And we get the Chevy Volt ! See video

[..]

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/world-s-first-super-bus-can-hit-155-mph-ar117659.html

[MCRIDER]

People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe".

Do you mean what people already believe abut the Volt?  Or what people already believe about japanese vehicles?

[Momz]

You mentioned the Chevy Volt.

Rush Limbaugh must be beside himself. Why you ask?
GM has temporarily suspended production of the Volt until demand increases to match inventories.

Rush does not like "alternative" fuel vehicles and especially electrics.

[..]

People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe".

Do you mean what people already believe abut the Volt?  Or what people already believe about japanese vehicles?

Both.

As Andy Rooney wrote.

[Blues]

The arabs have available cash to put into R&D and in this case, an important incentive... a directive from a sheik.  In our country, companies are now ridiculed for trying new technologies, especially if they don't get it right the first time or two.

[cookiedough]

 Don't be fooled, our govt. and oil companies and most likely auto mfgs. are one in the same and they have the technology to easily make vehicles getting better mpg and run on electric at a much cheaper than you would expect cost to mfg..  However, if we did that, the govt. and oil companies would lose billions in revenue and our world is run off of oil companies profits even though you may not realize it.  Just look at the technology, or lack therof, in the past 20 years or more of cars NOT becoming more fuel efficient.   For example,  our former 4 cylinder 2.2L cavalier (P.O.S.) made in 1994 returned 33 mpg and now the chevy cruze/hyundai elantra/toyota corolla all return ONLY a few more mpg and at best 40 mpg  hwy.  Same can be said for our former 1988 toyota tercel 4 speed manual returning an impressive 40 mpg way back in 1988 technology 1.5L engine pretty peppy for it's time - no car running strictly on gas 4 cylinder returns over 40 mpg today.  Also, look at 1/2 ton truck mpg today vs. say 1990, only returning like 2-3 more mpg now than in 1990 in a V8 truck.  Yah, the hp/torque has gone up, but mpg has stayed only slightly better.  Why - because the govt. and oil companies cannot stand to loose billions in profits. 

The prius is o.k. priced for about 6 grand more than a corolla new msrp but I'm not willing to spend an extra 6 grand since it would take me like 7 years of driving a prius to make up for the increase in price.  GM's chevy volt is a total joke - who would spend over 40K on a dinky no ground clearance car of any kind?  Not the general public that is for sure.  Government Motors (GM) is surely going to loose millions in this mfg. of the volt since it will set them back huge in profits.

[Bob E.]

I don't buy the tin-foil hat conspiracy theory that the govt, oil companies, and car mfr's could easily do it so easily and cheaply.  What would be the motivation for the car mfr's?  I would think they would want to have the most fuel efficient car...especially given the high gas prices.  But if they did, they would likely not compete sticker price-wise with the less fuel-efficient car.  And when people are comparing car prices, they don't always equate the better fuel economy with a higher sticker price.  They are thinking about their monthly loan payment, not necessarily the less frequent trips to the gas pump.  Plus, even though gas prices are high, it still takes a long time to make up for cost difference.

The problem is that advances in fuel efficiency don't happen without technology.  Technology costs money. The car mfr's won't spend that money because it eats into their profits, unless they raise the price of the car.  So they hold the threat of higher prices over the heads of the govt when we try and mandate better fuel economy standards.  So the govt usually backs off.

[Patrick]

Electric cars.. Throughout the early 1900s many different electric cars were built, and they were great cars. These early cars didn't catch on fire, went 80-120 miles on a charge, and women liked them for the ease of operation..  Now, in comparison, we end with the Volt ! With all the 'stimulus' money provided Government Motors each Volt cost the taxpayers 1/4 million dollars and they tried charging 40K for these 25 mile/charge pieces of crap.. These cars actually are a coal powered vehicle, just ask anyone who owns one how much their electric bill has increased.. And, to add insult to injury, GM tried petitioning our wonderful president to increase our fuel tax an additional $1/gallon.. I will never, ever, by another GM product.. Well, ya got me started..

