Bob Lutz: EV1 never coming back
Our friend John McElroy isn't the only person out there who thinks that General Motors should dust off the old EV1 program and re-release it for public consumption again. Apparently, a passionate electric car enthusiast copied Mr. Bob Lutz himself on a letter suggesting that the EV1 needs to be brought back with its original lead-acid batteries. Remember, though, that Lutz is extremely involved in the Volt project, so it's not too surprising that he had plenty to say in response to the letter. In fact, Lutz echoes many of the sentiments expressed by our own Sam Abuelsamid, who recently wrote about the difficulties of reviving the long-dead program. Lutz highlights the fact that the General lost one billion buckaroos on that program the first time around and balks at the suggestion that lithium ion batteries are not yet ready for primetime. According to Lutz's response, the Volt's battery pack will not delay its launch. For our part, we're content to see the Volt picking up the pieces left by the loss of the EV1.
[Source: LA Times]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Dinosaurus 8:48AM (7/02/2008)
GM is doing the right thing focusing their EV energies on the Volt.
Reply
Peekoyle 9:24AM (7/02/2008)
Didn't GM lose 38 billion last yr? Why is Maximum Bob complaining about losing 1 Billion on a car that they wanted to fail.
Reply
woodenbee 9:30AM (7/02/2008)
maybe if Lutz et al had let the hundreds of buyers that picketed the dealerships begging to buy the cars they wouldn't have "lost" so much money,
Reply
MikeW 9:32AM (7/02/2008)
Well they would call it the EV2...
Reply
throwback 9:51AM (7/02/2008)
Folks the EV-1 is dead, as is Elvis, neither one is coming back it's past time to move on. If you want to believe GM is solely responsibile for there not being millions of EVs on street so be it, but why continue to look backwards?
Reply
Don 11:34PM (7/03/2008)
Elvis isn't dead, he just went home.
Mike!!ekiM 5:16PM (7/08/2008)
Because of the EV1 spec's with out-of-date batteries?
0-60 in 8 secs
75-150 mile range
and ( stealing from wikipedia ):
Aluminium frame
Dent resistant side panels
Anti-lock brakes
Traction control
Heat pump (Heater/AC)
Keyless entry and keyless ignition
Special one-way thermal glass to allow for better heat rejection
Regenerative braking
Very low drag coefficient - Cd~0.19, CdA~0.36 m² (3.95 ft²)
Super light magnesium alloy wheels
Self-sealing & low rolling resistance tires (developed by Michelin)
Automated tire pressure loss warning system
Magnesium framed seats
Time programmable HVAC (cabin heating or cooling) settings
This car can compete with any car built today,
except for the battery.
phil easler 9:49AM (7/02/2008)
Bring the EV1 back, no brainer
Reply
Tim 10:01AM (7/02/2008)
Out with the old and in with the new.
Focus, Grasshopper.....
Reply
BenBrown 11:36AM (7/02/2008)
Hmmm... I see VW is bringing back its "failed" 1 liter car after "wasting" huge money developing it the first time. The Prius has been a financial loss for Toyota for quite some time except for the trust it built the company which affected ALL of its car sales. They've done so well that their Prius sales has slumped, because they can't build enough to sell. Trust is serious financial capital that may be quite a bit more expensive to generate with the Volt than simply bringing back a nominally improved EV1.
Reply
Yanquetino 11:12AM (7/02/2008)
The Volt is a different animal, as is evident by its deplorable 40-mile EV range (thus still keeping addicts dependent upon the Middle Eastern "drug"). Nonetheless, you can bet that a lot of its technology and components are a direct result of what GM learned from the EV1. If Lutz were smart, he would rename it the EV2. That very simple marketing ploy could do a lot to reassure Joe Q. Public that GM never really "abandoned" its EV line, but merely took a hiatus to design and build an "improved" 4-passenger model. Its hard to believe that GM isn't smart enough to have figured this out.
Reply
Richard 11:59AM (7/02/2008)
Well if GM won't bring the EV1 back, why doesn't Toyota bring back Rav4 EV? It's a better car, and I wouldn't mind if it had Lead acid batteries as long as it has at least 60 miles range! Hell, that's a better car anyway. Toyota could sell it without the batteries, I'd buy it!
