# Open Letter on Chevy Volt, Electric Cars, Chevy and GM



## 2ndsout (Feb 10, 2009)

I posted this thread on the other car forum I am a member of ( www.Saturnfans.com ) I wanted to get your thoughts on this:

*Disclaimer: This "letter", "blog", "Thread", etc. deemed under my screenname as a writing on this website, is my own personal opinion, and is in no way any reflection on anyone's opinion but my own. Read and discuss. Thank you. *

So I have recently been doing research on Electric Cars, and the extremely "Short" rise and fall of the GM EV-1. Some of the research that I have discovered has been extremely enlightening. Almost scary. I have to sit back and ask, "What if "this" happened"; or if X had happened. How would our world as a whole be different today.

Now I am not going into a whole tirade of how I hate GM for only making the EV-1 as a lease vehicle...only in California and Arizona back in the mid 1990s. I have to ask myself; why wasn't the "Electric Vehicle" perfected in the EV-1? Why would GM squash an opportunity to make a decent amount of money on a potentially wonderful excursion in the EV-1? These questions may never be answered. Maybe someone has an answer? Who knows. All that I do know is that I am one of many who feels that with the announcement that GM is planning to release the Chevy Volt here in the next year...well; on paper: The Volt sounds like a pretty cool car. Electric car with a nice range, GM behind the car with a Chevy Logo slapped on the front of it. Everyone is going crazy for this "Electric Car"...the "Savior" of GM. Are we doomed to repeat history again? Seriously. There was a lot of hoopla when the EV-1 was manufactured, people lined up to get a lease, people enjoyed driving the EV-1 because they had fun driving around in an "Electric Car". Will the Volt see the same? My guess is that probably not. I really feel that GM is sitting on a PR nightmare. A "Pandora's Box" of Customer issues, dissatisfaction, and general mistrust in GM on the Chevy Volt. Why? Simply for the fact that the Volt has been pushed back a few times in release already, mainly due to the fact that they are working night and day to perfect the batteries. My main question is that, with the development of Lithium Ion batteries, which are NOT cheap by any stretch of the imagination...will consumers jump at the fact that Lithium Ion batteries don't have a long life and will need to be replaced? Will those that leased an EV-1 or Toyota Rav4 EV have an "Advantage" over those American Driver consumers that aren't experienced with "Electric Cars", and how to properly charge them? I am sure that there are some minds at GM that are thinking about this, but also there are American car drivers out there that will not understand the premise of plugging in a car for a period of time before it can be driven an extended distance. 

Another thought on the Volt is the price. Will GM think that the Average American family with 2.5 children will REALLY be able to afford a $35-$40K "Electric Car"? While the glitz surrounding the Volt sounds extremely enticing, there are going to be alot of general car buyers that will be disappointed. Mainly for the fact of the Volt's small production number initially; and according to Bob Lutz (who is retiring from GM...how convienent) ramping up to 50 or 60K cars in the 2nd year in production....will GM be able to perfect the Volt and have it live up to people's expectations? I certainly hope so, or the Volt will be the demise of GM and Chevrolet. I don't see how GM can plan to turn themselves around on building the Volt and making a profit. There are too many "What ifs" here and GM is sitting on a PR Nightmare just waiting to happen. Some of the Volt engineers have even said that GM is pushing 2-3 years of development into the course of 1 year before the Volt hits showrooms. Is that good business? 

In my own thoughts...what SHOULD have happened was this: Imagine circa 1980; either Jimmy Carter or incoming president Ronald Reagan devoted hundreds upon thousands of dollars to the big 3 to develop "Electric Cars". In a way if we had started our research and development back in 1980...by the year 2000; the technology could have been perfected. The EV-1 would have been a good pre-cursor to the development of the Electric Car and how it would handle, but would have developed out of 14-15 years of development; only to be perfected with the Volt. Now; here in 2009; we are behind the 8-Ball...GM killing off the EV-1 for a miriade of reasons, the Volt rushed into production and pushed back a number of times. Are we doomed to repeat what has already happened with the EV-1 all over again? Or will GM and Chevrolet...maybe...finally get it right? My own thoughts are that I hope that GM does it right this time around. If we had taken the steps in 1980 and the following years...2010 may be a completely different year when it comes to the debut of the Volt. Hopefully the future of Electric Cars is not doomed before they begin.

