Chevy Volt: On Video

Well, ok then. Go ahead and present that to the Toyota Board of Directors.

Let me know what they say after they stop laughing.

 

daniel,

Not quite so. years ago, 6~7 years? Toyota had $65 Billion cash on hand.
That was then, now Toyota should have $150 billions in fluid cash in its coffin.
Total assesment of then Big Three's market value were $46 billion total combined. How much do you think GM's is worth today?

The only simple reason Toyota can not or won't buy GM is 'cause the calamitous political agreesion towards Toyota is this remotely happens.

But if all the major stock holders of GM gets united and petitioned, then may be Toyota can take over as a collaborating "Consultant"? Toyota does not want GM to go under, it is bad business as a whole for Toyota. GM after all, it is an American Icon....

I remember, when Bob Lutz was saying, how come Toyota can make money when they are losing money in every Prius they build..Time does change.

 

Could the answer be that Toyota are forward thinking now just as they have been in the past and the short term losses on early Prius was what needed to be done to become the market leader in Hybrid technology which is now, due to higher volume, a very profitable sector of the industry and will continue to become more profitable.

It isn't good enough just to invest in the machines to make the cars or maketing to sell them, you need to invest in your customers.

 

Uh - Toyota sued CARB too, so your anger seems a little misplaced.

Anyway, your negativity against GM and the Volt is no different than those who castigated the Prius, particularly in the earlier days. You are creating doubts about a product/technology that may benefit all of us greatly. So I really don't understand the point. Let them work out the bugs and bring it to market -- help this new technology gain mass acceptance in the marketplace instead of fighting it because it comes from a company you don't like.

BTW, since GM makes mass transit buses, I'm not sure what the complaint is. IMO, buses are a much more flexible mass transit solution than rail lines that in large measure tie up a lot of surface street traffic and cannot adapt quickly to new communities, new business centers, and the changing economic realities of most major cities.

 

Serious effort does nothing for me. I want results. I see no point in getting all excited and spend time looking at a car that may never get made. So if the Volt never makes it to production, we are supposed to give GM a big pat on the back for inspiring thinking in other companies? Should I give the Big 3 props for wasting millions of dollars in the Supercar program that spurred Toyota to build the Prius? Whoever builds the car gets the prize and until I see a well-built Volt on the lot, I will continue to doubt GM's intentions.

Nice try on comparing the Volt to the next generation Prius or other Toyota hybrids. The problem is the comparison holds no water. First, Toyota has made no promises or big ad campaigns about the next-gen Prius, although videos of these vehicles on the road have been posted here (

). Secondly there still is not a mass-produced car that gets better gas mileage and emissions and show me any GM car that gets close to the Prius.

As with the hybrid minivan. Show me where Toyota has come out and promised any kind of hybrid minivan? I think Toyota is missing a big opportunity in not building one, but using this as an argument is totally disingenuous. GM has consistently drummed up press on a car it hasn't built yet and as you allude to, may never build. Yet I have seen numerous ads and commercials of the Volt with a timeline that continues to be pushed back (kinda of like GMs goal for 1 million hybrids in 2010).

No whining here, I just want GM to build it instead of keep talking about it. The idea of the Volt is great, ahow me any post where a person downgrades the idea of the Volt because it is from GM. I personally have a feeling the idea was only proposed as part of a greenwashing campaign by GM. Your apparent total trust of GM is what is silly IMO.

Your welcome. Apparently us hate-filled GM haters have to stick together and keep each other warm with our undying anger and unsubstantiated rhetoric. Maybe if I keep it up, I can get an autographed copy of Who Killed the Electric Car (haven't gotten a chance to watch it yet though).

 

Bullshit!!!

The Prius detractors were berating a car that was on the roads, that you could buy and drive. Granted, there were waiting lists, but that's because the car was so popular that demand greatly exceeded supply, because supply exceeded Toyota's expectations. And they were berating it with outright lies about battery life and build quality and a host of fantasies totally detached from the reality of the car, a real car with a performance history.

I have never detracted the Volt: I have said over and over and over again that the Volt concept is superior to the Prius as the foundation for a plug-in hybrid, and I have said over and over again that I will buy one if it comes out first. Unlike some, who have said they would not trust it until it's been on the road for a year or two and established a reliability record, I've said that if it's the first to market to do what it claims or what I need, I will buy it as soon as it becomes available to me. (In another thread, it's reported that they will not sell it to me, but that's their decision.)