Reply
Karkus 12:47PM (7/02/2008)
Ummmm.....
The EV-1 and RAV4 EV were discontinued because they were big money losers for the car companies (and maybe they were worried about the batteries becoming a problem too).
Corporations are bound their shareholders to try to make money. You can't blame them from stopping something that lost money, especially when CARB retreated from their EV mandate.
BenBrown...the Prius makes plenty of money for Toyota (and esp its dealers) and has been doing that for quite a few years now.
Reply
Karkus 1:02PM (7/02/2008)
Doesn't anyone think that maybe the EV-1 and RAV4 EV were discontinued because they were probably big money losers for the car companies?
Corporations are bound by their shareholders to try to make money. You can't blame them from stopping something that lost money, especially when CARB retreated from their EV mandate.
BenBrown...the Prius makes plenty of money for Toyota (and esp its dealers) and has been doing that for quite a few years now.
Reply
Fritz 3:21PM (7/02/2008)
EV1 and the Rav4-EV were ended b/c GM sold battery patents to Texaco who was purchased by Chevron who then sued Toyota and Panasonic for making and using the large format NiMH batteries. Lookup patent encumberence.
From Wikipedia:
Once the last of the 328 EV’s was sold in November 2002, the website disappeared and the EV program was unceremoniously scrapped. No additional cars could be sold because Toyota didn’t have anything to sell. The RAV4-EV was based on the 1996-2000 gasoline powered RAV4, which had become obsolete. Production of additional vehicles would only be possible under one of two different scenarios. The first would be if the RAV4-EV was redesigned to fit the 2003 RAV4, the second would be if production of the 1996 version was resumed. Toyota claimed that tens of thousands of orders would have been necessary for them to resume or continue production, and development time would have been a major obstacle.
Whether or not Toyota wanted to continue production, it was unlikely to be able to do so, because the EV-95 battery was no longer available. Chevron had inherited control of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH EV-95 battery when it merged with Texaco, which had purchased them from General Motors. Chevron's unit won a $30,000,000 settlement from Toyota and Panasonic, and the production line for the large NiMH batteries was closed down and dismantled. Only smaller NiMH batteries, incapable of powering an electric vehicle or plugging in, are currently allowed by Chevron-Texaco.
So for those seven months in 2002 a full-sized production electric car was available for sale to the general public for the first time in decades. Buying one wasn't easy, however; just one special sales person at only a dozen dealers - and only in California - was authorized to sell the Toyota RAV4-EV. If an individual wasn't already aware of the car, they were generally unable to buy (or even see) one. Many would-be purchasers were steered instead to Toyota's Prius gasoline electric hybrid vehicle, despite having asked about the plug-in car.
From Wikipedia again:
Patent encumbrance of NiMH batteries
In 1994, General Motors acquired a controlling interest in Ovonics's battery development and manufacturing. In 2001, Texaco purchased GM's share in GM Ovonics. A few months later, Chevron acquired Texaco. In 2003, Texaco Ovonics Battery Systems was restructured into Cobasys, a 50/50 joint venture between Chevron and Energy Conversion Devices (ECD) Ovonics.[12] Chevron's influence over Cobasys extends beyond a strict 50/50 joint venture. Chevron holds a 19.99% interest in ECD Ovonics.[13] In addition, Chevron maintains the right to seize all of Cobasys' intellectual property rights in the event that ECD Ovonics does not fulfill its contractual obligations.[14] On September 10, 2007, Chevron filed a legal claim that ECD Ovonics has not fulfilled its obligations. ECD Ovonics disputes this claim.[15] Since that time, the arbitration hearing was repeatedly suspended while the parties negotiate with an unknown prospective buyer. No agreement has been reached with the potential buyer. [16] Cobasys's patents relating to NIMH batteries expire in 2015.