Some other articles that back up my thoughts:

Take a read on some of these articles, that back up my "Open Opinion"

http://www.hybridcars.com/plug-in-hy...olet-volt.html

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/chevy-volt-vega-redux/

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1033...-it-survive-gm

Discuss....


----------



## rbgrn (Jul 24, 2007)

Did you watch "Who killed the electric car?" It was all about what happened to the EV-1.


----------



## 2ndsout (Feb 10, 2009)

rbgrn said:


> Did you watch "Who killed the electric car?" It was all about what happened to the EV-1.


Yes. I watched that.  It's sad that the technology was there for the EV-1 and GM squashed it like a bug. 

I rather like the EV-1, and it would have been nice to see one of these cars in person. It's too bad that I will only be able to see pictures, etc. of the EV-1. 

It would have been a really fun car to drive and own.


----------



## Coley (Jul 26, 2007)

By bringing out the Volt, GM took care of one of the main reasons for the demise of the EV-1.....

NO dealer replaceable parts needed by a gas engine...and NO oil or fuel needed that could be controlled by Big Oil.....

That is just my own opinion also, but I think it is fairly close to why EV-1 was crushed....


----------



## coulombKid (Jan 10, 2009)

Coley said:


> By bringing out the Volt, GM took care of one of the main reasons for the demise of the EV-1.....
> 
> NO dealer replaceable parts needed by a gas engine...and NO oil or fuel needed that could be controlled by Big Oil.....
> 
> That is just my own opinion also, but I think it is fairly close to why EV-1 was crushed....


When 
you review the facts in who killed the electric car that GM was and is infected with lazy corporate managers that never had any intention of being the car company of the future. In the early 70s I was a professional automotive technician. When you tear down and repair automobiles from all over the world you learn a lot about the corporate culture that is responsible for most automotive vehicular nightmares. All domestic vehicles were always over-weight, consumed too much fuel, had smog systems 5-years behind the times, and had styling representing corporate managers that had too much power, no taste, and NEVER listened to customer wishes. Enter the US government. They opened the flood gates to foreign imports because the Detroit fat-cats just wouldn't stop ripping off the US consumer. 
I realized the US automobile companies were toast based on entrenched corporate attitude in 1979 and hung up my torque wrench as a profession for good.
After 1982 I experienced that attitude again as engineer involved in product development. In the 80s US companies would routinely crank out products after, at most, two prototype cycles. Over seas (except china these days) they get it right BEFORE shipment most of the time. After a decade in engineering I hung up the CAD terminal because 99% of the engineering/marketing decisions are made by fourth quarter nickel clickers that were going to hit the golden silk well before anybody catches a whiff of the Madoff/AIG MO. I saw a EV1 back when they were on the road and would have bought one if GM would have allowed it. To crush them was an act of environmental terrorism. Its quite evident that numerous government officals both state and federal got bought out at the time. We need to change the laws so that there is no statute of limitations with respect to this type of graft where the earth and the consumer is getting ripped off. We need to make it possible for an old man on his death bed to turn states evidence and make it stick. The current clowns in detroit need to be fired en-mass. You will never see a Volt on the street.


----------



## Coley (Jul 26, 2007)

I also hung up my tools from working for GM, Ford and AMC in the '70s. 

I had a restoration business for some 20 years and then dropped that to do some prototype work for a Ford supplier.

The production changes that they required on a part, that would only ever be seen by the factory workers as they installed them, were foolish.

It seems they had to spend all of the alotted R&D money, or else.

A friend that was consulted on the new Mustang at the time, was rebuffed when he suggested that the current rear ends that Ford made were fine, but they had to design a new one because of the R&D money once again.

The new design was poorly made and had lot of replacements.

Now, I just reproduce antique auto parts and other metal castings. 

The car industry in this country is still making the same design mistakes that they made 40 years ago.....or are they mistakes?


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

> Imagine circa 1980; either Jimmy Carter or incoming president Ronald Reagan devoted hundreds upon thousands of dollars to the big 3 to develop "Electric Cars". In a way if we had started our research and development back in 1980..


i was manufacturing evs in 1980 and pressed to find some way to lease the batteries.
that way the battery companies would find the best long life battery for the lease and would encourage development in batteries.
also the customer would be _pay as use the battery.
_
most of my evs that i sold died as their batteries died as the customer did not want to pay out megabucks for a new one.




