Ships and trains are constant load, for the most part. They accellerate to a steady speed and hold that engine speed for hours or days at a time. Engine speed for personal automobiles is all over the place in city and suburban driving. Even on the highway the level of variation is far more than you see with industrial vehicles.

 

That's why you put in a prime mover that can still supply the surge power necessary to the motors, supplemented perhaps with a battery pack if necessary.

It's not trivial, but its not terribly difficult either. And there are certainly reliabilty and safety concerns to handle that aren't as problematic on large platforms. But in Xcel's thought vein, GM is a national engineering asset with talent that meets or exceeds any other group that has largely solved these problems...over and over again. Other forces outside the engineering sphere are dumbing them down.

 

Well last time I checked, the most recent story on GreenCarCongress.com said that GM's series hybrid city busses were a flop and provided no reduction in fuel consumption or emissions versus the fuel-only busses. I know they're supposed to be great in theory, but in reality, they aren't proven effective.

 

Hi AZCivic:

___I will have to look it up but I believe those GM busses were using the larger P1/2 - Allison based parallel hybrid - transmission setup which is nothing like a series hybrid.

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net

 

The GM busses using the 2 mode system that's supposed to be the best of both worlds (series-parallel-direct) aren't doing well in terms of FE and (depending on the engine) pollution vs. normal diesel, especially considering the massive difference in cost. The only significant gains (on average) have been the somewhat reduced transmission maintenance.

The Chrysler Orion series-hybrid busses have been living up to expectations in most FE and reduced pollution, and especially in reduced maintenance costs with no real transmission at all. I too would like to see series hybrid designs, mostly because they allow for serious PHEV upgrade capability with the drivetrain being fully capable of all-electric operation by design. I believe that's what Chrysler is doing with the upcoming plug-in hybrid Sprinter vans, but I think the technology could be applied to smaller vehicles as well.

 

Thats the problems with GM as mentioned in your post. They have or had the tech to do this. And a test bed like electromotive ( loco/marine ) of which I think they sold off in a effort to gain capital to keep building JUNK!

I truly wish GM would just go under and get it over with. There a scare on this nation that needs covered up like cat pooo. If they had the engineering skills that have been mentioned why would a class A engineer go to work for the company knowing they build junk?

You think GM is useing any of what they know or learned in the loco and marine divisions. I think not. Or they would have jumped all over hybrid autos and trucks and been the world leader insted of Toyota.

BAS and basicly what is used as a generator in a truck to power tools is the best GM can do?

Treat them like cat poo!!!!

 

Thank you Wayne!

These kind of statements need to be made more often!
I don't think college kids need Dodge RAMs or F350s, or ZX72's or whatever type of oversized vehicle that can lay down drag strip rubber, just so they can make the payments for the vehicles by mowing lawns.
Like you said, the lawn mowing could be done just as easily with a Ford Ranger.

Way back when, when there were no F350s and RAMs etc..., people still got their lawn done, I just can't figure out why and how?

Anyway, I'm sorry Martin, but your justifications do not in the least come even remotely close to beginning to convince me. To me, it still seems the same approach: this is what we want to build and sell, because this is where we think we can make more money per vehicle, so we will either find enough people whom we can copnvince with our arguments that they need this, or embark on another advertising and/or rebate campaign to unload these vehicles. It's the same stuff all over again, and I am getting so tired of hearing this.

M

 

As an afterthought:
It's easy to criticise, especially from the armchair (or keyboard), so I thought I should follow up with some suggestions and positive aspects, and not just criticism:

I think GM could build good vehicles that sell (it's just that apparently they don't make the right choices on what to pursue).
I think the Pontiac Solstice is a fine example. I have not driven one (yet), but it has great styling, based on reviews I would gather that it performs well and handles well, and it is a small car that probably gets reasonable mileage (not great, but likely reasonable). It's a new type of car (or almost) for GM, a venture into new territory. I think (and I hope) that it will do well.
GM needs to develop and build more things like that, instead of continuing to bank on the old (losing, as we all know now) SUV and Truck bandwagon.
How about developing a smallish, four seater sports car. Truly smallish, not just a large car with a small interior. A small car, with exceptional design/looks, great handling, great functionality, and very good mileage. How about building a sports car that is a true sports car (not a gas-guzzling supercar like the Ford GT40 or new Cobra, or equally guzzling pseudo muscle car like the new mustang), and one that can be driven hard but still gets very good mileage. How about hybridizing the solstice, or a solstice derived small four seater? I'm not sure that will work, but new ground needs to be trodden here. I think GM could do it, but the management just doesn't seem to get it. Plus, the Solstice is the first GM car in years if not decades that actually looks good, IMHO.