A Forbes mag article from Jery Flint

This could help explain Forbes' negative attitude towards the Prius. Another article from Jerry Flint from 2002?. Notice how it portrays EVs as boring etc and how it makes the false claim of a fuel cell prototype from GM by 2005 at the end of the article!! Even the title couldn't be more negative.


Go carts of the apocalypse
Vicki Contavespi and Charles Dubow, 11.21.98, 12:00 AM ET

For all of you out there who remember the glory days of Detroit metal, when living-room-size, atomic-powered road yachts roared up and down the main streets of America, electric cars must loom like go-carts of the apocalypse. Can you imagine Aretha or Bruce writing gritty heartfelt anthems to something that runs on batteries?

The problem with electric cars is that they aren't sexy. Real gas guzzlers are sexy. Generations of Americans have marked the important moments of their lives in cars. Getting your first driver's license, making out in the backseat, driving off from your wedding, taking your baby home from the hospital. They are things of metal and fossil fuels, oozing brute strength and aesthetic beauty, promising a link to escape, the unknown, even sometimes death. On the other hand, if your mom could design a car for you it would be electric: safe, slow and terminally uncool.

The fact that electric cars come across as bloodless versions of our favorite mode of transport should come as no surprise. Change upsets as many people as it inspires and certainly the introduction of the electric car will cause more theoretical bloodletting than the Edict of Nantes. One school will praise electric-powered cars for being ecologically sensitive, environmentally pure and able to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels and, in turn, keep us out of another Mideast war. The other school will argue that electric cars are the automotive equivalent of soy burgers.

Can you imagine Aretha or Bruce writing gritty heartfelt anthems to something that runs on batteries?

Of course, the truth is somewhere in between. Electric vehicles, also known as EVs, have made great strides since they were first seriously talked about as a replacement for gasoline-powered cars in the 1970s. (The first EVs appeared as early as 1830, years before the gas engine.) Today's EVs not only look slicker and drive farther than their predecessors but they've also got a lot more zip. Not that anyone will ever compare a Chrysler EPIC (Electric Powered Inter-urban Commuter) with a Ferrari Diablo, but a surprising number of people are beginning to realize that electric cars may not be such a stupid idea after all.

Steve Kirsch, the founder of Infoseek, is among the first converts. His $100,000 Acura NSX sportscar has been gathering dust in his garage because he's fallen for his new $400 a month Saturn EV1. He says that his EV can do everything his gas-powered cars can do and more. "Like to race?" he asks, "You'll love this car because you'll always win...by a mile. In two seconds, you'll be seeing your competition in your rearview mirror. I don't care if they are driving a $250,000 Ferrari or the latest Porsche. The reason is simple: this car has full torque at 0rpm. And there is no shifting to slow you down either. This car can literally go from 0 to 180mph in first gear. But don't get too excited...the one you'll buy at your Saturn dealer has a limiter on it so you can only go around 80 mph. But that's not so bad. You save money on those speeding tickets you won't get. And it keeps you from traveling at a dangerous speed and possibly killing yourself."

But there are other attractions as well, according to Kirsch. "For you single guys out there, this car is a babe magnet. Hey, I'm 41, bald, not terribly good-looking, and married with two kids. Yet, I've had gorgeous women come up to me and ask me if they can drive me around in this car. Lots of 'em. Now that never happened with my NSX. Just don't let my wife know."

As the old saying goes, the auto industry had to kiss a lot of frogs before it found a prince. The challenge for Detroit and the other major carmakers is that they are essentially being forced to produce EVs and they have to pretend to like it. California's legislature has told carmakers that by 2003, 10% of their unit sales in the state must be zero-emission vehicles.

Detroit has gotten religion. EVs could no longer be seen as the provenance of a few crackpots in R&D who were tolerated because they attracted government funding or provided tax write-offs. In fact, until California passed the law it hardly mattered to auto manufacturers whether their prototype EVs worked at all. But now there was going to be increasing pressure to produce a viable, market-ready electric-powered car or face fines from the California Air Resources Board.

Although the initial goal of deriving 2% of their sales in California from zero-emission cars by 1998 was very optimistic (nationally only 1,600 or so cars have been sold or leased to consumers in 1997 and 1998), the Big Three and Japanese makers have been working hard to make good on their end. They have a long way to go, since just 2% equals roughly 20,000 cars in California alone.

"The GM EV1 is the greatest single product disaster since the Edsel."

One of the projects that has caused a good deal of excitement in the auto industry is the Toyota Prius, a car that is currently available in Japan and will be introduced in the U.S. in 2000. The Prius is a hybrid-electric car, one that runs on a combination of gasoline and batteries. The problem with the Prius though is that it is overpriced and underpowered.

The most successful EV to date is Saturn's EV1 from General Motors, although that's not saying a lot. Unfortunately, with the exception of aficionados like Infoseek's Kirsch, no one's driving them.

"The GM EV1 is the greatest single product disaster since the Edsel," says Jerry Flint, Forbes auto industry columnist. Flint says GM has spent $400 to $500 million on development and has sold about 500, which makes the vehicle's true cost about $1 million per vehicle. The problem is that despite its nifty looks and pickup, the car only averages between 50 to 70 miles between charges--and, adding insult to injury, it requires three hours to recharge. Assuming, that is, you can actually find a charging station where you can juice the thing up.

What the automakers are really excited about is the next generation of alternate fuel cars, specifically the so-called fuel cell car that combines hydrogen and oxygen chemically to make electricity, resulting in a pollution-free car with a greater range than an EV. General Motors chairman Jack Smith expects that GM should roll out a prototype by 2005, far in advance of his earlier prediction of 2020.

For the time being, though, the EV1 and its cousins, the Ford Ranger EV, the Nissan Altra EV and all the other EVs have made believers of a few enthusiasts, but they have yet to make any significant inroads into the marketplace.

 

Thank you for the correction, Daniel. meant to show their partiality to big engined gasoline vehicles which is reflected in the first two paragraphs and headings and thier attack on and disdain for any alternate fuel vehicles whether electric or hybrid. I wanted to show that this has been their policy for a while hence we shouldn't be surprised about their bad review of the Prius.

 

If you view the article in light of their criticism of the Prius, as posted on Priuschat.com, you may see things differently:

http://priuschat.com/forums/viewtopic.php?...ighlight=forbes