115-year-old electric car gets same 40 miles to the charge as Chevy Volt

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/14/114-year-old-electric-car-gets-same-40-miles-to-the-charge-as-chevy-volt/

And?? The Volt is a PHEV, not a BEV, despite the linked article and GM's own
insistence.

The EV1, RAV4-EV, Etc. got more miles per charge.

On 14/10/2011 9:48 PM, Daniel who wants to know wrote:

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/14/114-year-old-electric-car-gets-same-40-miles-to-the-charge-as-chevy-volt/

Makes more sense to buy a Zenn Motors vehicle for 1/4 the price and go
pure electric to skip on maintaining 2 drive trains.  Or better yet, a
Tata Nano for say $3500 and get a heater that works, gets 52 mpg and
Euro crash rated.  And for less than a down payment on a GM Volt.

Trouble is, corrupt legislators may not allow the import of these
vehicles into their jurisdictions to protect the corrupt and inefficient
unions.

Volt was a bad idea and billions wasted.  But Marxist Obama has
Government Motors.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.  But
we have big huge government we can't afford...
    -- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

On 14/10/2011 4:47 PM, Jim_Higgins wrote:


http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/14/114-year-old-electric-car-gets-same-40-miles-to-the-charge-as-chevy-volt/

The only progress GM has made since then is bailout money on the grand
kids debt-tax slavery tab?

Whew.  GM, that is bad.  You can stick the taxpayer with the debt, but a
loser is still a loser.

--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs.  But
we have big huge government we can't afford...
    -- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

http://www.ev1.org/

Each two years, a review was held by CARB of the ZEV mandate, and auto make=
rs' progress toward their ZEV targets. Instead of progress, auto and oil in=
dustry groups testified that the goal was unreachable, impossible, and that=
 no one wanted an Electric car like the EV1.=20

In 1994, they engaged a public relations firm run by Joe Cerrell to fight t=
he ZEV mandate. A letter writing campaign, bused-in retirees, focus groups,=
 and other tricks were used to try to derail the ZEV mandate.

After years of acrimony, CARB and the AMA reached, in 1996, a Memorandum of=
 Agreement ("MOA") which seemed to be an amicable solution. Unfortunately, =
this MOA was kept secret from the public, which was unable to review it. CA=
RB is still allowing the AAM to scam the public by keeping exact ZEV number=
s and status secret, to this day.

As events proved, the AAM had a couple of nasty surprises in store for CARB=
. First, one ploy to weaken the Mandate was the idea of trading off pure ZE=
V production for hybrids, and giving "PZEV" (partial ZEV credit) for better=
 gas mileage. This led to an injunction since it infringes on the federal g=
overnment's sole power to regulate MPG and CAFE standards. In the aftermath=
, auto makers used the hiatus to dismantle their battery ZEV programs and c=
rush the EVs. Thus, CARB should have resisted AAM pressures, and stuck to r=
equiring ZEV production. Their conciliation proved a weakness. The second s=
hock was revealed at the CARB 2000 ZEV review: the MOA, contrary to the ide=
as of CARB, did not commit the AAM to a "good faith effort" to build a mark=
et. Rather, it only committed them to put out a certain number of ZEV cars =
for a certain number of years. The fate of the ZEV was not spelled out in t=
he MOA:

CARB staff thought the ZEV program would expand, and ZEV numbers on the roa=
d would increase; while
AAM intended, and the MOA text permitted, the ZEV to be taken back and crus=
hed after the demonstration period ended.
This is why GM, Honda, Ford, Nissan and, for a while, Toyota were able to k=
eep control of the ZEV and not sell to the public (their worst nightmare!) =
and were able to get away with never offering their ZEV for sale. It was on=
ly Toyota, from Mar. to Nov. 2002, which offered the last 328 Toyota RAV4-E=
V for sale to the general public.

http://www.ev1.org/volthoax.htm

GM VOLT: a plug-in, but not an EV.=20
Engine comes on to turn wheels, like a Prius.    Nissan Leaf: A real EV, uses =
no oil or gas while running.=20
No tailpipe! Can be fueled by your rooftop solar system, a rooftop system o=
f only 6 to 12 square yards, 1.3 kw (cost: $8000 before rebate or tax credi=
t) is enough to drive 1000 miles per month.
Battery pack is located above the center of gravity, and between the seats:=
 meaning only a 4-seater, and with a less than stable feeling on turns.    Bat=
tery is located on the undercarriage, like the Toyota RAV4-EV, giving it st=
ability and making it a 5-seater with more room in the cabin.
Drives and feels like an oil-fired car, not an EV    Feels and drives like a r=
eal EV, peppy and smooth around corners
Battery is too large (16 kWh) for the amount you are allowed to use (8 kWh)=
 because it's designed like a Prius, putting the gas engine prior to the el=
ectric drive, so you can only use half the battery.    Designed like a real EV=
, 24 kWh which are 80% accessible. This lowers the wear-and-tear on the bat=
tery and gives more range.
3900 lbs, much too heavy (heavier than the larger Toyota RAV4-EV) because i=
t has the wrong battery and the wrong design.    3500 lbs., with a 660 lb. bat=
tery pack. Still the wrong battery, since it only has a lifespan of 5 to 10=
 years and 80,000 to 100,000 miles.=20

Nickel is cheaper and longer-lasting, and less heavy in practice. A 30 kWh =
NiMH pack weighs 1000 lbs., the 20 kWh you can access in the LEAF weighs ab=
out the same per kWh (30 lbs. per kWh) but costs more and doesn't last as l=
ong.
The wrong battery. ironically, the 400 lbs. of Lithium in the VOLT yield on=
ly 8 kWh (40 lbs. per kWh) while 400 lbs. of Nickel batteries would yield 1=
2 kWh (33 lbs. per kWh)    Nissan plans to recycle used batteries into new bat=
teries, enabling lower cost and eliminating the need for new mining of the =
metals in the battery.
Supposedly a car for all missions: but if you drive it long-distance, you w=
ill pay 35 to 50 cents per mile in over-mileage charges, meaning it's too e=
xpensive for long-distance.    Those wanting to travel long-distance should an=
alyze WHY: if it's to save money, take a TRAIN. If it's to see the USA, tak=
e an RV. The idea of driving cars or trucks long-distance on cheap subsidiz=
ed oil is PAST HISTORY.