually burned petroleum products.

Yep, our generation will be laughed (or cursed at) at for burning oil. Not just burning it though, burning all of it. We will have to hope whales make a good come back. Drill baby, drill.

 

[SPhill]

Good point Driz. It is my primary concern with the Volt. It's a very complex machine. Toyota in the meantime has had 10 years to polish its equally complex design and come up with a remarkably trouble-free vehicle.

Agreed. Toyota positioned the Prius as the face of the company -- highly efficient, forward thinking technology that would identify Toyota as the leader in innovation. Everything counted on making Prius reliability above reproach (a general perception Toyota already enjoyed). They largely succeeded and gained enormous Green credibility, to the extent that many consumers gave little thought to the consideration that Toyota also makes the Sequoia, Land Cruiser, GX and LX; full size SUVs of the sort that domestic OEMs were excoriated for daily. It was a tremendously sucessful joint engineering and marketing campaign.

I share your concern. GM may be wise to back away from positioning the Volt in the same manner, particularly since they don't enjoy the good graces of Consumer Reports. Opinions of CR differ among enthusiasts, but I tend to believe that their lackluster eval will have more traction with the public than Motor Trend's Car of the Year award.

 

[begreen]

Some of the reviews for the Prius I and II were sour grapes too. The market proved the reviewers wrong.

 

[Billy123]

How does the heater work on the Volt?

 

[drizler]

Ill stick with the truck that thats proven itself to me every day for 35 years and thats GM trucks. I tried a toyota truck just to see what all the fuss was about and it turned out to be a poor substitute for a real truck that can go to work every day in a contracting business and perform. CR rates the tacoma trucks when they are brand new, not 5 years later when their falling apart. Perhaps if your just driving to bingo its fine if the frame dont fall off. I could never haul wood for the stove in it as after about 300 lbs in the back the rubber stops were bottomed out on the axle,yeh a real winner that 1999 toyota was. you can have em.

No Trump the ratings from CR cover all years especially when looking at problems with past models.
Also you're comparing a Tacoma with a full sized truck and complaining about hauling?
Toyota stepped up to the plate and has been fixing or replacing all of those defective vehicles, can you expect the US automakers to do the same?

THe toyota was rated as a half ton ,and i bottomed out with 4 cement blocks in the back,im quite sure the blocks were no more than 40-50 Lbs each so 200Lbs max (8x16) The rear springs are crap, plain and simple iv heard tundra owners(full size toyota trucks) say the same thing. THe truck was useless for hauling anything over 200LBs. THey do that so it rides like a car,yea it does ride like a car and hauls like one too. I have half ton GM trucks ,can carry a ton before they bottom out.
You guys that say GM makes all junk,and toyota and everything foreign is so perfect and always reliable, its just BS. im here to tell you my experience side by side comparison owning both at at the same time. I listened to you guys before when i bought the toyota believing the hype, thinking they were so wonderful,well i tried it and it was a joke compared the any GM truck i ever owned. SO you can make all the excuses you want for the many design flaws in toyota trucks,you keep drinking the koolaid and ill keep what works for me. BY the way CR gave that 1999 a great rating so much for CR.

And CR was right. If you live in areas where road salts are not an issue the Tacoma and Tundra do not have frame rot issues. Like I've said before I have a neighbor with a late 90's Tacoma with no rust whatsoever. To be noted the frames were manufactured for Toyota here in the states and the problem frames were all by the same manufacturer.

I call BS on your spring example unless you had a defect. My neighbor with the Tacoma goes woodcutting all the time with me and loads his truck up with 1/2 to 1/3 a cord of wood with no issues of springs bottoming out. It certainly squats pretty good but it's not really meant for heavy hauling either.

I don't think GM makes all junk, but more than 50% of what they make is.

