More Prius Hate from GM's Bob Lutz

Thanks for the link, sorry to disagree with you, it thoiught it was was a good read. He acknowledges all the ways Toyota handed GM it's head over the past 10 years, what more do you want from a GM exec who has been beaten at a game he's excelled at for an entire career? That's being a "jerk?" I missed all the lies.

I think the Volt will be a flop because of it's high cost and low range, something GM can ill afford right now, but who knows. Folks once thought the Prius would never amount to anything. Hindsight is a wonderful thing...

 

qoute...

One sporadically selling hybrid, he realized, had greened an entire company and catapulted nearly every vehicle in its product line.


OMG
sporadically? i geus he did not now about the 1 mil hybrides sold?

edit

i did some further reading and this GUY simple talks about the EV1 being a 1990 car and that because its was to expensive was dropped and go's to the volt....

nothing about that the EV1 could be sold in many numbers and that GM did not wanted this car on the road togehter with chervon

qoute
During the '90s, the automaker spent more than $1 billion developing a small two-seat electric vehicle known as the EV1, using heavy nickel-lead batteries before concluding that it was cost-prohibitive for consumers and scrapping it to the disgust of fervent EV1 fans and environmentalists.

Lauckner, who had carefully studied the EV1 and thought that the car would have been wholly impractical with nickel-lead batteries, saw similar problems with Lutz's vision of a car intended to go far on lithium-ion batteries. "Too expensive," said Lauckner, who made clear that with all the batteries needed for a vehicle to travel about 150 miles, Lutz would merely be making another battery-heavy, cost-prohibitive car.

 

Bob Lutz is an old man who thinks like an old man. GM was running under the old man thinking management team and locked into their demise by the
old man thinking unions that would not evolve with the changing markets. The Prius was well beyond the dream state that GM and the unions chose to live in. Bob failed to earn his money while working at GM, quit crying.

 

It was sporadically selling at first, that's what the article is talking about. No one could have guessed what it would become based in the US Gen 1, it did look like it was going nowhere. That's why GM did not see the "halo effect" of the Prius coming until it was way too late. Again, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I don't have an axe to grind with anyone and I am no GM supporter by any means, but Prius supporters can be overly strident too...

 

there was no halo effect..

the prius sold on it own.. not just a few and al the other cars where just normal toyota cars that sold better because of the prius

 

Interesting read. GM did indeed see the Prius coming, but didn't think they could make money on it. Toyota may well have come to the same conclusion, but built it anyway.

 

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, but that's what the halo effect is...it's not about sales of the Prius itself.

 

its not about picking a fight

its about just what you trying to say ............. what you want to read and whats in the story.

toyota made a profit out of the prius....

and the 4 cyl ICE and what usa car makers now call ecoboost is something EU and japans car makers already got in there program in 2001.....

not because the prius was there the poeple where atracted to the dealers
but the high gas prices got them wanting to have more fuel eff. cars..
and the us car makers did not sell those in the same size.

 

Best we agree to disagree...best to you.

 

Halo effect or not, people stayed with Toyota products and didn't go back to GM. Even the large sedans, SUVs and big trucks, GMs bread and butter, suffered due to sales of Toyota's products in those categories. They may have gone over because of the halo effect, but they wouldn't stay there if Toyota didn't offer a better product. GM never understood the concept that people want quality and reliability engineered into the vehicle, not merely a longer warantee.

 

Lutz actually believes his nonsense. He lied to himself and helped lead GM into their current bankruptcy. But even now, after he is gone from GM, the echos of his nonsense continue to reverberate.

Those who signed up for the Lutz-fantasies deserve everything that has and is going to happen to them. i absolutely have no sympathy for today's Lutz-lemmings since they choose to believe his foolish claims:

