GM starts the assembly line
 

http://canadianpress.google.com/arti...9gEo9ALBpQ3owQ

Way to go! Looking forward to more progress.

Bob Wilson

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

I agree and will be rooting for one of the US HOME teams.

I hope they can eventually put something out there that competes well with the HiHy and the FEH - I dont think the Vue does yet... If so - I will replace my Town and Country (van, not citizenship).

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

How about GM making fuel efficient cars?

Yes, while it's true that any impovement is good, why not compete with Japan's efficiency for smaller vehicles?
How about a 50 or 60 MPG sedan? Open the market to a plug-in battery electric? (Without later crushing all of them)

I wonder if those titanic GM hybrids will be sold, or available for lease only?

-Steve

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

I'm glad to see full hybrid offerings in larger vehicles. I wish they were also offered in pickup trucks (the current GM offering is just a mild hybrid). When one looks at gas consumption in the more useful gallons/mile (or gallons/year) rather than mpg, it becomes apparent that there is far more oil to be saved from big vehicles going hybrid. Anybody know how GM's hybrid city busses are doing?

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

I'm looking for either a hybrid minivan or the GM two-mode in a "frame" that can carry an RV shell. This will meet my wife's demand for an RV and my demand for efficiency. Granted, it won't have great highway MPG but when we get to the destination, it won't require owning our own oil well to move about.

I also see efficiency as being needed as part of a continum from the smallest, four seater (in some countries two+ seaters) up through the largest freight and construction vehicles. The advantages of hybrid transmissions are so great and IMHO it scales well.

To me, hybrid technology moves 'peak power' demands from over-sizing the ICE to a mix of electric-battery and allows optimization of the ICE. Today, ICE only vehicles have to use oversized engines to meet their peak power demands. Hybrid technology allows us to avoid the overhead and inefficiencies of partial power, large engine operation.

Now the the europeans can deliver on their diesel hybrids, that will be game, set, point. Then we'll have to find new challenges . . . smart highways.

Bob Wilson

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Wow a hybrid RV. What you could do if the batteries were large enough

1 onboard 110v system
2 PHEV
3 Diesel/electric hybrid
4 no need for a aux generator
5 runs off a methane generator off the sewer tank ;)

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Chevy Malibu, Saturn Aura and Pontiac G6 4 cylinders are rated at 22 / 30, as compared to Honda Accord 22 / 31 and Toyota Camry 21 / 31

A 3.5L V6 Chevy Impala seats 5 or 6 and leads its class in fuel economy with 18 / 29. So for people interested in the Accord / Camry size vehicle, I guess we already do.

Stay tuned. First you take care of your bread and butter, then you spread the wealth. Saturn is launching the Astra fairly soon. It should be fairly competitive with Civic and Corolla on all measures.

Saturn VUE Plug-in has already been announced, as has the Chevrolet Volt

You may buy or you may lease. And you may keep them for as long as you see fit. How many you want? ;)


Peace,

Martin

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Hmmm, even with $4 gasoline,there will be a market for a biggish SUV that gets an honest 16-18 mpg in the city and maybe 24-25 highway.Our ancient(1998 197,000 miles) Suburban-acquired 5 months ago-is a surprisingly good vehicle(everything works,nice comfortable ride-lotta rattles on rough roads, but pretty quiet on interstates).It get 16 mpg in the city when 1/2 of the city driving is city interstate.In the purest redlight to redlight city it gets 12-13mpg.This isn't too bad considering it can haul 8 people, or a lot of 4x8 building material, or tow.They are great evac vehicles-toss in everyone and everything and go.
I drive it about 90 miles a week,and get 13.5 mpg-If it got 18 mpg I would save about 1.6 gal/wk-87 gallons/yr.Most folks drive the wheels off them-300+miles per week,and will save about 300 gallons/yr over a normal Suburban.They are commonly kept to 150,000 miles so they will make their premium back in about 6 years,and be "greener" the whole time.
The big SUVs will be on the road for a long time;the numbers will drop, but they are more useful than pickups in many respects,so they will be around even with $7 gasoline(just driven less, of course)
Charlie
Many folks with $$ problems will buy used big SUVs because they are cheap,and versatile.

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Hi Martin, thanks for the reply.