[Patrick]

I guess I quit too soon.. I should have mentioned hydrogen.. Thats the technology I'm waiting for and I'll probably buy one,, as long as its not made by GM or Toyota.. OK, I'm done..

[Challenger]

The problem is that advances in fuel efficiency don't happen without technology.  Technology costs money. The car mfr's won't spend that money because it eats into their profits, unless they raise the price of the car.  So they hold the threat of higher prices over the heads of the govt when we try and mandate better fuel economy standards.  So the govt usually backs off.
[/quote]                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          They seem to have the technology to get 375 to 400 HP out of engines that used to be 250 HP.  My 1976 GMC 350 full-time 4X4 got 13 MPG, My 02 5.4 F250 2 WD gets 11 MPG. quite an improvement.  Just saying!  

[cookiedough]

Challenger,  your 02 ford 5.4L f250 2wd only gets 11 mpg, wow that sucks.  Yah, car mfgs. have the technology to increase hp/torque over the years, but not fuel efficiency?  I don't buy that theory.  A lot of that has to do with the public wanting more and more hp/torque when it really is not needed.  My former old 1998 chevy silverado 5.7L 350 V8 around 275 hp and 310 torque (or around there) had plenty of power to pull anything my current 381 hp/401 torque 5.7L toyota tundra can and still achieving near the same mpg around 16-17 avg mpg.  If car mfgs. have the technology to increase engines hp/torque, maybe they need to re-think their priorities and have someone step in and do that for them by increasing mpg?  Just saying.

[Patrick]

Fuel mileage seems to be so subjective.. My Thunder Road version Dodge 5.7  was getting 15 around town and 19.5 on the highway if kept under 75mph.. A little playing with mapping and its now 17/22.. There is a limit to fuel mileage,, just my thoughts..

[MCRIDER]

  Just look at the technology, or lack therof, in the past 20 years or more of cars NOT becoming more fuel efficient.   For example,  our former 4 cylinder 2.2L cavalier (P.O.S.) made in 1994 returned 33 mpg and now the chevy cruze/hyundai elantra/toyota corolla all return ONLY a few more mpg and at best 40 mpg  hwy.  Same can be said for our former 1988 toyota tercel 4 speed manual returning an impressive 40 mpg way back in 1988 technology 1.5L engine pretty peppy for it's time - no car running strictly on gas 4 cylinder returns over 40 mpg today.  Also, look at 1/2 ton truck mpg today vs. say 1990, only returning like 2-3 more mpg now than in 1990 in a V8 truck. 

The reason that same sized vehicles get fewer MPG than 1980's vehicles is weight.  Weight from all the government mandated safety equipment.  Bumpers, crash barriers, air bags structure supports, etc.

[MCRIDER]

With all the 'stimulus' money provided Government Motors each Volt cost the taxpayers 1/4 million dollars and they tried charging 40K for these 25 mile/charge pieces of crap.. 

The Volt engineering was all completed when the bailout money was issued.  The taxpayers didn't pay anything to develop the Volt.  It was ready to be released to the dealers.

It's easy to get confused when Fox news is your only source of information.

[hotglue #43]

Here is a possible solution....
http://www.scuderigroup.com/

an 'air hybrid'....

[Trynt]

With all the 'stimulus' money provided Government Motors each Volt cost the taxpayers 1/4 million dollars and they tried charging 40K for these 25 mile/charge pieces of crap.. 

It's easy to get confused when Fox news is your only source of information.

As opposed to MSNBC 

Hey but look on the bright side, according to the NY Times is only takes 26.6 years for the Volt to payback its extra cost with fuel savings.

[Full_Throttle]

With all the 'stimulus' money provided Government Motors each Volt cost the taxpayers 1/4 million dollars and they tried charging 40K for these 25 mile/charge pieces of crap.. 