• "Lutz saw that driving a Prius constituted nothing less than a values statement" - bullsh*t! The NHW11 gets better than 50 MPG in the EPA labs and in my hands. Even the average drivers who report their mileage get 45 MPG. There is a Prius value when you pay for your gasoline ... you pay less!
• "consumers not enamored of the Prius itself nonetheless saw its existence as proof of Toyota's wisdom" - Toyota quality was legendary in 1991 when we bought our Camry. This was a decade before the Prius came to the USA. Again, Lutz is projecting facts and data not in evidence.
• "halo effect" - when someone is in denial, they invent supernatural effects to explain what is happening. This is Lutz's insanity from his own mouth. When others repeat his nonsense, the insanity is not diminished.
• "American automakers, including GM, suffered under the perception that they were stuck in yesteryear and saddled with cars of inferior quality" - this isn't an illusion, it was and remains the truth today as anyone with the money to spend can tell by reading the Consumer Reports Owners' Survey. This is not an "industry" rag or mag and even Consumer Reports went reluctantly into at least Prius neutral from a distinct anti-Prius bias in the beginning. Even now, their 'professional' reports show mileage that only other car mags get. But they are wise enough to listen to their subscribers WHO PAY THEIR SALARIES!
• "That's where Toyota did a very clever thing: The Prius had its own unique appearance" - and a coefficient of drag of 0.25. This is the nonsense of a sheet metal artist who has lost any understanding of engineering and aerodynamics. That is the insanity of listening to 'art' instead of 'engineers.'

I don't care what Lutz thinks today as his thinking of yesterday was so wrong that GM is paying the price today. That anyone today thinks Lutz is someone to admire or even emulate, well I don't suffer fools gladly. They deserve everything that they have signed up for and the sooner the better.

Bob Wilson

 

Slightly off topic; I don't think the Prius is making Toyota any profit in simple terms. I believe the Prius costs somewhere in the order of $40k per unit to design and manufacture. That's not to say that the interest the prius generates in the technology doesn't help them sell Hybrid SUV's and luxury cars at a profit.

Additionally, I beleive Chevron's patent rights to NiMH technology expire in 5 years, perhaps then we can really see the market expand.
It would also be nice to see some manufacturing of NiMH battery packs come to the US.

 

$40K per Prius? Sorry, but if that is the case Toyota would have gone bankrupt a LONG time ago.

The Prius ranges from $23,000 to $32,000, and Toyota sells more on the lower end. You are looking at an average cost of around $27,000 paid by the car buyer for each Prius sold. If Toyota had to spend $40,000 to build each one, they would lose $13,000 per car.

Toyota sold 1.5 million Priuses worldwide thus far. That would mean they have lost $19.5 BILLION dollars so far if it cost them $40,000 to build each one. You don't hide that kind of losses on the balance sheet.

Sorry, but your numbers simply don't make sense.

 

I don't hear a lot of "lies" within the interview/article. What I do hear is a lot of opinion, which you can either agree or disagree.

It's not so much what Mr. Lutz says, but the way he evidently says it, that is telling. Laughing about the waste of the early days, and openly mourning his perceived passing of The American Muscle cars defines him as a dinosaur. Is it really "funny" that a designer once spent $75000 just to be able to listen to an engine? If I was in charge of a company or project and the best justification a project head could give me for the purchase of a competing car was that he wanted to be able to duplicate the sound of the engine so he just went out and bought himself one, it would be no laughing matter.

I think much of what Lutz says has happened the past 10 years is pretty accurate from a GM, American Auto Industry POV. However, what I find disturbing is, again, his attitude about it. Sounds like in typical American Auto Industry fashion GM instead of making long term sacrifices is looking for the late inning Home Run. The Single hit game changer. That's a very risky proposition.

I would also debate his attitude about the what he considers the "glory" cars of the american auto industry. Why bemoan their potential passing? Why not look at the inevitable changes as a challenge? Instead of gnashing of teeth about the legislated tide against cars like the Camaro or his beloved Corvette, and STILL trying to justify their existence by marginalizing cars like The Prius to East and West Coast intellectual elitists and enviromentalists. (unfair and wrong IMO) Why not take up the challenge of redefining the muscle cars and sports cars and SUV's of the future?

What I mean is, for example, Toyota seems to understand that long term, The Prius must evolve. So it is evolving. Slowly...but it is getting more mainstream, more luxurious and being mechanically refined, generation to generation year to year. That's what has kept Toyota ahead. Meanwhile GM is grasping for an out of the ball park, game changing hit. Who's approach makes more sense? Trying to formulate a perfect alternative automobile right out of the gate? Or marketing and producing one for a decade plus, and refining and adapting it, as it's demand and market dictate?