Those GM vehicles you mention can get (and exceed, for a few) 31MPG.
But you make my point.
Foreign auto makers have been well exceeding the 30MPG flag that GM so proudly waves in its advertisements. I only can only wonder why the big 3 continue to lag so far behind. (Certainly not only GM)

Most of us here know the actual MPG- and potential in the HCH and Prius, which have been out at least 5 years. Case in point:

Many Prius owners choose to drive more thoughtfully and get +60MPG in thier car- same with HCH owners. Personally, in a pinch, I can approach 70 with my 5 passenger sedan.

I haven't heard reports of anyone driving any of the big 3 even in the same MPG ballpark. Who knows, perhaps GM can reach that if and when they put the new drivetrain in their smaller cars (Which would benefit most).

At least folks will be able to buy- vs lease- the new titanic GM hybrid vehicles, and not be forced to return them for some terrible fate.

Chevy Volt holds a lot of promise. But remains only GM's concept car.

-Steve

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Steve,

If you can agree to the idea that there are several angles to the fuel economy question AND that different automakers have different points of strength, then I submit to you the following.....

ANGLES TO FUEL ECONOMY:

How is fuel economy best measured? Is it one of these?

• Miles per gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel
• Miles per gallon of petroleum or diesel (not the same as the above)
• CO2 emissions in g/km (this is the approach of the EU, California, and several other states)
• Gallons of gasoline used per year

Or is there some other measure? Or combinations of the above? The best approach to solve one of the above may not be the best approach to solving the others.

How should an automaker seek to make the most impact?

• Produce one vehicle that gets a higher label number than any other
• Reduce the gallons of gasoline consumed per year by its highest volume products
• Provide the widest portfolio of segment fuel economy leading vehicles
• Have the highest average fuel economy, sales volume weighted, in the marketplace
• Displace the most petroleum required to operate its vehicles
• Completely respin their portfolio of products to achieve higher label numbers

So, what's my point? There are two actually. One is that depending on what the focus and priorities a company has for resolving the environmental / fuel conservation / dependency on oil, the technologies deployed to address these issues may differ in type and portfolio area of focus. The other is that as a company works toward implementing fuel saving technologies, they will do so first from their positions of strength in the industry.

If a company is focused on getting the highest sticker number they can, then they are going to focus on smaller, lighter weight, more aerodynamic vehicles. They may then consider hybrid electric, diesel, or variable displacement technology solutions (or some combination). Then they would gradually expand usage of these technologies to other parts of their portfolio. Example....Hybrid electric technology in Prius, then Highlander / RX400, then Camry. Tundra (irresistable area of conquest) was on the path at one point but Toyota ran into difficulty in scaling the technology that far up.

If a company is focused on achieving maximum reduction in the consumption of petroleum products across their product portfolio, then they are going to focus on their highest volume vehicles, particularly those that have the highest consumption, and work towards reducing the consumption by considering hybrid electric, diesel, or variable displacement technology solutions. Examples.....variable cylinder displacement in high volume Chevrolet and GMC SUVs and pickups, then high volume Chevrolet Impala.

Examples......2-Mode Hybrid technology in Chevy Tahoe and GMC Yukon, followed by Escalade, Sierra, Silverado and Saturn VUE. There is no public press release describing 2-Mode on any car programs so I will not comment there.

They may also look to replace petroleum-based fuels with some other type of fuel.

Examples....FlexFuel (low petroleum content) capability for high volume trucks (Silverado, Sierra) SUVs (Tahoe, Yukon) and cars (Impala)

POINTS OF STRENGTH:

Toyota and Honda have demonstrated market strength in Mid Size, Small, and Compact Cars. Focusing hybrid technologies on Insight, Civic, Camry, and Prius make total sense from the aspect of protecting your market strong point. Personally, I wonder why Corolla and Yaris are not available in hybrid form yet. I would guess that it has to do with ability to get price.

GM, Ford and Chrysler have demonstrated strength in the Full Size Pickup, Full Size SUV, and Mid Size Car segments. I could list all the applications that each has in these segments for FlexFuel and diesel, but that would make this post waaaay too long (too late ;) )

Bottom line is, each group of companies is going to first protect the strong points in their portfolio with fuel savings technologies, then spread out into areas of conquest.