> It seems they had to spend all of the alotted R&D money, or else.


how many time do you see 3 million dollars and 3 years development quoted.
for a project that with a couple of decent engineers could take 3 months if that
yes i say and the bosses new luxury boat and car included in the 3 million bucks.

the latest ford and some others cars are forgetting the rule of golden number
1.6 to 1
they are getting so low and sleek that most of the panels are 2 to 1 ratio and look @#$ ugly if an unbroken panel has to be that size then it has to be broken up with some thing or decoration to stop it from being ugly


----------



## Coley (Jul 26, 2007)

For WW2, they made changeovers to completely different machines, such as airplanes, cannons and tanks.

The change in production was fast, compared to today.

The $40,000. for a volt is hard to justify.
An all electric Volt could be made could be manufactured at a much lower cost.

The new Camaro is priced at $30,000. An EV Camaro could be $20,000.
and still profitable.


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

one of the problems is contracts
to take a camaro from the production line and put an electric motor in it means they have to still buy the petrol motor under contract until the suppliers contract ends.
so what do you do with a 1000 spare motors and exhausts and radiators
so if you delete the motors etc you have to put an order for a huge number of batteries and electric motors you have to guarantee you can sell them 
i found this out in 1980 when we tried to make electric cars.
with mass production and cheap parts you have to order 10000 or more to make the mass production viable.

its a chicken and the egg situation
1000,000 cars ordered before they are cheap enough for an average motorist can buy one.

http://www.evalbum.com/preview.php?vid=1990


----------



## ftaffy (Mar 13, 2009)

I work for a defence contractor (not in the states) but with a recent conversation about the difference between what we do and what they do in the states the answer he gave was money. They have a problem they just keep pumping money into it until it goes away, simple because they had that money to spend.

I (probably not the normal household consumer though) would probably pay the $40K for a Volt, i like it more then imiev which will be in a similar ball park. 
The +20K to the Tesla S is a big jump... We are heading into serious sports car regions of money.


----------



## Coley (Jul 26, 2007)

What I am saying is, that a car similar to the new Camaro, designed completely without an ICE and all of the attending parts, could be made at much lower cost per unit. 

A run of 10,000 cars would be a good test. Sell them at a loss if need be to educate the public about them. Scrapping all of the EV-1s wasn't much of a money maker either and resulted in poor PR for GM.

The engineering/manufacturing tooling for an ICE and all of the hundred attending parts is enormous.

Think of all of the parts needed on an ICE. 

The motors, controllers, contacters, batteries and all other EV parts needed
could be made at a lesser cost in orders of 10,000 pcs.

The EV-1 was all hand assembled, making (approx) 4 cars a day. Sure they were expensive, but scaled up to run 10,000 of them on an assembly line would bring the cost down dramatically.

Once those 10,000 started to hit the streets, the orders would come in.

If we as individuals can convert a car into an EV, for <$10,000 to $20,000, that will suit our needs, the manufacturers could surely do much better.

The bottom line is the reduced need for dealers (which they are closing anyway), and oil products not needed as much as they are now, are the main causes that GM and others will not jump on the pure EV bandwagon...


----------



## GTTDUX (May 22, 2008)

If GM finally gets the Volt to market or not, I could care less. The buy American crowd should all go down to their Honda or Toyota dealer and take a test ride in the Insight or Prius and then say " why would I give twice the price for a Volt". End of story - GM is toast - Why do they try to kid us otherwise - Bob Lutz - old V8 Bob as product Tsar - give me a break - he's a fighter jock - not an engineer - all he knows is power, power and more power - that's why we don't get what we need. You can't even get these dimwits to consider a small turbodiesel with 6 or 8 speed tranny for the pickup trucks. Who needs 300 HP in a pickup - ******* hot rodders maybe but I'm interested in keeping my hard earned money in my bank account not GM's or Exxon's.


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

in an article on the prius some one took it on a long journey and it returned 60 mpg
a lot better around town.
however once on the open road and th ebatteries are down a bit is is just an automatic 1500cc car. with top speed of maybe 120 km/h
4 seats and boot.
ok my daughter has a suzuki alto.
660 cc top speed 120 k and 4 seats and auto and 1/4 the price of a prius
and 51 mpg 
so around town great
on the open road on par with any 1500 cc car