Instead of bemoaning the passing of SUV's, Trucks, and Muscle Cars, why not work to redefine them? IMO, that's the race. The Prius has reached Iconic success for a variety of reasons that go beyond the fact that it has a identifiable look and was adopted by a segment of youth and counter culture. GM wants a "hit"? Produce a SUV, Truck or Sexy Muscle or Sports Car using electric or Hybrid technology that is viable and comparable in operation to todays standard ICE. Easier said than done, but 15 years ago who would of thought Toyota would be mass producing a mid-size hatchback that can get 50 miles to the gallon city? Toyota went from selling a strange thing called a "Hybrid", that actually had an icon of a Turtle that lit up on it's display, to todays Prius. A comfortable, midsized, utilizable hatchback that has a buttons marked "Power", "Econ" and "EV" on it's dash. Debate the efficency of these buttons and modes, but their very existence proves Toyota has a good idea of what it's consumers want from an "alternative" automobile and that is EVERYTHING. Toyota has been slowly, methodically producing and marketing it's product, meanwhile GM struggles to get up from the ground, dazed and looking for a miracle product in the VOLT.

In this interview, Lutz looked backwards and gave some interesting insight into the past, and I really have no qualms. But for an industry and company holding on for it's very existence GM can ill afford looking back.

 

:crazy:

you did read about toyota telling that toyota make's a profit on the prius?

your:welcome:

 

An engineer, I may not understand the "halo effect." Let me check with the experts:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Lacking engineering skills, Lutz and his Lutzite lemmings still subscribe to the "halo" and Wiki does an excellent job of describing what it means:

"A halo ([ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language"]Greek[/ame]: ἅλως; also known as a nimbus, [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aureola"]aureole[/ame], glory, or gloriole) is a ring of light that surrounds a person in art. They are often used in religious works to depict holy or sacred figures, and have at various periods also been used in images of rulers or heroes. In, among other religions, [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic"]Hellenistic[/ame] Greek, [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Rome"]Roman[/ame], [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism"]Buddhist[/ame] and [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity"]Christian[/ame] sacred art, sacred persons may be depicted with a halo in the form of a golden, yellow or white circular glow around the head, or around the whole body, which is often called a [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandorla"]mandorla[/ame]."
​

Ignorance is not a sin but inventing supernatural effects to describe what is going on is a sin. It doesn't work and it pisses God off!

Bob Wilson

ps. Perhaps over the top:

 

Lutz's viewpoint is no doubt shared by the current crop running the Big Three. I'm not surprised by his attitude, no doubt if interviewed by a certain grossly obese obnoxious drug addict pervert radio talk show host, who I will not dignify by even mentioning his name, then Lutz's opinions would probably become very caustic indeed

Just because a company is old, or at one time was the biggest name around, doesn't mean they can ignore the future. From a Canadian perspective, consider The Hudson's Bay Co. In either case, they had their glory days, a long period of stagnation, then the inevitable crash and burn

 

The cost to design is spread across multiple models including Lexus hybrids. Remember, the original Prius was designed, tested and manufactured in 3 years instead of the normal 5 years cycle.

As for the cost to manufacture, you ought to read this study on the Camry Hybrid from the US Department of Energy. It includes a table (3-1 on page 33) with the cost of Prius as well.

Since then Toyota said they reduced the cost by 30% with the redesigned 2010 Prius.

 

Hi All,

Its interesting how Lutz twists things. He accuses Prius buyers of the very thing that people buy big cars, suv's and commuter pickups for. That is, for appearances. While the Prius has an "appearance" its an appearance is built of the neccesities required to deliver transportation value. Not stylish demeanor, or demands to be a unspoken threat on the public roadways. GM's product developement just is stuck a modern form of the founding principles of their company - giving people colored cars, when Ford would only give them black.

I can only conclude he is out to call the kettle black, ie use the debating tactic of accusing the leading group of the very mistakes the looser has made. He thinks he can spin the world, and dupe the buying public. I think this is because delivering transpotation value is just not satsifying professionally for him. I mean, if you could walk out back, hop in your very own personal fighter jet, and zip to NYC (from Ann Arbor) in a hour (versus W.G.'s 13 hour 70+ mpg run) at will, would the sedate world of the family car transportation value be enough for you ?