Long post.....hope it makes sense.

Peace,

Martin

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Hi Martin,
Some of the hybrid skeptics have claimed that hybrid owners have their egos tied up in "showing off" their hybrids. But that only applies to the current Prius and Insights that have distinctive profiles. Even my NHW11 Prius has a lot in common with the Ford Focus except for the trunk foil. So I used to think 'hybrid specific' bodies were a problem. Then I thought a little more about it.

A hybrid specific body, a separate design from a gas-only vehicle, allows optimizations that may be inappropriate for the gas-only vehicle. For example, gas-only vehicles have a higher cooling air requirement than a hybrid. So things like smaller radiator grills and under-body, aerodynamic improvements may not make sense.

At the risk of sounding elitists, there are sound engineering reasons for the marriage of a purpose built, hybrid body and hybrid drive train. If nothing else, it applies a 'clue by four' to gas-only drivers that they don't have to stay with the same old technology that robs them at the pump.

Other than my license plate, "C-52MPG," I really don't care what my car looks like. But having both a 2003 Prius and 2001 Echo, I'm not sure a hybrid package could fit in the Echo without serious problems. The two body styles are otherwise very similar.

I know it costs a lot to come up with a new body but I notice Toyota did that when they went from the NHW11 to the NHW20 and it did nothing to hurt their sales. IMHO, retro-fitting a gas-only power system to a hybrid body would be a lot easier. We could call them 'mock' hybrids.

Bob Wilson

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Martin,

Pick a segment, then produce a vehicle that gets really good miles per gallon. I expect many who need a vehicle in that segment that worry about fuels costs will buy it.

If GM picks the minivan segment and does it well, I will probably buy one.

If Jeep outfits a Liberty or Patriot with a hybrid or efficient diesel in the US, I will buy that if available first....

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Bob,

I understand everything you said and wouldn't argue with any of it, BUT at one point in time, Toyota was on record as saying that all new vehicle programs would be engineered with hybrid accomodation a given. This was before the Yaris was launched and before the Camry was updated. Camry has a hybrid, but Yaris doesn't. Whyizat? Two logical reasons occur to me.....cost exceeds expected customer willingness to pay or they recognize a capacity concern and would prefer to divert the capacity to higher priced (Camry / Prius / HiHy / RX400) applications.

Peace,

Martin

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Although I haven't seen the new Scion xB, a hybrid version of the 'box' xB would be an easy sell for our family. Although more of a microvan than a minivan, there is a lot of utility in having a large, open space.

I've speculated about taking a Prius hybrid system and force fitting it into the front of a Scion xB. I'm fully aware that the wiring would be a nightmare. But in the end, it would be such a great utiltarian vehicle, it just makes a lot of sense.

My wife wants an RV but we could settle on a minivan. Regardless, it has to be a reasonably sized hybrid drive system with at least 1/3d hybrid and 2/3d ICE. BAS won't cut it.

Bob Wilson

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Concerning the hybrid Yukons etc., my principal worry is that GM has stated that these will be available on a limited basis, probably meaning west coast. In the end, I hope this doesn't become a paper dragon (like the FEH which I know exists but I have never seen in my small town). In my view, the limited market idea shows no real conviction to the design. I hope that I am wrong and that GM sells all they produce so that they will expand production, availability. With gas prices rising, the demand should increase.
Glen

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Limited basis is in reference to total volume built each model year, not geographical preference. There are a number of factors that could limit the number expected to be built, most dealing with the availability of critical components. It could also deal with the degree to which dealers participate. In order to be able to sell them, dealers would likely have to commit to purchase of specific repair tools and certification of technicians to work on the hybrid systems. I was once involved in the development of tools and training and dealer certification for Corvette ZR-1. Because of the cost of the tools and the cost to train technicians to repair a vehicle they might never see (only a few thousand were sold each year) some Chevrolet dealers chose not to participate and as such were not allotted any ZR-1s to sell.

Peace,

Martin

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

Hi Martin, thanks for the post:

Your explanation makes sense, as long as anyone actually attempts to compete with the very high MPG foreign automobiles.
Again, I'm not picking on GM specific.

On the other hand, all of the big 3 seem to rely exclusively on defense, rather than to agressively, offensively compete an conquer Japan's high efficiency models. I don't know any winning team that is purely defense.