When it comes to frame rot Chevy is the KING. Just look at the the rails right at the base of the dip where they round down under the cab. That's where they rust out and crack every time. The mud and salt catch in there and they rust out right there. The 3/4 ton series is better because the frame is thicker so the rustout takes longer. Don't even get me started on Chevy electrical problems bypassing fuses that lost contact and melted loose in the cheap fuse boxes. I don't even bother fixing them anymore, just cut the wire and toss in a dollar inline fuse. Speedometer clusters also love to conk out on Chevy's too as do the radios for whatever reason. My buddy just got an 04 with 65K miles and it tossed the oil pump when his wife was driving it. Burned up the engine because she didn't stop but who ever heard of a car with that low mileage blowing an oil pump and that was a 5.3 no less. I never had any of these problems with any old Jap cars. About the only thing I can fault the Jap cars with is rusting out a bit faster. It's things like this that make me wonder why anyone would buy a volt for nearly double the price of a Prius (though I do hate that ugly assed rear end they have on them). Just a bit fugly to me. On the subject of the battery technology used by the Prius I read the report last year. Those batteries are so good they will live the entire life of the car. The failure rate was something like .0004% which roughly translated to near perfection. It means they have only lost a literal handfull to shorting out internally ect. Not bad at all especially for new technology.

 

[begreen]

How does the heater work on the Volt?

Not sure, but I thought I read somewhere that it has a heatpump (AC run in reverse) for greater efficiency. When it gets below a certain temp, the engine comes on to help warm things up. Sounds like an ok solution for our climate, but not for really cold regions. The Leaf uses a straight resistance heater, which directly drains from the battery, therefore affecting range. They recommend preheating the car while it is plugged in to save power when untethered.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Its funny iv never had any of these problems in 35 years of GM cars and trucks,or my family in 45 years, with the exception of rust in the 80s that just about all Mfgs had and fixed with the exception of toyota which was still putting out rusting frames and bodies on their trucks right up top the 2000 model year. Just the usual starter here,or an alternator there,exhaust pipe and muffler and regular maintainence such as oil changes.

GM must have a special factory where they build cars and trucks just for me.

No electrical problems,never an engine or transmission failure,never a rust problem since the 80s. Trucks all have from 175000 to 250000 miles,still going fine.
And i use these trucks for a contracting business for the last 23 years,not for going to bingo or commuting.

As i said I think ALL Major Mfgs are putting out quality products today and ALL Mfgs have put out some junk in the past including toyota.
For the REAL story on the volt go to gm-volt.com to read excerpts of ACTUAL owners of the car before making UNinformed comments
If toyota were to put a 40 mile range battery in its prius it would cost $50000 for all those carping about the price of the volt.

 

[TMonter]

Its funny iv never had any of these problems in 35 years of GM cars and trucks,or my family in 45 years, with the exception of rust in the 80s that just about all Mfgs had and fixed with the exception of toyota which was still putting out rusting frames and bodies on their trucks right up top the 2000 model year. Just the usual starter here,or an alternator there,exhaust pipe and muffler and regular maintainence such as oil changes.

GM must have a special factory where they build cars and trucks just for me.

No electrical problems,never an engine or transmission failure,never a rust problem since the 80s. Trucks all have from 175000 to 250000 miles,still going fine.
And i use these trucks for a contracting business for the last 23 years,not for going to bingo or commuting.

As i said I think ALL Major Mfgs are putting out quality products today and ALL Mfgs have put out some junk in the past including toyota.
For the REAL story on the volt go to gm-volt.com to read excerpts of ACTUAL owners of the car before making UNinformed comments
If toyota were to put a 40 mile range battery in its prius it would cost $50000 for all those carping about the price of the volt.

Except it's not a 40-mile range. It's an average 27-32 mile range.

Yes all cars have gotten better but when you look at reliability of US cars GM and Chrysler are at the bottom of the pack overall with Ford being upper middle.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

If you read the ACTUAL post from volt owners on the gm-volt site many are getting between 50 and 60 electric miles on a regular basis.
Im sure you could get bad MPG with a prius or any car under certain circumstances,My toyota got bad MPG on every trip.
Its the nissan leaf that had drivers stranded with a dead battery after only a fraction of the stated range,cant happen with the volt.

If you ck ten different rating lists you will find 10 different opinions,but it s not hard to find a top ten list with GM and ford and Dodges on it,these days.

http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&subject=iqs&story=iqsCar

 

[SPhill]

Ya gotta do better than JD Powers. They maintain a financial relationship with the businesses they are supposed to be independantly evaluating.

