The GM argument as posed here is plausible to me. GMs stregth in the NA market is trucks. Might as well shoot for the heart of your market. But...

A hybrid truck designed for those who actually use trucks for their intended purpose is very hard. Martin is right on that- those who need towing, heavy hauling, etc will not be served well with a battery-based hybrid system.

I think developing one to meet the needs of heavy-duty users is a waste of time and resources. There are plenty of perfectly legit uses for large engines that use lots of fuel- especially when used for work and therefore contributing far more to GDP than their ownership cost. (CO2 argument notwithstanding for this one time) OK, I also count certain recreation in this- towing boats, RVs, etc.

What NEEDS to be available is a vehicle for the legions who WANT the big truck 'experience' yet have little or no need for it if they looked at things objectively. The FEH and HH come to mind. If you often need hauling capacity, go elsewhere. If you need to tool around town, occasionally moving largish stuff, they fit the bill.

The truck segment needs to experience a schism. A version for soccer moms and dads, and the existing big-iron version for those who actually need it. Steer the customer to the platform that fits their needs. For 95% of those walking into a suburban dealer, that is not the big-iron version. But in order to do that, the alternative product's gotta exist in the first place!

There is nothing wrong with having a big truck that sucks fuel- WHEN YOU ACTUALLY NEED IT.

Stop trying to design a truck hybrid system that will satisfy everyone when its not possible. Give the real users what they've already got, and pull out all the stops for FE for the rest of us wannabes.

 

No arguement from me. It actually might save fuel....

 

The industry is already doing that. This is why two of the single fastest growing vehicle segments in North America are Small unibody Utilities and Mid Size unibody Utilities, as opposed to Body on Frame trucks and utilities. Those who need to tow or haul need Body on Frame. Those who need to transport families and friends need unibody.

Ahhhhh.....but what if it IS possible? Should we do it? My vote is "Yup".

Peace,

Martin

 

I'm not sure if my vote would be YUP. Why?
I agree with others that there IS a need for big trucks (hardly for big SUVs though IMHO), but that they are rarely used for the purpose they are built for.
However, my argument is that if you put a 'green' label on a very large, full size truck by 'hybridizing' it, you may end up making this vehicle more 'socially acceptable'. Let's say you can build a full size hybridized truck with an improvement of FE by 20%, but one that still uses twice as much gas as a normal size car: while the benefits for those who truly need these vehicles would be welcome, if many others buy them because they are now green, but still get substantially lower FE than conventional vehicles, you are having more of a negative overall effect on consumption.
Part of the effect of hybridized full size trucks could hinge on 'responsible marketing' (oh my, I'm making myself laugh now ), and I've never really seen such a thing and I don't think the big 3 have a record of such a thing.
I'm sorry if this offends some folks on this forum, but to some extent that is one of the problems with what I woudl term 'power hybrids' vs 'efficiency hybrids'. Power hybrids are those that use this technology not to increase mileage at constant performance, but instead use it to increase performance without a decrease in mileage.
The problem in my view is that the overall standard for fuel economy has sunk to such abysmally low levels - and levels that are largely not perceived as the problem they truly are - that maintaining this level is simply not good enough. We need to do everything we can to increase FE far, far above the median levels currently achieved. We need to move well above 30mpg, into at least the mid 30's if not well into the 40's.
It can be done, but certainly at some cost.

 

Well, Martin- I guess part of the GM thought process is that you might as well go for broke- there's not much left to lose in some respects. So sure- the vote should be YUP. Sometimes the mold needs to be broken and rebuilt- rebuilt correctly. Hopefully GM can get there. Ford delayed the FEH for how long? It was worth it- they have an amazing vehicle.

I hope it IS possible to satisfy all comers, and I hope GM can do it. Many behemoths have reinvented themselves before, but many have also failed. The aerospace industry comes to mind- Northrop Grumman in particular.

I'm hedging my bets, but I'll still put some money on the table for the home team.

 

Exactly.The city/Suburban truck culture is an anachronism, and the sooner it is put the grave, the better off the country will be. That GM will be unable to adapt and will die seems rather evident.

 

I will provide just one fairly narrow example of real world use for a full size pickup. I use this example because I see it a lot.

In my area there are a lot of enterprising young guys (late teens to mid twenties) who are putting themselves through college by operating lawn services in the spring - fall and snow removal services in the winter. Typically, they can afford one vehicle (remember, they're paying for college). That vehicle has to be capable of hauling lawn equipment or towing a trailer full of lawn equipment. It also has to have the capability of pushing a snow plow. For those of you who've never experienced a midwest or northeast snow storm, the snowplow thing is non-trivial.

This vehicle is also they're everyday driver. Now, if it were hybridized with Displacement on Demand, they could experience best in segment fuel economy when the truck isn't "working". And when it's "working", it's more than capable.

Granted, this is only one example, but it's one that I often see. There are also any number of independent contractors and delivery people whose work vehicle doubles as their personal vehicle.