> he's a fighter jock - not an engineer - all he knows is power, power and more power


agree there


----------



## vpoppv (Jul 27, 2009)

I think we are ignoring the power of the oil industry here. Remember, the biggest solar energy research facility is owned by BP (Bristish Petroleum). Chevron owns the rights to NiMH batteries. Doesn't this sound like a monopoly to anyone else? The fact is, GM HAD to kill the EV1 for it's survival. I used to be in parts/service in California working for Toyota at that time. You should have seen the somber looks at those training meetings as service writers, technicians, parts people, saw the writing on the wall: obsolescence. No more oil changes, no more tune-ups, etc. Parts and service are the backbone of the auto industry. Dealerships can't operate without them. As an automaker who relies on the demand for parts YEARS after the car is no longer produced, imagine this new EV not requiring all that service. Now imagine people realizing they could buy a car that no longer requires service, can be charged while they sleep, who doesn't need to stop at gas stations anymore. Why would a consumer even bother with ICE again? So, as a manufacturer, you just slit the throat of your ICE operations, the one that you can profit from years after you quit making the vehicle. People accuse GM for having a poor vision of the future. I think they had a VERY CLEAR vision of the future, which is why they couldn't kill the EV1 fast enough. People also wonder why GM would risk the Volt, when they had such bad luck with the EV1; no worries there, you have that ICE in there guaranteeing a need for the oil changes, gas use, and continued need for parts. I think EV'ers will have an easier time in 2014 though, when the patent on the NIMH battery expires....


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

very true and well said thanks for that insight
it sends shivvers down my spine 
even in model T years the cost of a car as 120 dollars ? and in spares it was 800 dollars to buy.

i guess the industry will adapt as the computor industry will service the hybrid computors and the rewind industry will service the motors and the older mechanics will fade away as younger ones will adapt to change.
i would see hybrid transmissions will be a subject in future polytech schools so the gloom is for the older generation as the gradual change to newer technology breeds a new trades

i my self have had to retrain some 10 times in my working life.


----------



## jackbauer (Jan 12, 2008)

As previous posters have stated auto manufacturers dare not build a car without a combustion engine of some sort. My opinion on hybrids is that they are simply a misdirection magic trick. Build an ev but sneak an engine and petrol tank in there! Business as usual.

Now we have major auto makers on the brink of failure all over the world at worst and seeing sales falling of a clif at best. Why? Lack of progress. ICE powerplants are old hat and have had every last mpg wrung from them with ever bewildering arrays of electronic controls. What the auto world needs now to save itself is an ev with the model-t business model. no frills.cheap.plentyfull. Which brings us full circle to the cure being worse than the disease as far as they are concerned.

My view on the volt? Loose the ICE and all its crap and pack in more battery capcaity. Loose the gimicks and build em cheap. what will really happen though is some will sell but not many. the image of the ev as slow , low range ,boring will be preserved and gm will have the excuse to axe the project claiming no public interest.


----------



## vpoppv (Jul 27, 2009)

jackbauer said:


> As previous posters have stated auto manufacturers dare not build a car without a combustion engine of some sort. My opinion on hybrids is that they are simply a misdirection magic trick. Build an ev but sneak an engine and petrol tank in there! Business as usual.
> 
> Now we have major auto makers on the brink of failure all over the world at worst and seeing sales falling of a clif at best. Why? Lack of progress. ICE powerplants are old hat and have had every last mpg wrung from them with ever bewildering arrays of electronic controls. What the auto world needs now to save itself is an ev with the model-t business model. no frills.cheap.plentyfull. Which brings us full circle to the cure being worse than the disease as far as they are concerned.
> 
> My view on the volt? Loose the ICE and all its crap and pack in more battery capcaity. Loose the gimicks and build em cheap. what will really happen though is some will sell but not many. the image of the ev as slow , low range ,boring will be preserved and gm will have the excuse to axe the project claiming no public interest.


 Absolutely agreed. I keep hearing that the Volt can't be built because the battery doesn't exist yet that they need. What, we could do it on a production vehicle at the beginning of the 20th century, but not anymore? We can load up and drive an EV on the moon a year before I was born, but can't build one here on Earth? Who is falling for this hype? Reporters?


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

> We can load up and drive an EV on the moon a year before I was born, but can't build one here on Earth?


i think they cost $75,000 each 
the latest moon buggys are so out of touch with reality as to be laughable.
many of the present older hybrids where the batteries are getting old they rip out the back seat and make them plug in hybrids putting enough batteriees in to get them over the daily commute with the ice as back up.

another advantage is the battery if larger than needed gets usually a half discharge and thus gets a big increase of total life
roll on 2014 and the LIMH patent expires and then the mass production will kick in and cheaper batteries.

my coNZept from 1978 with NIMH batteries init would get at least 200k per charge









sadly it no longer exists as it had so many inventions in it i had to hide it and eventually it was dumped


----------



## jackbauer (Jan 12, 2008)

Leaving environmental issues aside , auto makers cannot continue into the future on ice powerplants. The last decade has seen cars sold on gimicks. air con , electric this , electric that , gps etc etc with the great side benefit of model specific parts and model specific garages who can charge what they like because only they have the equipment and parts.