GM and the others pay for those awards and trophies. No credibility there.

San Francisco Chronicle, JD Power Cozy with Winners

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Ya gotta do better than JD Powers. They maintain a financial relationship with the businesses they are supposed to be independantly evaluating.

GM and the others pay for those awards and trophies. No credibility there.

San Francisco Chronicle, JD Power Cozy with Winners

I do much better. I take my opinions from ACTUAL ownership experience of the vehicle im commenting on.
As far as CR i used to buy Products from their recommendations only to have them perform poorly and break down prematurely. I cancelled my subscription 5 years ago. Even when i was a member i never filled out their car survey.
Based on past experience if i were to buy a new truck today it would be a GM HD 6.6 Duramax Diesel , truck is bulletproof No one has been able to match it since it came out in 2002. There are 2 in my family since 2002 and they rock.

 

[jdemaris]

. . . electric motors are 90% efficient versus 20-30% for internal combustion engines?

What does electric motor efficiency have to do with overall vehicle efficiency? You lost me on that one. Most electric power in the US comes from burning coal - that is mined and transported with equipment using petroleum.

A gas or diesel internal combustion engine runs on petro-products directly.
An electric powered car runs on coal, gas, and diesel products - indiirectly.

Electric cars use half the energy of gas models.

I'd like to see some verifed facts and figures on that statement. You are claiming that . . . all the energy involved in making such an electtic car - along with all the energy used to produce the acutal grid electricity - to get that car down the road - is in total 1/2 of what a gas or diesel car uses for the same task? I do not believe that for one second.

Additonaly the U.S. produces most of our electricity from domestic sources (national security).

Yes, domestic coal mostly. And if we had to greatly increase our coal mining, coal transporting, and coal burning to fuel cars and trucks -what do you think might happen to our coal supply? Seems we already did that once with our "limitless" supply of domestic primary oil reserves.

Finaly, many of us could produce our own electricity, gasoline is a little more difficult to manufacture at home.

Hmmm. Tell me how to do that please. I live in central New York and already have 7000 watts worth of solar-electric panels. I cannot even run electric hot water heaters ,much less power electric cars and trucks. Granted that if I lived in New Mexico, or Arizona -I'd get much more from my solar array. But, not all of us live in sunny areas. To say "many of us" could produce that power seems to imply most of us live in sun and have the money to spend.

 

[jdemaris]

Its funny iv never had any of these problems in 35 years of GM cars and trucks,or my family in 45 years, with the exception of rust in the 80s

Sounds like you are less demanding of your GMs than I am. Or perhaps you DID own special ones.

I've worked as a mechanic, off and on, since the 1960s. Cars, trucks, HD diesels, heavy equipment, etc.

As to brand-bias, I was a long-time Chevy and GM fan. 50s-early 70s.

That being said. Let's see.
GM camshaft failures 1970s up to the mid-80s. Huge problem that did not happen with any other make.
GM valve-guide failures for the early years of non-leaded gas useage.
Chevy Vega aluminun-bore engines - built like a Briggs & Stratton lawn-mower engine.
70s Oldsmobile diesel engines built upon gas-engine platforms. Miserable failures until the new law-suit DX replacement engine came out in 1981.
GMs 4-6-8 gas engines.
GMs over-drive automatic that came out in 1982. The 700R4 that nobody had a good fix for until 1987 and up.
GMs head-gasket failures with the first-year 1982 6.2 diesels that were designed by Detroit Diesel.
GM 6.5 diesel trucks 1994 and up to late 90s - miserable electronic pump control failures with NO known fix for many years.

And yes, of course GM made some good stuff.

As to rust? I live in two places. Central New York and northern Michigan. In both places, road salt is used winter and summer. Ice control in the winter and dust control in the summer. Rust is a big issue. I just scrapped out a 2002 Dodge van due to severe rust. I recently replaced a two-foot long section of frame rail in my 98 Chevy truck. Had to do the same in my 95 Dodge truck. Note they are both 3/4 ton trucks with thicker frames then 1/2 tons. My wife's 2003 Subaru has rust holes in it. So - my conclusion? They still rust. Ford has a major recall going on right now with rear axles breaking from rust when less then 10 years old.