The Volt engineering was all completed when the bailout money was issued.  The taxpayers didn't pay anything to develop the Volt.  It was ready to be released to the dealers.

It's easy to get confused when Fox news is your only source of information.

Your right; the taxpayers bailed out the company who spent too much money developing a car that noone wants, and thus went bankrupt. Just sayin 

[Gear Jammer]

With all the 'stimulus' money provided Government Motors each Volt cost the taxpayers 1/4 million dollars and they tried charging 40K for these 25 mile/charge pieces of crap..  

The Volt engineering was all completed when the bailout money was issued.  The taxpayers didn't pay anything to develop the Volt.  It was ready to be released to the dealers.

It's easy to get confused when Fox news is your only source of information.

Your right; the taxpayers bailed out the company who spent too much money developing a car that noone wants, and thus went bankrupt. Just sayin  

Difficult to understand for those who get their info from BSNBC and the others in the obamanation's political propaganda services,,,

[MCRIDER]

[/quote]

Your right; the taxpayers bailed out the company who spent too much money developing a car that noone wants, and thus went bankrupt. Just sayin 
[/quote]

Not many people hated the car when Bush was in office.  It was mostly engineered and developed back then.  They did know the price was too high.  As soon as Obama saved the company, all of a sudden, everybody hated the car and the company.  It's funny how easily misinformed people are easily swayed.

[Gear Jammer]

Your right; the taxpayers bailed out the company who spent too much money developing a car that noone wants, and thus went bankrupt. Just sayin  
[/quote]

Not many people hated the car when Bush was in office.  It was mostly engineered and developed back then.  They did know the price was too high.  As soon as Obama saved the company, all of a sudden, everybody hated the car and the company.  It's funny how easily misinformed people are easily swayed.
[/quote]
And how hard it is to confuse and bedazzle those who stay informed...

Hard to hate a car that wasn't in production before Nobama's term, and had no road trials until the last several years  

[Thespian]

I guess I quit too soon.. I should have mentioned hydrogen.. Thats the technology I'm waiting for and I'll probably buy one,, as long as its not made by GM or Toyota.. OK, I'm done..

 +1! NASA invented the technology years ago. It's the right fuel for the future as far as I'm concerned.

[..]

On sale end of 2010.

I know if I had known of the vehicle during Bush's term I'd have derided it then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt

[ricoman]

I think some research will show that the early 1900's electric cars averaged 20-40 miles on a charge with a few exceptions. There was one powered by an "Edison" battery that did a great deal better.
Recharging was a difficult process at best.

[Moonshot_1]

Your right; the taxpayers bailed out the company who spent too much money developing a car that noone wants, and thus went bankrupt. Just sayin 
[/quote]

Not many people hated the car when Bush was in office.  It was mostly engineered and developed back then.  They did know the price was too high.  As soon as Obama saved the company, all of a sudden, everybody hated the car and the company.  It's funny how easily misinformed people are easily swayed.
[/quote]

The Volt fails on it's own merits. Nothing to do with Obama or Bush or bailouts.

It's expensive. Even with the rebates it's in excess of 30k

It's got a narrow window of practicability. Outstanding technology for a commuter car in temperate climates. Hate to be stranded in one in a blizzard. In less than temperate climates the energy output required to keep occupants comfortable must have a huge impact on it's range.

Can take hours to achieve full charge.

Limited to 4 people and limited cargo capacity.

If you run out of charge and gas, you can't go get a gallon of electricity and be on your way. There's a gas motor that runs a generator that charges the battery but I'd bet it would need to put a hefty charge in that battery before the car would operate properly.

If the price was well under 30k and I lived in an urban area in a temperate climate, sounds like a neat car to have. Great commuter car for that environment.

Can't see it working out very well in the rural Great Plains in December.

[RP#62]

I'm waiting for a car that'll run on beer urine.  No shortage of that.
-RP