Bob Lutz on winning the Car of the Year
At the L.A. Auto Show earlier this month, the 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Two-Mode Hybrid won the Green Car of the Year award. Carlist's Lou Ann Hammond got a chance to ask Bob Lutz what he thinks about being nominated (and then winning) this award. She's posted a video of that conversation over on the site. So, what does "Maximum" Bob Lutz have to say about this award? The nomination can help move public opinion towards thinking that GM is a green automaker, but the company is still at a 3 or 4 on a scale that goes up to 10. What would move them to a 6 or a 7, Hammond asks?
"If we can put the Volt into production tomorrow and start selling 60,000 to 70,000 a year that would definitely do it," Lutz answers. Watch the rest of the conversation here.
[Source: Carlist]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kardax 2:46PM (11/27/2007)
Where does the nick-name "Maximum" Bob Lutz come from? I only see it used on this site...
Reply
Gary 4:55PM (11/27/2007)
A Tahoe is a green car of the year?!?!? What the heck does that make my 50mpg vehicle? Green car of the century?
Reply
small-wee-wee 5:49PM (11/27/2007)
Gary, your 50MPG car gets nothing cause it does not make the guys with the small weenies feel superior.
Only a behemoth like the Tahoe does that and it makes the world a better place too cause its grreeen!
Reply
summazooma 7:27AM (11/28/2007)
Guys,
Playing devil's advocate for a second...
You know how frustrating it is to hear an anti-hybrid person post on how "disappointing" hybrids are for A) getting fuel economy inferior to it's EPA ratings, B) the batteries are part of a whole other set of environmental (or, for that matter, financial) problems, and C) add in your own favorite "counter-point" here... and that they're just not worth it, compared to current ICE fuel economy or emissions champs?
Remember how one of the points with Hybrids is that they're a transitionary step, leading to better solutions, as technologies develop, drop in cost and, in general, improve?
Well, I will take the stance that, just in hearing Maximum Bob talk as sensitively about environmental issues, we're seeing a huge "transitionary step" for the American automotive industry... and that a Tahoe that gets this kind of fuel economy is a HUGE step (but certainly not the end-destination for this technology). Think about it for a second... on at least two different points...
(1) This is a full-size advanced HEV SUV that just trounces the also-full size SUV Sequoia that Toyota just introduced in L.A. Auto Show. The fact that we're criticizing GM for this HEV Tahoe in the face of what Toyota just revealed kind of reinforces, in fact, the key point that Lutz makes: GM's perceptions are lagging the amount of R&D investment and emerging results, especially given what these same categories of perceptions are for Toyota (Keep in mind that Toyota tried to develop a large truck HEV but backtracked when they couldn't get it to work with the level of performance that they sought).
(2) This is an advanced Hybrid system being launched on the biggest cash-cow for GM & one of the highest volume vehicle platforms in the U.S.; Though the HEV is definitely only a drop in the bucket for this vehicle/ platform, the fact that it's out there for the "masses" and makes HEV more relevant for people who might look down on "them small unsafe cars" is a huge step towards changing public perceptions, not just for GM but for environmental technologies... This is HUGE...
(3) Back to Point (1), though this isn't in absolute terms, a hugely fuel efficient vehicle, I would have to point out that the emissions are as big, if not a bigger, story (as I would point out for any HEV); In that case, I think this is a big story, bigger than a "clean" diesel would be. And, let's not scoff at the amount of efficiency improvement here, either; It may not be absolutely a highly efficient vehicle but, again, if it gets a high-image entertainer/athlete/youth icon out of a low-teens bling-mobile into something in the low-twenties, it's a net gain.
(4) This is also only the first application of this, with future applications to include smaller CUVs (the VUE will apparently have THREE HEVs to choose from, an inexpensive soft HEV, this 2-mode HEV and a PHEV??????) and passenger cars.
(5) Finally, though car companies have been their own worst enemies at times, again, to the point of this interview, encouragement and, yes, market success is the best hope to continue the change in tide (short of environmental cataclysm); It is, in fact, why a Toyota have continued on their slate of HEV models (or Honda dropped the Accord HEV for this generation... and, yes, I know there is more to it than that, regarding the Accord but, still, this is a huge part of the story there).
So, anyway, let's congratulate the industry in making moves, encourage it to continue, keeping in mind that many more "like-minded" professionals work in the industry than conventional (and equally biased) thinking might suggest, and embrace these products as signs that change is well and truly in motion.
Reply
DJ 9:34AM (11/28/2007)
Maximum Bob should be renicknamed Bare-Minimum Bob. Saying 60-70K Volt units sold would push GM towards being perceived as a ‘Green’ automaker is funny since it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the number of vehicles GM sells. Even if you add in the planned sales of GM hybrids it still won’t help. A ‘Green’ Car Company is an oxymoron. This is just GM joining the ‘Green Washing’ party with Toyota, et al.
Reply
Tim 10:46AM (11/28/2007)
Gentlemen, please!
Apparently GM's plan is to set the eco bar in each CLASS of vehicle. If all automakers try to outdo each other by increasing the fuel efficiency of each class, we all win. Not everyone wants to drive a diesel beetle and eat granola even though others would like to FORCE them to.
It’s a free market and GM is finally listening. I wish our elected officials actually listened to us rather than the special interest lobbing dollars.
I for one am happy to see GM finally doing the right things and I believe that their pace of improvement will only increase. We’ll see…
Reply