"JazzMan" > wrote in message
...
> y_p_w wrote:
>
> >
> > Certainly many of the electrics in recent years were sold at a net
> > loss. Remember the GM EV1, Toyota RAV4 Electric, or the Honda EV
> > Plus? GM claimed there was no demand for the EV1 (a lie). The
> > real reason was because it was costing them $80,000 each to make
> > them
> >
>
> The EV-1 was never intended to be sold to consumers. That
> vehicle was only available under a lease program, GM used
> that lease program to do long-term testing of electric
> vehicle technology. It was a sad day indeed when the program
> was terminated at the end of it's run and the cars were all
> taken back. Every single lesee really liked the car and it
> worked well for them. If it had been available in my area
> I would have leased one in a heartbeat. The volatility and
> the gaming going on in the gasoline industry is really
> hurting people now, having an all-electric car would allow
> someone who truly wanted to to step out of the game altogether.
>
> BTW, the reason for the high production costs of the EV-1 was
> because every one was a hand-built and hand-assembled car. If
> GM had set up their usual mass-production assembly line for
> the EV-1 it likely would sell for less than what a mid-level
> SUV sells for now. Fundamentally, the only really expensive
> part was the motor and the battery pack, but don't forget that
> those costs were offset by elimination of expensive to design
> and build transmission systems and complex emissions control
> systems on gas engines. No fuel injectors, no catalyst, no
> smog pumps or EGR systems, no exhaust system at all for that
> matter, no fuel systems, no evaporative vapor recovery system,
> no clutch system, no tranny cooler, no radiator, no antifreeze,
> I could go on and on. Ultimately I would see an all-electric
> direct-drive car being cheaper to make than a regular petro-fuel
> vehicle.
>
> Another plus of an all-E car is that it can use better
> electrical sources, including reforming fuel cell technology,
> and renewable non-carbon energy sources.
>
>
> JazzMan
> --
I love folks who preach how great electric cars are. They never take
into account that generating the power to charge that vehicle is doing
more damage than running an auto. It also seems to escape their notice
that electrics are only useful in large cities since they have such
terrible range they are impractical in the rest of the country. The only
real non good source for electrical power on a long term scale is
nuclear and the green folks scream when they hear that. But it's a fact.
No other power source is even close.
As for fuel cells they are a joke. Current cells fail in less than 10K
and are dependent on natural gas to produce the energy. Add in the fact
that they are an energy losing item as well and you see why they are not
really big sellers.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----