Peace,

Martin

 

Hi Martinjlm:

___I was doing some research yesterday on the history of both the EV-1 and Precept and came across some of GM’s past hybrid initiatives. I do not know if you knew about all the variants but it appears some of your team members had a serial hybrid w/ an Isuzu based CI-ICE and even a turbine driven unit installed in an EV-1? Maybe this is all a hoax and I doubt those engineers ever built the extended 4 seat version but they did with the Precept. The more I read, the more ticked I became. Of course you guys were pushing 80 + mpg as you should have with both the Precept and EV-1 when hybridized but GM is selling a POS - Chevy Aveo with an absolutely horrific 27/35 using a stick. That is so pathetic it makes me choke every time I see one out on the highway given my far safer, larger, far more powerful, far cleaner, non-hybrid - PZEV Accord is. That Aveo is so far outclassed it appears to have been designed back in the middle 70’s by comparison

EV1 Electric: Series Hybrid

___I know you have access to some EV-1 test mules (they are not all crushed out in the desert) and you have access to enough techs to cobble something together as well. Although the Pontiac G6 has a Cd of .33 (another point of contention with what may have been the best automobile team ever assembled) why not throw in the EV-1’s 137 HP ATV drive unit and instead of the EV-1’s std. Ni-MH pack, drop in just a 1 – 1.5 kWh module and P&G the G6’s I4 to maintain a SoC between 40 and 60%. Instantly you have a hybrid that will take out the Prius II’s best (because it can) and secondly, it won’t cost an arm and a leg. The technology is sitting in one of your research centers off in the corner going to junk while you are forced to goof around with BAS and a P1/2 hybrid initiative for SUV’s? Think Skunk Works and there will be a chance. Think inside the box and GM is finished.

___Let me say a few words about simple automobile aerodynamics which will be yet another case study for future MBA candidates on what to avoid so as not to run a company into the ground … Does an 05 Pontiac G6’s Cd of .33 mean anything when the 7th gen Accord (03 to present) is running .3 for the sedan and .29 for the coupe? 10% higher and it’s an exponential drag as speed increases just thrown away … GM built all kinds super tech machines as experiments (Precept Cd = .16/EV-1 Cd of .19) yet they produce for all intents and purposes, flying 4X8 sheets of plywood for the average consumer. If your marketing genius’ (the ones that had a hand in the mess GM is facing today) would have placed the engineering tech in a std. looking automobile for Prius II like results instead of something akin to planet Krypton’s Car of the Year, maybe GM would sell more efficient automobiles and make a profit while doing so? I can just imagine where the .3 + billion that GM spent on the PNGV developed Precept and the Billion + or - for the EV-1 went? And to think of Bush’s Freedom Car initiative as just another joke … It is sickening to think what GM had and what both Smith and Wagoner have/are throwing away

___With that, why not pass an E-Mail up to Wagoner and tell him to replace himself with Ford’s Mary Ann Wright? I am sure she could be bought from Ford if the position and salary were satisfactory. I would hate to see Ford lose her special talents but GM in the bigger scheme of things is more important to this country then the hybrid project over at Ford. Ford has a strong hybrid talent pool to replace her with so it would not be a huge loss for them hopefully? I just cannot stand to see GM slide into the blackness as it so anti-American to even think of such a thing? GM does not have the talent at the top to do the right thing except for managing future union wage and benefit concessions possibly? This is not such a good thing for the rest of the country either

___I just don’t get it and probably never will. GM is headed for its death yet they had the most advanced team to do the impossible ever assembled. Until maybe the Toyota Prius II or Ford Escape HEV projects possibly? Does it not make you sick that the 3 knuckleheads (both John Smith recently and Roger Smith from years ago are retired and Wagner should be) are making tens of millions of dollars in their retirement years while they destroyed the company you work for? I liked Stempel although he was not a particularly strong finance guy? Back to my point. You will be out of a job within 4 or 5 years because of their decisions from years gone by unless something changes … GM had more world class expertise in automobile propulsion and aerodynamics then anyone anywhere and as mentioned above, they threw it all away for reasons only a few of the multi-millionaire class will ever know

___Sorry to all for my OT rants … And back on topic.

___Martin, I am one of those that use an 03 Ford Ranger XLT (I4 w/ a stick (24/29) to haul around 4,000 + #’s of Landscape trailer and gear in my spare time too. I am not doing 0 - 60 in 12 seconds when hauling that kind of load and **** well shouldn’t have to but she still gives me awesome FE even when driven as any hypermiler would even while towing that kind of overweight load locally (see her last two tanks). Maybe I will run outside and take a quick pic because her bed is currently filled to the brim with Landscape debris … Hybrid’s are for FE, not necessarily towing car trailers and the like. If you try to make a square peg fit into the round hole, you will have a mess on your hands even though that is what your bosses have probably told you to do

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net

 

series power...
trains do it (GM-built locomotives)
ships do it (GM-built plants)
why not cars & trucks...

its not even close to out of the box thinking, for any team with any exposure outside the little world of automobiles.

 

Hi GoNavy:

___The only issue is that all those serial hybrids do not go ICE/Nuclear - Steam turbine/Gas Turbine - Off like a hybrid can. This is the new technology, not that they are all serial hybrids. Well, a diesel boat can go battery and the nuke boat can run natural circ (semi-Nuke-Off) but those are bit more advanced

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net