No brand-loyality inferred here except. . . I am now a Ford fan simply because they are the only independent car/truck company in the USA and took NO bail-out money. Funny that Ford's quality ratings are at an all-time high, while GMs are low.

If you think people only by GM because GM is the best - I suggest you look at the long history of poor quality issues for Mercedes and Audi over the years. People who like the brand buy them anyway.

 

[Dune]

. . . electric motors are 90% efficient versus 20-30% for internal combustion engines?

What does electric motor efficiency have to do with overall vehicle efficiency? You lost me on that one. Most electric power in the US comes from burning coal - that is mined and transported with equipment using petroleum.

A gas or diesel internal combustion engine runs on petro-products directly.
An electric powered car runs on coal, gas, and diesel products - indiirectly.

Electric cars use half the energy of gas models.

I'd like to see some verifed facts and figures on that statement. You are claiming that . . . all the energy involved in making such an electtic car - along with all the energy used to produce the acutal grid electricity - to get that car down the road - is in total 1/2 of what a gas or diesel car uses for the same task? I do not believe that for one second.

Additonaly the U.S. produces most of our electricity from domestic sources (national security).

Yes, domestic coal mostly. And if we had to greatly increase our coal mining, coal transporting, and coal burning to fuel cars and trucks -what do you think might happen to our coal supply? Seems we already did that once with our "limitless" supply of domestic primary oil reserves.

Finaly, many of us could produce our own electricity, gasoline is a little more difficult to manufacture at home.

Hmmm. Tell me how to do that please. I live in central New York and already have 7000 watts worth of solar-electric panels. I cannot even run electric hot water heaters ,much less power electric cars and trucks. Granted that if I lived in New Mexico, or Arizona -I'd get much more from my solar array. But, not all of us live in sunny areas. To say "many of us" could produce that power seems to imply most of us live in sun and have the money to spend.

Since I don't have your computer skills you must bear with me a little.

First point, motor efficency. I don't know how I can explain it any better, but I will try. If your internal combustion engine is 20% efficent, and your electric engine is 90% efficient, then the electric motor with put more of the energy it uses into moving the car. Wasted energy in internal combustion engines is mostly heat, you know that they expel tremendous amounts of heat right? The reamainder of waste is mostly friction, the electric motor has only two bearings.

Second point;Electric cars use half the energy. This is a long known, well established fact. This includes the fact that electric generating plants are only about 30% efficeint. I have no interest in doing your homework for you. Do some research.

Third point, I am no proponent of burning coal. If you read more of my writing you would know that.

Fourth point; I didn't even mention solar power. There are many other ways to generate electricity. Google is your freind. We have members here who have systems far over 30 KW. 7 KW is a tiny system these days.

 

[jdemaris]

. Google is your freind. We have members here who have systems far over 30 KW. 7 KW is a tiny system these days.

Sorry chief, but NO, Google is not my friend. In fact, Google can't even spell "Googol" correctly. So their first post ever - had their name spelled wrong. In case you don't already know GOOGOL is a big number and was the company name spelled wrong (and still is).

Google is a tool and like any tool can help and can hinder. All depends on who is using it, why and how.

My def of efficiency of a car goes something like this. How well a fuel - where ever it happens to be in raw form - can be transformed into a car or truck taking us down the road. There is a lot of stuff that has to go in that process, from start to finsh. The end-efficiency of an electric motor being compared to the end-efficiency of an internal combustion engine - in itself - is meaningless.

And about solar electtric? If you think a 30KW system is the norm for a household, you and I are on different planets. Hey, maybe your planet is better?

Solar incentives are offered by some states since few can afford solar-electric on their own. Most such incentive programs do not allow a solar array that can provide more then 110% of annual useage. So, if you think a 30KW system is normal to provide 110% useage to single-family households - your friends must be very wasteful and have houses like Al Gore's.

 

[Dune]

. Google is your freind. We have members here who have systems far over 30 KW. 7 KW is a tiny system these days.

Sorry chief, but NO, Google is not my friend. In fact, Google can't even spell "Googol" correctly. So their first post ever - had their name spelled wrong. In case you don't already know GOOGOL is a big number and was the company name spelled wrong (and still is).

