• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Who Killed The Electric Car?

meh, less informative more michael morish...
pretty arrogant how the director thinks the range is enough for everyone ..forgot if this was in the movie or the pbs interview. but its obviously not true, just enough is a tercel for most people, which isn't what they buy of course.

as for crunching cars, looks bad yes, but it happens. the turbine car was also junked and crushed. its not a conspiracy thing, they just get rid of them that way.

the ev1 wasn't viable in the 90's. there were no break throughs to make that car, no amazing battery which is what they or anyone wanting to build such a vehicle was developed. back then gas was a buck 25..maybe a buck 50. no electric vehicle let alone one based on 90's tech could compete with that.

as for people and surveys. getting people to say they want an electric car is easy, who doesn't. assuming its their fantasy vehicle of course.

look how few people actually put their money where their mouths are and buy solar arrays and such for their homes. paying a little more to save the earth? very few, let alone electric car conspiracy nuts bother.


and range, the prius gets 600miles range, hard to beat.
 
as for crunching cars, looks bad yes, but it happens. the turbine car was also junked and crushed. its not a conspiracy thing, they just get rid of them that way.
Click to expand...

this is one of the the bigger things that i don't understand. why get rid of them? the cars were in great condition, had epochal historical value, and there was great demand for the few that still existed. if it's not a conspiracy, why was GM not be forth while with the group of protesters? instead of being silent, they could have explained why they were unwilling to the sell the cars to them; whether it was because of the bureaucratical mess GM was in, the extra cost of keeping parts in hand as required by the state, or their fears that 'proprietary' technology could be used by rivals (although they had patents up the kazoo for the thing). was GM uncomfortable with its own, valid, non-conspiratorial reasons for destroying the car? we do not know. the cat was out of the bag when the protesters found the parking lot filled with ev1s, it was a pretty bad PR move on GM's part to just fan the flames of conspiracy by being silent as they surreptitiously destroyed the remaining cars.





 
Originally posted by: mjrpes3
as for crunching cars, looks bad yes, but it happens. the turbine car was also junked and crushed. its not a conspiracy thing, they just get rid of them that way.
Click to expand...

this is one of the the bigger things that i don't understand. why get rid of them? the cars were in great condition, had epochal historical value, and there was great demand for the few that still existed. if it's not a conspiracy, why was GM not be forth while with the group of protesters? instead of being silent, they could have explained why they were unwilling to the sell the cars to them; whether it was because of the bureaucratical mess GM was in, the extra cost of keeping parts in hand as required by the state, or their fears that 'proprietary' technology could be used by rivals (although they had patents up the kazoo for the thing). was GM uncomfortable with its own, valid, non-conspiratorial reasons for destroying the car? we do not know. the cat was out of the bag when the protesters found the parking lot filled with ev1s, it was a pretty bad PR move on GM's part to just fan the flames of conspiracy by being silent as they surreptitiously destroyed the remaining cars.
Click to expand...

Thats because a big company like GM doesn't care about making a bunch of activist protestors mad. Sure maybe they coulda handled it better, but the view is pretty much that these type of protesters can never be appeased so why even try. MY dad works in the nuclear industry, and there are of course always people arguing about how nuclear platns are evil and gonna kill us all etc. And the company doesn't really even both trying to inform them since every single expert from the company is going to instantly be written off as having been paid off, and whatever good reasons there are for doing something are going to be ignored in favor of conspiracy theories. The fact of the matter is that electric cars arent on the roads because electric cars are not economical and there is not a high enough demand for them to justify the costs.
 
bingo, bottom line is dump it. its not worth losing another dollar over. the main idiotic thing was that they dumped their hybrid development. but i guess that doesn't make a good rabble rousing documentary.

truthiness basically sums up this kinda documentary and the people who believe it.
 
Originally posted by: mjrpes3
as for crunching cars, looks bad yes, but it happens. the turbine car was also junked and crushed. its not a conspiracy thing, they just get rid of them that way.
Click to expand...

this is one of the the bigger things that i don't understand. why get rid of them? the cars were in great condition, had epochal historical value, and there was great demand for the few that still existed. if it's not a conspiracy, why was GM not be forth while with the group of protesters? instead of being silent, they could have explained why they were unwilling to the sell the cars to them; whether it was because of the bureaucratical mess GM was in, the extra cost of keeping parts in hand as required by the state, or their fears that 'proprietary' technology could be used by rivals (although they had patents up the kazoo for the thing). was GM uncomfortable with its own, valid, non-conspiratorial reasons for destroying the car? we do not know. the cat was out of the bag when the protesters found the parking lot filled with ev1s, it was a pretty bad PR move on GM's part to just fan the flames of conspiracy by being silent as they surreptitiously destroyed the remaining cars.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. As long as people are talking about GM, either good or bad, the name and brand is still out there on the lips and in the minds of consumers. Any publicity is good publicity. Also, like BrownTown mentioned, "GM doesn't care about making a bunch of activist protestors [sic] mad."
 