In her book, Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that Will Recharge America, published in February 2007, Sherry Boschert argues that large-format NiMH batteries are commercially viable but that Cobasys refuses to sell or license them to small companies or individuals. Boschert reveals that Cobasys accepts only very large orders for these batteries. When Boschert conducted her research, major auto makers showed little interest in large orders for large-format NiMH batteries. However, Toyota employees complained about the difficulty in getting smaller orders of large format NiMH batteries to service the existing 825 RAV-4EVs. Since no other companies were willing to make large orders, Cobasys was not manufacturing nor licensing any large format NiMH battery technology for automotive purposes. Boschert concludes that "it's possible that Cobasys (Chevron) is squelching all access to large NiMH batteries through its control of patent licenses in order to remove a competitor to gasoline. Or it's possible that Cobasys simply wants the market for itself and is waiting for a major automaker to start producing plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles."[17]
However, recently-signed Cobasys contracts demonstrate that the company is willing to use its NiMH technology in the automotive industry, specifically for use with hybrid electric vehicles. In December 2006, Cobasys and General Motors announced that they had signed a contract under which Cobasys provides NiMH batteries for the Saturn Aura hybrid sedan.[18] In March 2007, GM announced that it would use Cobasys NiMH batteries in the 2008 Chevrolet Malibu hybrid as well. Cobasys remains unwilling to sell NiMH batteries in smaller quantities to individuals or companies interested in building or retrofitting their own PHEVs.[citation needed]
Remember BIG OIL when you read about the hydrogen powered cars of the future. They will be powered by hydrogen supplied by BIG OIL...
I think they are a group I want much less to do with. I'd prefer to get my energy from my rooftop and TVA.
Reply
Fritz 3:22PM (7/02/2008)
EV1 and the Rav4-EV were ended b/c GM sold battery patents to Texaco who was purchased by Chevron who then sued Toyota and Panasonic for making and using the large format NiMH batteries. Lookup patent encumberence.
From Wikipedia:
Once the last of the 328 EV’s was sold in November 2002, the website disappeared and the EV program was unceremoniously scrapped. No additional cars could be sold because Toyota didn’t have anything to sell. The RAV4-EV was based on the 1996-2000 gasoline powered RAV4, which had become obsolete. Production of additional vehicles would only be possible under one of two different scenarios. The first would be if the RAV4-EV was redesigned to fit the 2003 RAV4, the second would be if production of the 1996 version was resumed. Toyota claimed that tens of thousands of orders would have been necessary for them to resume or continue production, and development time would have been a major obstacle.
Whether or not Toyota wanted to continue production, it was unlikely to be able to do so, because the EV-95 battery was no longer available. Chevron had inherited control of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH EV-95 battery when it merged with Texaco, which had purchased them from General Motors. Chevron's unit won a $30,000,000 settlement from Toyota and Panasonic, and the production line for the large NiMH batteries was closed down and dismantled. Only smaller NiMH batteries, incapable of powering an electric vehicle or plugging in, are currently allowed by Chevron-Texaco.
So for those seven months in 2002 a full-sized production electric car was available for sale to the general public for the first time in decades. Buying one wasn't easy, however; just one special sales person at only a dozen dealers - and only in California - was authorized to sell the Toyota RAV4-EV. If an individual wasn't already aware of the car, they were generally unable to buy (or even see) one. Many would-be purchasers were steered instead to Toyota's Prius gasoline electric hybrid vehicle, despite having asked about the plug-in car.
From Wikipedia again:
Patent encumbrance of NiMH batteries
In 1994, General Motors acquired a controlling interest in Ovonics's battery development and manufacturing. In 2001, Texaco purchased GM's share in GM Ovonics. A few months later, Chevron acquired Texaco. In 2003, Texaco Ovonics Battery Systems was restructured into Cobasys, a 50/50 joint venture between Chevron and Energy Conversion Devices (ECD) Ovonics.[12] Chevron's influence over Cobasys extends beyond a strict 50/50 joint venture. Chevron holds a 19.99% interest in ECD Ovonics.[13] In addition, Chevron maintains the right to seize all of Cobasys' intellectual property rights in the event that ECD Ovonics does not fulfill its contractual obligations.[14] On September 10, 2007, Chevron filed a legal claim that ECD Ovonics has not fulfilled its obligations. ECD Ovonics disputes this claim.[15] Since that time, the arbitration hearing was repeatedly suspended while the parties negotiate with an unknown prospective buyer. No agreement has been reached with the potential buyer. [16] Cobasys's patents relating to NIMH batteries expire in 2015.