Google is a tool and like any tool can help and can hinder. All depends on who is using it, why and how.

My def of efficiency of a car goes something like this. How well a fuel - where ever it happens to be in raw form - can be transformed into a car or truck taking us down the road. There is a lot of stuff that has to go in that process, from start to finsh. The end-efficiency of an electric motor being compared to the end-efficiency of an internal combustion engine - in itself - is meaningless.

And about solar electtric? If you think a 30KW system is the norm for a household, you and I are on different planets. Hey, maybe your planet is better?

Solar incentives are offered by some states since few can afford solar-electric on their own. Most such incentive programs do not allow a solar array that can provide more then 110% of annual useage. So, if you think a 30KW system is normal to provide 110% useage to single-family households - your friends must be very wasteful and have houses like Al Gore's.

Like I said, solar is only one way to make electricity. Electricity is easier to make than gasoline for the average homeowner. You could choose to buy gasoline for the rest of your life, at ever increasing prices, or you can make an investment which will free you from energy costs. With the additional dramatic savings in maintainence costs of the electric car, long term payback is huge.

 

[jdemaris]

Like I said, solar is only one way to make electricity. Electricity is easier to make than gasoline for the average homeowner. You could choose to buy gasoline for the rest of your life, at ever increasing prices, or you can make an investment which will free you from energy costs. With the additional dramatic savings in maintainence costs of the electric car, long term payback is huge.

Explain please how you - with the present state of technology - can easily make enough energy to run and heat your home, propel your car/truck, etc. Also tell me your plan to produce food for the masses with no petro-chemicals for fuel, fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides.

I've got a couple of hundred acres with a lot of wind, some sun, water-power etc. and it still is no easy task. Many people live in apartments or 1/4 acre lots. I think your are misinformed - or having pipe dreams.

As to your wld claims about "dramatic savings" with electric cars? Hey, they have NO record yet of any savings. So far, they've just eaten up a lot of tax-payer dollars.

As to electric cars being highly efficient? Let's see. Coal fired plants run 25-35% efficient buring coal. 5%-7% of that electricity lost through the grid. Then you charge batteries in your car? Batteries means another 10% loss. Then wind drag at 2% more loss. Then rolling resistance another 4%-5% loss. But wait - at the end your electric motor is 80%-90% efficient and you think that makes it all much better?

 

[Dune]

I never said heat your home with electricity. I never said anything about providing food. I wouldn't even try to heat water with solar generated electricity, but apparently you have, or at least done the math. It is far more efficient to heat the water directly from the sun, and easy to acomplish as well.

Think it is no easy task now, wait till we run out of oil. My father ran his fishing boat on wood chunks or gasoline or kerosene or diesel with in a one off engine. It is you who is sadly mis-informed.

If you really have the land with the wind, put up a bigger windmill and make some power. You can buy them any size you want, or, if you were a half decent mechanic, you could readily build your own.

Any one who heats with wood could generate their own electricity with a gassifier, the same way my father ran his deisel fishing boat in Norway during WWII.

As to your complete ignorance regarding electric cars, really, check into Google. At one time, one third of all motor vehicles and many boats were electric. Electric vehicles have a very long track record, with reliability and low maintaince being among their highest virtues.

For the last time, the atmospheric carbon produced by driving an electric car is aproximatly half of that of a gasoline engined car. Deisel cars are about 50% more efficeint than gas, but are far less common in passenger cars. These are facts, not opinions to debate.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Its funny iv never had any of these problems in 35 years of GM cars and trucks,or my family in 45 years, with the exception of rust in the 80s

If you think people only by GM because GM is the best - I suggest you look at the long history of poor quality issues for Mercedes and Audi over the years. People who like the brand buy them anyway.

Never had the problems you mention,did not own those particular vehicles. Any company selling 6 million + cars and truck a year will have issues with some models,just like toyota the only other company selling that many vehicles does. I dont care what anyone else buys or likes,im doing what works for me and has worked well for 35 years.
End of story.

 

[jdemaris]

I never said anything about providing food . . . It is you who is sadly mis-informed.
. . . .If you really have the land with the wind, put up a bigger windmill and make some power. You can buy them any size you want, or, if you were a half decent mechanic, you could readily build your own.