Originally posted by: Excelsior
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo


and range, the prius gets 600miles range, hard to beat.
Click to expand...

No it isn't.

TDI.
Click to expand...

Those things still pollute a lot more than gasoline engines because the air/fuel mixture is never stoichiometric, and the fuel itself is full of impurities not present in today's gasoline. The reason VW is not selling a diesel engine this year is because, in their current configuration, they can't meet the new polution standards for diesel engines, which were tightened to coincide with the pollution standards of gasoline engines.
 
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: mjrpes3
as for crunching cars, looks bad yes, but it happens. the turbine car was also junked and crushed. its not a conspiracy thing, they just get rid of them that way.
Click to expand...

this is one of the the bigger things that i don't understand. why get rid of them? the cars were in great condition, had epochal historical value, and there was great demand for the few that still existed. if it's not a conspiracy, why was GM not be forth while with the group of protesters? instead of being silent, they could have explained why they were unwilling to the sell the cars to them; whether it was because of the bureaucratical mess GM was in, the extra cost of keeping parts in hand as required by the state, or their fears that 'proprietary' technology could be used by rivals (although they had patents up the kazoo for the thing). was GM uncomfortable with its own, valid, non-conspiratorial reasons for destroying the car? we do not know. the cat was out of the bag when the protesters found the parking lot filled with ev1s, it was a pretty bad PR move on GM's part to just fan the flames of conspiracy by being silent as they surreptitiously destroyed the remaining cars.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. As long as people are talking about GM, either good or bad, the name and brand is still out there on the lips and in the minds of consumers. Any publicity is good publicity. Also, like BrownTown mentioned, "GM doesn't care about making a bunch of activist protestors [sic] mad."
Click to expand...

So the conspiracy is that Sony Pictures released this movies at the will of GM? 😀

 
Originally posted by: Thegonagle
Originally posted by: Excelsior
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo


and range, the prius gets 600miles range, hard to beat.
Click to expand...

No it isn't.

TDI.
Click to expand...
The reason VW is not selling a diesel engine this year is because, in their current configuration, they can't meet the new polution standards for diesel engines, which were tightened to coincide with the pollution standards of gasoline engines.
Click to expand...


I think the real reason is that VW isn't about to design a new diesel engine that uses today's (dirty) diesel fuel in the US, when we're about to switch to a different, cleaner blend on June 1, 2010.
 
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: Thegonagle
Originally posted by: Excelsior
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo


and range, the prius gets 600miles range, hard to beat.
Click to expand...

No it isn't.

TDI.
Click to expand...
The reason VW is not selling a diesel engine this year is because, in their current configuration, they can't meet the new polution standards for diesel engines, which were tightened to coincide with the pollution standards of gasoline engines.
Click to expand...


I think the real reason is that VW isn't about to design a new diesel engine that uses today's (dirty) diesel fuel in the US, when we're about to switch to a different, cleaner blend on June 1, 2010.
Click to expand...

Actually, they're scrapping the 1.9l and, in 2008, brining over their 2.0l 140hp diesel. The issue isn't the fuel in the cars, it's the fuel killing the environmental equipment. Until we get the ultra-low sulfur diesel, they can't put in all of the environmental equipment that would allow a 50-state diesel. But if they put in all of that equipment now, the sulfur will destroy, among other parts, the catalytic converters.
 
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: mjrpes3
as for crunching cars, looks bad yes, but it happens. the turbine car was also junked and crushed. its not a conspiracy thing, they just get rid of them that way.
Click to expand...

this is one of the the bigger things that i don't understand. why get rid of them? the cars were in great condition, had epochal historical value, and there was great demand for the few that still existed. if it's not a conspiracy, why was GM not be forth while with the group of protesters? instead of being silent, they could have explained why they were unwilling to the sell the cars to them; whether it was because of the bureaucratical mess GM was in, the extra cost of keeping parts in hand as required by the state, or their fears that 'proprietary' technology could be used by rivals (although they had patents up the kazoo for the thing). was GM uncomfortable with its own, valid, non-conspiratorial reasons for destroying the car? we do not know. the cat was out of the bag when the protesters found the parking lot filled with ev1s, it was a pretty bad PR move on GM's part to just fan the flames of conspiracy by being silent as they surreptitiously destroyed the remaining cars.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. As long as people are talking about GM, either good or bad, the name and brand is still out there on the lips and in the minds of consumers. Any publicity is good publicity. Also, like BrownTown mentioned, "GM doesn't care about making a bunch of activist protestors [sic] mad."
Click to expand...


I don't buy that. The saying "no such thing as bad publicity" is used in reference to Hollywood actors or rock stars, not a car company.
 
I killed it! <spit> That's right, ME! And I'd do it again too....looking at me all funny like it was superior and elitist. Don't take kindly to that. No sir, I don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top