In her book, Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that Will Recharge America, published in February 2007, Sherry Boschert argues that large-format NiMH batteries are commercially viable but that Cobasys refuses to sell or license them to small companies or individuals. Boschert reveals that Cobasys accepts only very large orders for these batteries. When Boschert conducted her research, major auto makers showed little interest in large orders for large-format NiMH batteries. However, Toyota employees complained about the difficulty in getting smaller orders of large format NiMH batteries to service the existing 825 RAV-4EVs. Since no other companies were willing to make large orders, Cobasys was not manufacturing nor licensing any large format NiMH battery technology for automotive purposes. Boschert concludes that "it's possible that Cobasys (Chevron) is squelching all access to large NiMH batteries through its control of patent licenses in order to remove a competitor to gasoline. Or it's possible that Cobasys simply wants the market for itself and is waiting for a major automaker to start producing plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles."[17]
However, recently-signed Cobasys contracts demonstrate that the company is willing to use its NiMH technology in the automotive industry, specifically for use with hybrid electric vehicles. In December 2006, Cobasys and General Motors announced that they had signed a contract under which Cobasys provides NiMH batteries for the Saturn Aura hybrid sedan.[18] In March 2007, GM announced that it would use Cobasys NiMH batteries in the 2008 Chevrolet Malibu hybrid as well. Cobasys remains unwilling to sell NiMH batteries in smaller quantities to individuals or companies interested in building or retrofitting their own PHEVs.[citation needed]
Remember BIG OIL when you read about the hydrogen powered cars of the future. They will be powered by hydrogen supplied by BIG OIL...
I think they are a group I want much less to do with. I'd prefer to get my energy from my rooftop and TVA.
Reply
Fritz 3:22PM (7/02/2008)
You should watch eBay for Rav4-EVs. They go for BIG bucks. These are vehicles with old batteries and all the normal creature comforts like air conditioning and power windows and they still get 100 miles per charge.
Dunno about you but that fits the needs of 98% of my family and friends.
I want an electric car. I don't want the complexity of a hybrid or what the Volt offers.
At my house we can get by with two EVs (commuters) and still keep an internal combustion engine vehicle in the garage for trips to grandma's house or just go rent one for the weekend and thus save on depreciation and insurance on a 3rd vehicle.
Reply
emdee 3:54PM (7/02/2008)
Well, if they wanted to, they could make and updated version of the EV-1, keep lots of the styling and technology and use updated battery tech.
They very well have to do it to keep with the game if they want to compete with Nissan and Tesla and VW and the others working on electric cars.
They might have blown a billion on that one, but they've got the tech now so it's not like they would be starting from scratch.
See this is a good example of why GM is going down the toilet.
Reply
Yanquetino 4:06PM (7/02/2008)
Karkas:
Actually, I can --and do-- blame corporations when the need to "make money" in the short run is more important than doing the "right thing" in the long run. As Wally Rippel observed in WKtEC, what really killed the EV1 was "lack of corporate __wisdom__."
Also, to clarify, GM and Toyota never built enough EV1s or RAV4-EVs to truly determine if they would be big "money losers" --or "money winners." My own guess... is that yes, they would have been "money losers"...for a few years until their numbers swelled sufficiently to break even and perhaps eventually turn a profit (just like Lutz now claims will happen with the Volt). After all, the Prius was a big "money loser" at first, also. It is only after several years that it has established a sufficient share of the market to "make money" for Toyota and its stockholders.
A more accurate assessment would therefore be that the EV1 and RAV4-EV simply weren't judged to potentially make as __much__ money, and certainly not as __quickly__, as Hummers and 4-Runners.
What is unconcienable about those decisions is that the executives had to already know what was on the horizon. Surely they could perceive that the oil supply was starting to dwindle, that the demand for it would only increase, that its prices would thus skyrocket, that the "drug dealers" who sell it are zealots, that pollution levels and global warming would only get worse.
Even Roger Smith could foresee what was coming way back in 1990 when he first announced the Impact, but his successors... just didn't give an At's Rass. Not as long as they could personally pocket a much larger retirement package in a few short years, then bow out... and the world be damned.
Yes, I do blame them.
Reply
TIMMAH! 4:52PM (7/02/2008)
I wish Toyota would bring back the Rav4 EV. Those were a solid piece of engineering. The current ones are what, 8 years old now and they're still going strong on their original battery packs.
Reply