As i'm sure most people here will know , hydrogen is the biggest red herring ever invented by the industry , hybrids a close second. I mean a hybrid SUV for peats sake! A change in govermental policy is what is really required imho. But the auto lobby work very hard accross the glode to ensure this does not happen.

Mainstream press is as much to blame as when reading between the lines the same old mantra that evs are slow etc is clearly evident.

What production evs do exist are a joke (with the exception of tesla) and are designed i think to put people off the entire concept. 

What i would do is buy a chevy volt. Strip it. And rebuild it as a 100mile plus pure ev. Call a newscrew and do an interview right outside gm hq

the next breakthrough in car propulsion will come from backyard tinkerers. Not the mainstream.


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

my own car had a walk in 5 ft 10 inch height that allowed a person, with the gull wing door up, to walk into the car some thing no car i have seen has, as most gull wing cars are so low that you virtually lie down to drive.

So yes the back yard tinkerer has the advantage over the mainstream manufacturers.

as for SUVs they are the biggest con this century.
i have every 5 th vehicle in my city a suv and no real snow here for 16 years yet since 1993 when we had a 6 inch fall, there was and explosion of suvs on the road.
so the manufacturers are desperate to make older models undesirable with motors that used to last 30,000 miles befor showing signs of wear to modern motors at 250,000 km still not needing oil between changes.

so hopefully the hybrid will lead to the all electric car, and wind down slowly the huge infrastructure of the ice industry


----------



## 86Honda (Apr 15, 2009)

Well, I can't wait to thumb my nose at the oil companies once my LiFe batteries arrive next week. Goodbye FLA! But our family is not just doing electric. We also have two Geo Metros. One got 53mpg highway recently and the other I don't know yet (just rebuilt the engine and still in break-in). Let's see - Prius, $25,000+, 60 mpg. Geo, $1300 (including rebuild and repairs), 50 mpg. Gonna take a lot of driving to eat up that difference. And I'd hate to have to be the one to trace down a Prius problem - these modern cars are too complex to understand. Maybe I'm just an old curmudgeon, but the old-tech DIY folks will never be on Detriot's happy list. Now if my government could just give me a tax break for my DIY electric instead of having to buy a new hybrid...

But I don't really want the government involved in my project in any way, so just as well. If it already doesn't make economic sense before the government gets involved, it certainly won't after.


----------



## The Toecutter (May 30, 2010)

The Volt's drag coefficient of 0.28 is on par with the 1921 Rumpler Tropfenwagen(Cd 0.27). It is also a 3,500 lb pig. Both of these factors make the energy use per mile increase dramatically, and thus the battery cost per mile of range increases dramatically. The fact that it is a plug-in hybrid with low EV range means that the battery will be deep discharged as a matter of routine, instead of as an exception; wheras a 500 cycle lithium cobalt battery will last 100,000+ miles in a 200 mile range EV, you will need a much more expensive battery that lasts far more cycles for a plug-in hybrid to have similar longevity.

Why oh why can't they simply build a streamlined, lightweight car, similar to their 1992 GM Ultralite concept(88 mpg, 0-60 mph < 8 seconds, 135 mph top speed, 0.19 Cd, 1,400 lbs) or the 2000 GM Precept(80 mpg, 0-60 mph 11.5 seconds, 0.16 Cd, 2,600 lbs)? They could build such a car to accomodate not only an all-electric drivetrain, but also gasoline ICE and diesel, thus ensuring that they will not have to get a mass order of the EV version to ensure a profit; they would already have the platform mass produced for other applications. If mass producing with composite materials is still too expensive, there is nothing wrong with using conventional materials seen in modern Kias and Hyundai midsize cars, that manage to exceed safety standards without going over 2,500 lbs.

