Quote:
Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing
Active versus Passive
Volt says To-May-To and the Leaf says To-Mah-To
|
Not very accurate. An Active system will take into account outside impacts...including any potential failures inside the pack. A passive system won't no any better and can't self-correct.
Any active system is designed and controlled to do what it's supposed to do.
A passive system, however effective, is uncontrolled...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans
Well, I do agree with the moderators that this is not a car to buy if you want to save money (which that is how it will be marketed, "save money on gas") However we all know in time it will get cheaper and this technology may find its way into every vehicle at some point in time to meet more strict CAFE standards which we know are coming. At that point it is goodbye V8 and hello to supercharged 4-6 cylinder/hybrid's.. Not that there is anything wrong with that however I will miss the sound of the V8 when it does..
|
There's no reason the V8 will go away. The logic behind this prediction never made sense. As I4 and V6 engines (hybrid or not) advance. So will V8s. Purposes may be shifted...but not their existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans
Obviously GM doesn't have to make a profit on this Volt to survive since it is US Government owned. That is why Ford is not throwing all their money into this type of vehicle, only using certain grant money and a small percentage into the R&D. They will probably share R&D with other car companies down the road about this so they may be handling this the "free market" way as best as possible. GM on the other hand, are already losing money on the VOlt selling it at $41,000 and then on top of that they lose another $7,500 (they meaning the Government which is GM for all intents and purposes for this comparison)
|
You are very wrong in your statements above. First and foremost -- just because GM temporarily has stock owned by the treasury, does not change the fact that it is, has been, and always will be a for-profit BUSINESS that relies on generated income to operate and grow.
Secondly, Ford is not doing any of this because they had no money to do it and made the low-risk decision to hold off until the technology and market was proven. There have been official statements by executives along these lines ever since the Volt concept was released and toyota said it was impossible. (
) Alternatively, they have been investing in common hybrids to compete in that segment. GM intentionally made a high-risk decision to divert what resources they had to the Volt project because they felt the steps after the initial car, as well as the PR-boost was worth it. I'm still split on which is the right way to go.........
The $7,500 tax credit has no effect on General Motors whatsoever...that one needs no counter-argument.........