Any one who heats with wood could generate their own electricity with a gassifier, the same way my father ran his deisel fishing boat in Norway during WWII. . . . . As to your complete ignorance regarding electric cars, . . . .

We all make decisions and form opinions on incomplete information. You are overtly guilty of that when you accuse me of being "ingorant." You know nothing about me, or what I might know. It seems that somehow, you think by calling me ignorant, it somehow enhances your arguments?

Food is directly tied to energy use in this country, so I regard it as very relevant. Shift corn production to alchohol fuel instead of food, and food prices go wacky. When petroleum gets scarce and pricey - it effects it as a motor fuel and as an agricultural necessity.

In regard to gassification? Yeah, it works for some things for some people. I've got a tractor and a 17KW genset that runs on wood-gas. NO, not everyone can do it. It takes fuel, equipment, and expertise. If tomorrow . . . everybody decided to do it - many if not most in the USA would fail to find enough to burn.

As to your complete ignorance regarding electric cars,
For the last time, the atmospheric carbon produced by driving an electric car is aproximatly half of that of a gasoline engined car. Deisel cars are about 50% more efficeint than gas, but are far less common in passenger cars. These are facts, not opinions to debate.

If they were facts set-in-stone, there would be an inexorable consensus with the leading experts in the field, and there is not.
And by the way, the best compression-igntion engines (that you call diesels) top out as 40% efficent, whereas gas engines top out at 30%. Your figure of "diesels" being 50% more efficient then gasoline engines is not supported by any verified facts.
Depending on the level of tech, and if DI, IDI, etc. , in the real world you can expect 10%-20% better fuel mileage with a diesel car or truck over an equal powered gas vehicle. Since diesel often cost 40 cents more per gallon then gasoline in many states, there is often no monetary savings anymore.

We could also discuss "net-yields"here, in regard to commonly used fuels. That changes all the time. At this moment, coal and petro give the biggest bang for the buck. When it comes to fuels we think are sustainable? For now there are none known to exist .

I'm curiuos what your plan is - to "easily" make . . . lets say 800 KWH of electricity, per month, for each of the near 7 billion people on this earth. Same goes for making "easy" food, "easy" accessed fuel for cars and trucks, "easy" heat for homes, etc.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

There are some on this forum that heat their homes with electricity CHEAPER than burning wood pellets. So either wood pellets are incredibly overpriced or electricity is not so inefficiently delivered after all.

 

[jdemaris]

There are some on this forum that heat their homes with electricity CHEAPER than burning wood pellets. So either wood pellets are incredibly overpriced or electricity is not so inefficiently delivered after all.

You seem to be comparing "apples to oranges." That is, "expensive wood pellets" versus "efficient electicity." I doubt efficiency has anything to do with the reasons why . . . an end-user chooses one or the other.

Just because electricity is cheaper per BTU, than a certain fuel at the time when it hits a consumers wallet - does not imply anything about how efficiently it is produced or delivered. All it reflects is price to the consumer.

When I got my driver's license, regular gas was 25-32 cents per gallon and most cars got around 10-15 MPG. That being said, I would not look back and say "hey, they were efficient."

Right now, LP is twice the price per pound or gallon in the northeast- as compared to the southwest. Does that mean LP is twice as efficient in the southwest? I don't think so. Just happens to cost less. In some areas, just the state fuel taxes and artificial price controls are a determining factor.

 

[jebatty]

Nothing better than a dueling tempest in a teapot! Why not find the things that you can agree upon that advance a sustainable energy future and energy independence for the US, as well as a safe world for living things, and then pursue that with a joint vengeance so that both the US and the world might be better off? Certainly, all the wasted "energy" in this tempest could be put to much better use.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Nothing better than a dueling tempest in a teapot! Why not find the things that you can agree upon that advance a sustainable energy future and energy independence for the US, as well as a safe world for living things, and then pursue that with a joint vengeance so that both the US and the world might be better off? Certainly, all the wasted "energy" in this tempest could be put to much better use.

You could post that tomorrow there will be water in the ocean, and someone on here will dis-agree with you.