7 ms·

Given that G.M. destroyed their first electric car of this decade why would anyone trust them to build a new one but somehow better the second time around? I've

Given that G.M. destroyed their first electric car of this decade why would anyone trust them to build a new one but somehow better the second time around? I've never heard of a company purposefully destroying capital in the way G.M. did. This has to be collectively the stupidest corporation in America right now. The Volt will likely fail because of its massive price and less than optimal features. Why would you buy one over a Prius anyway? At least with the Prius you'd be getting a quality car made by a quality company. I have no idea why people are buying cars made by G.M. these days between the poor quality history and getting bailed out I have no interest in doing business with them.

antidaily 16y ago
To be fair, American taxpayers have been subsidizing the Toyota Prius for years too. Why the Volt costs so much is beyond me - the technologies should be reasonably mature by now. But GM has to head in this direction. They can't just build shitty SUVs and crossovers.
- barake 16y ago
  Why is the totally electric Nissan Leaf only $32,780? Under ideal conditions it can get 130+ miles to a charge [1] implying it uses better and/or more batteries than the Volt. The trim and finish must be much better on the Volt considering how expensive batteries are and how relatively cheap gasoline engines are. Or am I missing something here? 1: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-20008319-48.html http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-20008319-48.html
  - dtegart 16y ago
    The Volt website does seem to imply that it comes well speced. Navigation and 30gb music storage seem to be standard. By comparison a similar speced Camry hybrid is between 30-33k
  - krschultz 16y ago
    It doesn't have the gasoline engine. First off, gasoline engines are not as cheap as you think they are in automobile configuration. There is a big difference between what you buy for a lawn mower and what they put in the Volt. Plus you have a lot more arrangement issues related to stuffing more crap into the same sized box. It takes a lot of man hours to design and build something like that.
adolph 16y ago
How can you say that they are the stupidest? They pulled off a massive tax-payer bailout, screwed their investors, stayed out of jail and are lining up a new round of investors. They may not be the best at making cars, but the company's mastery of the American financial and political process is second to none.
- ndimopoulos 16y ago
  And unfortunately the taxpayers are the ones that are paying due to this mastery. I do not understand why everyone is getting hyped up about this. What is the purpose of the electric car? The low/no emissions or the high MPG? If you ask people you will find out that almost all of them will say the MPG since that is the reason that has a monetary impact. I recall when I was in England I had a Renault Clio Diesel with 1.5 liter engine. That car would give me 66 mpg on the highway and around 50-55 mpg in the city. That was back in 2003 and it cost brand new 9,000 GBP (less than $15,000). That car was small, comfortable and fun to drive. It did what it was supposed to and more. Why do we see then a $41,000 price tag on a vehicle that cannot give us 66 mpg and that will be subsidized by the government (i.e. we will all pay for every car sold whether we like it or not). Great!
ergo98 16y ago
You really managed to fit it all in there. >Given that G.M. destroyed their first electric car of this decade why would anyone trust them to build a new one Because they had the experience of building an electric car, knowing it wasn't viable, and going back to the drawing board until the technology was refined? >I've never heard of a company purposefully destroying capital in the way G.M. did. That's because your analysis of it is hipster, populist garbage. Sorry to be impolite about it, but the whole "who killed the electric car" movement is populated by people proud of their ignorance. >The Volt will likely fail because of its massive price Since when did $41K (really $33.5) get classed as a "massive price"? That is an absolutely typical mid-level sedan price, and apparently the volt is fairly well equipped. >At least with the Prius you'd be getting a quality car made by a quality company. The number of problems with the Prius have been legendary. Toyota's quality lead over GM has shrunk to almost a rounding error, yet we'll forever hear the "angry at GM guy" railing his 1980s argument.
- barkingcat 16y ago
  I think the problem was that they didn't learn anything from that experience. It was undermined by internal political processes, and the party line for most of the 2000's was that GM was never going to build hybrid cars because the GM execs decided batteries didn't appeal to their egos. It's got nothing to do with profitability, viability, maturity of technology, etc. I mean, GM built, marketed, and invested millions into some of the MOST unviable cars out there you can find. At one point, almost every single car they sold was at a loss - they were paying people to drive them off the lots. You can't get more "unviable" than that. And I don't think the argument is "who killed the electric car" - the real story is "who killed GM" - the entire company is an exercise in producing a black hole for money, not in manufacturing or car making.
  - ergo98 16y ago
    >It's got nothing to do with profitability, viability, maturity of technology, etc. So had the rest of the industry moved to electric vehicles, eating GM's lunch? Surely they must have given that GM was in bed with big oil and was turning a blind eye to this great technology. Of course they didn't. Honda and Toyota did some minor initiatives in marginally hybrid vehicles (which they sold at a loss primarily for image, while at the same time ramping up their own mega-SUV land yacht efforts). Everyone else just ignored it. Worse the entire industry didn't even know what "future" was the best future. Hydrogen fuel? Electric? Flex fuels? Was some sort of ultra-capacitor going to come and change the entire industry? The improvements in battery technology over just the past couple of years have been incredible. Everything relies upon battery technology, and the entire worldwide automotive industry is essentially working together on this. GM in no way had it mastered over a decade ago. >At one point, almost every single car they sold was at a loss - they were paying people to drive them off the lots. Any year that any company has a loss you could claim that they "lost money on every single unit sold", but of course that would be facile. GM's trouble centered on a long accumulated pile of debt while they did a worldwide expansion, coupled with massive liabilities to the union in the US.