Further, the EV1 taught us that with streamlining, 100 miles range on the highway is 100% possible with lead acid batteries and nothing advanced. Imagine a Precept-like car with regard to aerodynamics that uses a 1,600 lb pack of lead acid batteries; getting 150 miles range with lead is not out of the realm of possibility at all, let alone the possibilities granted by modern batteries with 5x the specific capacity. Dave Cloud's electric Geo Metro(often referred to as the "Dolphin") does 200 miles range on flooded lead acid, thanks to extensive streamlining, and used less than $3,000 of components to build.

The Volt is a joke, in context.


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

shai agassi gave a talk and he said that the ideal way was to separate the cars from the batteries just as i tried to start 1980s
see his talk on utube here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcoJt2KLC9k

loved the quote
a hybrid is like a mermaid
when you want a fish you get a woman
if you want a woman you get a fish

google shai agassi and see how popular he is in the last 2 years.
he talks real sense


----------



## The Toecutter (May 30, 2010)

With streamlining, the need to seperate the car from the batteries, with regard to cost, mostly goes away. If you reduce your energy consumption by half, for the same range, you also reduce your battery pack size and thus battery cost by half.

Battery swap stations are not without their drawbacks. The wear and tear on the interconnects of such a complicated pack with its BMS would be tremendous. The need for quality control of the packs swapped adds to expense, and the consumer risks getting a bad pack, and depending upon the rules imposed by using the pack, could pose liability issues. Further, renting the battery, and having to pay for someone's profit margins with regard to it, adds to the vehicle's operating expense, even if such a scheme might reduce the initial purchase price. Said scheme also nullifies an inherent advantage of an EV, which is the option of not having to rely on paying another company for the car to get you where you need to go.


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

you have some good points there



> Battery swap stations are not without their drawbacks. The wear and tear on the interconnects of such a complicated pack with its BMS would be tremendous. The need for quality control of the packs swapped adds to expense, and the consumer risks getting a bad pack, and depending upon the rules imposed by using the pack, could pose liability issues. Further, renting the battery, and having to pay for someone's profit margins with regard to it, adds to the vehicle's operating expense, even if such a scheme might reduce the initial purchase price. Said scheme also nullifies an inherent advantage of an EV, which is the option of not having to rely on paying another company for the car to get you where you need to go.


battery swap would work well for say taxi or bus fleet.
not so good for private.
i brought my first set of batteries with a loan arrangement from the bank
where i told the manager that as the batteries wore down so were they paid off and he let me have the loan with the batteries as colateral.
that way i paid for the batteries as i used them
if looked after them then i was on the win.
if i did not then i would be paying them off and have no battery life.

the worst situation is where you have paid for the batteries cash and then after so many years you have to 'fill up your petrol tank' with some $1000 nds worth of batteries.--
this killed every one of the 9 NEEV trucks i built, only 2 survived in musems now


----------



## The Toecutter (May 30, 2010)

Part of operating an EV involves actually putting away the money you haven't spent on gasoline. While most people don't have thousands of dollars laying around, a properly designed EV would surely allow them to accumulate such by displacing the use of a more expensive vehicle, over the life of their first battery pack.

Also, did your packs fail suddenly, or did their range start decreasing incrementally?


I completely agree that battery swap stations are suitable for cabs and bus fleets. In fact, Americans were doing in more than 100 years ago!


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I don't think swap stations are practical at all in any passenger vehicle. Remember taxis and such are simply regular production vehicles. The expense of making a relatively few of them swappable is not reasonable, plus swapping means you need extra batteries for each vehicle, the most expensive part. Additionally, there are plenty of fast charge chemistries available right now. I think an average city taxi does about 150-200 miles a day. A stock Nissan Leaf can do that with a single somewhat fast charge during a lunch time break. A couple 10 minute really fast charges here and there could easily give even more range. No swapping, no swap stations, no extra battery packs, no waiting. Shai Aggassi and PBP are a total waste in my opinion and will likely fail. Swapping makes EV's more expensive in the long run, as does leasing batteries.


----------



## piersdad (Aug 16, 2008)

> Also, did your packs fail suddenly, or did their range start decreasing incrementally?


they were 120 ah FLA diesel starter batteries and failed slowly so i swapped the electric motor to the other end of the VW gearbox and placed a VW motor back on the gear box and made the sports car a hybrid.
i used a manual over riding clutch so that i could use the electric only or when cruising long distances would use the VW motor with regen braking on the hills thus charging the battery before electric cruising in the distant city.
did this in 1975 before hybrids were even thought of.

http://www.storydad.com/forum/index.php?topic=130.0

read more about my pioneering efforts


----------