My only "negativity" (as you and a few others term it) is that I do not believe the crooks at GM when they claim they're going to build it. I'm willing to put my money on the Volt by buying one! You call that being "negative"??? You want "negative"? How about GM that developed a great EV and then forced the leasees to give back perfectly good cars and crushed them! You want "negativity"? How about GM, that had the technology and then sat on it for a decade while people who cared about the environment were clamoring for an EV? You want real negativity? How about GM that owned the patent for the best battery yet developed at the time for EVs, and then sold that patent to an oil company so that it could never be used in an EV until the patent runs out?!?!?!?!

You're grabbing at straws when you call me "negative" just because I think GM's management are a pack of liars and crooks.

I've also said I hope I'm wrong about the Volt, and I'll still buy one if I don't already have a PHEV-40 or better or a 100-mile freeway-capable EV when and if GM offers it for sale in Spokane!

 

I would just like to reiterate Daniel's words here.

If anyone can ignore past GM "flaws", well...history will just keep repeating itself. Ignorance is not a good quality.

If, on, the other hand, one can see how the past actions of GM got us to this point, well, those are the more informed consumers.

I'd say at this point a Volt is so possible, that it's laughable. See their EV1. OVER a decade ago.

And Toyota isn't 'innocent'. They are for-profit and should have continued EVs...yet the large-format NiMH patent was (not so) mysteriously sold from GM to Chevron, and they had to use a smaller capacity battery via a hybrid car.

C'mon, GM, is that really showing forward thinking? Is the general public so clueless? Is the advertising for non-existent cars and hybrids really working? Why is that?

Nope, for me GM is far, far worse for this country than any 'foreign' company that continues to make cleaner, more efficient cars that are reliable, fun, and just plain better than GM's offerings.

I'm completely amazed the Prius needs NO ads (but is real and works and sells), whereas the GM "green" cars (limited hybrids available) and prototypes (sheesh, prototypes...NOT available) need endless marketing and hype.

 

Toyota do make a hybrid "minivan" don't they?
Toyota Sienna Hybrid | Hybrid Cars
I prefer people mover but there you go.

 

You make a good point: GM as a perfect right to lie to the public about their intentions. Lutz has a perfect right to announce the Volt to the world and make promises he has no intention of keeping. There is no law against lying and dishonesty unless it's done under oath or with the intention of committing fraud.

And we have a perfect right to say we don't believe him. We have a perfect right to point out GM's past lies, past crimes, and the abysmal quality record of its vehicles. It's not "crying" to tell a habitual crook that you don't believe him. Knowledge is power, and there are people on here too young to remember the past. We are informing them, so that they do not fall for the con game. GM is a criminal organization. People have a right to know that so they can be better prepared should they choose to buy a car from them.

 

You are always entertaining, Daniel! Kind of ironic you would buy a Volt from them, then.

BTW, maybe if GM had the same sort of deal from the U.S. government that Toyota had on the Prius, they'd be in market already with the Volt.

"In a BusinessWeek story published Thursday, March 24, [Jim] Press said that when he was at Toyota, “The Japanese government paid for 100 percent of the development of the battery and hybrid system that went into the Toyota Prius.â€

 

A deal like this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partnership_for_a_New_Generation_of_Vehicles

We have discussed this in another thread. Didn't he retract or partially retract this statement? Is there any proof that this is true, and if so, does it really matter?

http://priuschat.com/forums/prius-h...government-helped-fund-prius-development.html

 

My read on this is that it was, as stated by the Clinton Administration at the time, a 50/50 cost sharing program between government and the manufacturers. It looks like much (maybe most) of the federal $ went to federal labs and it's not clear to me what benefit ever accrued to GM directly. Regardless, if Congress structured a deal like the one Press says Toyota got on the Prius, I suspect GM would accept. Not that I'm advocating corporate welfare.

 

Did he give the specifics of the deal? Because he later retracted the statement here.

I tried to find the original BusinessWeek article, but their website search engine sucks.

 

Over promise and under deliver has been the score so far.

All this promotion for a product that won't be available for many years still, and even then in small numbers and expensive, is enough to try anyone's attitude. That very easily translates to hype.

Our advice is: Just do it! Less talk. More Action.

.

 

Back in the 80's I worked with an engineer who was really into cars. He was always talking about buying the latest model when it was available.

He once said the difference between the American car companies and the Japanese companies was:

The American companies would talk about upcoming models but it would take years for an actual car to be available. By the time it was in the showroom, he had lost interest in buying it.

The Japanese companies would introduce a new model and within a month or two you could go sit in it and buy it.

 

Exactly, but pointing that out is whining or being mean to GM.