antidaily 16y ago

To be fair, American taxpayers have been subsidizing the Toyota Prius for years too. Why the Volt costs so much is beyond me - the technologies should be reasonably mature by now. But GM has to head in this direction. They can't just build shitty SUVs and crossovers.

barake 16y ago
Why is the totally electric Nissan Leaf only $32,780? Under ideal conditions it can get 130+ miles to a charge [1] implying it uses better and/or more batteries than the Volt. The trim and finish must be much better on the Volt considering how expensive batteries are and how relatively cheap gasoline engines are. Or am I missing something here? 1: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-20008319-48.html http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-20008319-48.html
- dtegart 16y ago
  The Volt website does seem to imply that it comes well speced. Navigation and 30gb music storage seem to be standard. By comparison a similar speced Camry hybrid is between 30-33k
- krschultz 16y ago
  It doesn't have the gasoline engine. First off, gasoline engines are not as cheap as you think they are in automobile configuration. There is a big difference between what you buy for a lawn mower and what they put in the Volt. Plus you have a lot more arrangement issues related to stuffing more crap into the same sized box. It takes a lot of man hours to design and build something like that.

adolph 16y ago

How can you say that they are the stupidest? They pulled off a massive tax-payer bailout, screwed their investors, stayed out of jail and are lining up a new round of investors. They may not be the best at making cars, but the company's mastery of the American financial and political process is second to none.

ndimopoulos 16y ago
And unfortunately the taxpayers are the ones that are paying due to this mastery. I do not understand why everyone is getting hyped up about this. What is the purpose of the electric car? The low/no emissions or the high MPG? If you ask people you will find out that almost all of them will say the MPG since that is the reason that has a monetary impact. I recall when I was in England I had a Renault Clio Diesel with 1.5 liter engine. That car would give me 66 mpg on the highway and around 50-55 mpg in the city. That was back in 2003 and it cost brand new 9,000 GBP (less than $15,000). That car was small, comfortable and fun to drive. It did what it was supposed to and more. Why do we see then a $41,000 price tag on a vehicle that cannot give us 66 mpg and that will be subsidized by the government (i.e. we will all pay for every car sold whether we like it or not). Great!

ergo98 16y ago

You really managed to fit it all in there. >Given that G.M. destroyed their first electric car of this decade why would anyone trust them to build a new one Because they had the experience of building an electric car, knowing it wasn't viable, and going back to the drawing board until the technology was refined? >I've never heard of a company purposefully destroying capital in the way G.M. did. That's because your analysis of it is hipster, populist garbage. Sorry to be impolite about it, but the whole "who killed the electric car" movement is populated by people proud of their ignorance. >The Volt will likely fail because of its massive price Since when did $41K (really $33.5) get classed as a "massive price"? That is an absolutely typical mid-level sedan price, and apparently the volt is fairly well equipped. >At least with the Prius you'd be getting a quality car made by a quality company. The number of problems with the Prius have been legendary. Toyota's quality lead over GM has shrunk to almost a rounding error, yet we'll forever hear the "angry at GM guy" railing his 1980s argument.

barkingcat 16y ago
I think the problem was that they didn't learn anything from that experience. It was undermined by internal political processes, and the party line for most of the 2000's was that GM was never going to build hybrid cars because the GM execs decided batteries didn't appeal to their egos. It's got nothing to do with profitability, viability, maturity of technology, etc. I mean, GM built, marketed, and invested millions into some of the MOST unviable cars out there you can find. At one point, almost every single car they sold was at a loss - they were paying people to drive them off the lots. You can't get more "unviable" than that. And I don't think the argument is "who killed the electric car" - the real story is "who killed GM" - the entire company is an exercise in producing a black hole for money, not in manufacturing or car making.
- ergo98 16y ago
  >It's got nothing to do with profitability, viability, maturity of technology, etc. So had the rest of the industry moved to electric vehicles, eating GM's lunch? Surely they must have given that GM was in bed with big oil and was turning a blind eye to this great technology. Of course they didn't. Honda and Toyota did some minor initiatives in marginally hybrid vehicles (which they sold at a loss primarily for image, while at the same time ramping up their own mega-SUV land yacht efforts). Everyone else just ignored it. Worse the entire industry didn't even know what "future" was the best future. Hydrogen fuel? Electric? Flex fuels? Was some sort of ultra-capacitor going to come and change the entire industry? The improvements in battery technology over just the past couple of years have been incredible. Everything relies upon battery technology, and the entire worldwide automotive industry is essentially working together on this. GM in no way had it mastered over a decade ago. >At one point, almost every single car they sold was at a loss - they were paying people to drive them off the lots. Any year that any company has a loss you could claim that they "lost money on every single unit sold", but of course that would be facile. GM's trouble centered on a long accumulated pile of debt while they did a worldwide expansion, coupled with massive liabilities to the union in the US.