I'm certainly no marketing whiz, and I know that every region is different. But I do notice small, efficient sedans outnumber large utility vehicles perhaps 4:1 (or greater) in my area.

What a wonderful marketing opportunity, if GM, Ford or Dodge would only make the cars!

Who knows, perhaps someday my HCH will be replaced with an ultra-efficient, sharp looking Impalla or Malibu. Maybe our Grand Caravan pig will be replaced with a clean burning, efficient diesel Uplander minivan.

Mabe even ditch the pump completely and plug it in at night.

Today the ball is in Japan's hands. Hopefully (at least one) of our big 3 will at least attempt to take it back.

-Steve

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

My thanks too Martin! You're insights are a delight and gives credence to not only your experience and love of cars but credit, indirectly, to your employer.

One question about the two-mode transmission and I'll understand if it is proprietary. Can this unit be built in different power scales? For example, 'slimming' the electric motors might make the unit more compatible with lower powered vehicles . . . possibly the Impala or other Camry-killers?

I would not expect it in an Aveo, the bottom end. Heck, it probably weights half of their payload capacity. <grins>

Could you publish or point us to an open source of the two-mode transmission specifications?
- power
- weight
- torque-rpm curve(s) for each motor
- interfaces (I'm curious if there is an external oil cooler and filter)

Past published technical content have been fairly 'thin' understandable since the production models hadn't started rolling off the assembly line. However, these units will soon be showing up at dealers and the service departments. Once they reach there, the maintenance manuals will have a lot of this information and no doubt they are in final editing now.

Questions that I still have about the unit are:

1) at high-speed, is there an internal 'lock-up' mode that lets the ICE provide the bulk of the power augmented by one of the motors for 'passing' power?

2) is the shifting done with a syncro-mesh (sorry if this the wrong term) style of gear changing or something more akin to planetary gears and internal braking?

3) are GM spin-offs in the pipe? A two-mode transmission has application in other industries, not just moving folks and goods about the highway.

Toyota wrote a number of SAE papers that are readily available on the net. If you come across some GM equivalent papers, let me know. For a couple of bucks, it would be worth while to see the details.

Thanks,
Bob Wilson

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

No disrespect intended, but I have to say that you're wrong on this point. Fuel efficiency is not part of most companies' strategies, including their best-sellers. Looking at an entire brand's roster, I believe Honda has the most fuel-efficient ICEs, followed closely by Toyota. Honda identifies with fuel-efficiency, and they still have the character and spirit to express their convictions in their product... To take chances. Just look at their Element SUV and try to find the sex appeal. Toyota has ambition, but they're also nipping at GM's heels, so some of their cars are starting to look and feel like American domestic ones, at least on the inside. They also produce very competitive base models with inferior safety packages, just like GM. But I believe GM is the one, truly world-weary, cynical, and chauvinistic auto manufacturer. It's all manufacturing-by-numbers to them: Cater to the baser natures of the public; Sacrifice a model's identity to resemble more successful ones (eg. Chevy Impala). GM, along with Daimler-Benz, would have the gall to condescend the buying public by chalking up Toyota's success with the Prius to "good marketing". But they just don't get it: There is a culture and diversity to the consumer, and auto manufacturers can be judged on their attitude to these things.

It's great that GM is finally putting forth the effort to put out hybrids, but they are the followers, not leaders, in this trend.

Re: GM starts the assembly line
 

I think you missed my point. It could be as simple as comma placement on my part.

My point was.....

Each automaker is going to focus on protecting the strength of their portfolio. To the extent that fuel economy technologies can protect the strong parts of their portfolios, they will deploy those technologies in those products first.

Toyota and Honda have strength in profitable small cars and midsized cars, so that has been the primary focus of their hybrid activity. They would like to continue to conquest luxury cars and luxury SUVs. That explains the Lexus line of hybrids.

GM has strength in full size trucks and SUVs and mid-sized cars. Hybrids are being launched on full sized SUVs, pickups, and mid-sized cars.

I agree with you that fuel economy, at least up until now, has not been a singularly focused strategy point. On the other hand, if you've been to either the Frankfurt or Tokyo Auto Show, you'd recognize that it has become an increasingly important strategy element.

Peace,

Martin