And this is how Chrysler thinks it will beat the Volt
Click above for a high-res gallery of the Dodge EV
While telling the feds that it needs seven billion dollars - pronto! - just to keep the lights on, representatives for Chrysler are also saying that their plans for affordable electric cars, minivans and off-roaders are already in place and will basically save the company. When we first saw the prototypes, we noticed that none of them seemed ready for prime time. Still, the word from Chrysler is that EVs are "going to be a big deal for Chrysler."
That's what Lou Rhodes, Chrysler's vice president for advanced vehicle engineering, recently told CNNMoney. Chrysler has also said that it could be selling electric cars to fleets by 2009 and to the rest of us a year later; also, the company says that half of its vehicles could be electric drive by 2020. Ambitious goals, sure, but how seriously can we take them when they're asking for the big bucks and the Chrysler hybrids SUVs have already passed us by?
Gallery: 2011 Chrysler EVs
[Source: CNNMoney]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
jaguar879 10:40AM (12/17/2008)
It's somewhat viable if they become a MUCH smaller company and figure out how to trim legacy costs and wasted capacity.
Reply
gorr 11:23AM (12/17/2008)
Look to what happen to i think from norway and all the money loss from tesla, volt, linkvolt, fisker karma, so on. Nobody on earth is making money by selling electric cars... It's a death start business. Not enouph good and it will remain that way because gasoline is even better.. Only what have been opposed by goverment is good, hydrogen production, green algae farming and natural gas. The rest is a disease that slowly die, petrol refining, battery charging time and early depletion, diesel, etc.
Reply
Chris M 2:26AM (12/24/2008)
If I didn't know better, I'd think you were a shill for the oil companies, trying to supress the biggest threat to the petroleum cartel's stranglehold on transportation. But I do know better, the oil companies would never hire a promoter with such poor writing skills, and I'm well aware of your obsession with hydrogen (too expensive) and green algae (promising, but still under development and not yet in production) and natural gas (clean burning, but still controlled by the petroleum cartel)
Sorry, but there ARE companies making money with battery powered vehicles, most notably several NEV makers like GEM that have been operating for years. Tesla Motors is making money on each Roadster they sell, and should pay back the development costs within 2 years. It is true that Fiskar and a few others are not making money, but only because they are not yet in production.
Snowdog 12:00PM (12/17/2008)
Chrysler is not "Too big to fail". So let it. If Chrysler was really viable Cerberus could fund it with their own cash. They know it is a dead dog they wouldn't take a risk on, but they will let the taxpayer fund it.
The big three are not your children you don't have to treat them equally.
GM should get the money with a equity stake and severe controls placed on them. No more fighting the government with lobbying. They screwed up royally and they are "too big to fail". Prop them up, but they cede control that they proved they don't have the ability to do properly.
Ford is the only company headed in the right direction. They get loan backing if they require it without the interference because they have shown fiscal responsibility.
Chrysler is left to CH11/CH7. This will open a bigger domestic market for GM/Ford, making them more viable.
Reply
paulwesterberg 2:15PM (12/17/2008)
Agreed. They couldn't even come up with a decent design for the car they had to get the car from Lotus. I understand why a small shop like tesla focuses on drivetrain and outsources the chassis design, but I expect more from a company as large as chrysler.... unless they are totally inept.
50% electric by 2020 means how many cars?
50% of zero is zero.
Torbjorn 3:06PM (12/17/2008)
The VOLT was dead as of yesterday anyway. The BYD F3DM went on sale a full two years before the VOLT at HALF the cost ($21,900). The BYD car can go more miles than the VOLT in electric mode only. Warren Buffet put invested a quarter billion into BYD because he likes to make money not lose it on a failed venture to being with.
The Chrysler car is a fantasy...made to hoodwink you into thinking this company can become viable. They will not be able to compete with cheap Chinese manufacturing and no labor unions.
Reply
Throwback 3:19PM (12/17/2008)
Has anyone driven the BYD? Can it pass US or European crash standards? How well built is it? Does it even work? What aftersales support will there be? Will it be sold in the US? Seems to me BYD has as many questions as the Volt.
Reply
jake 4:19PM (12/17/2008)
I think Torbjorn is a little over-optimistic about the BYD. I think any of the proposed EVs/PHEVs, we should be cautiously optimistic because in this kind of climate any of them can die off.
RSR 8:33AM (12/18/2008)
I was thinking exactly the same. I haven't heard much about BYD vehicles' quality (regular, non-plug-in) so I can't tell how reliable they are. But before we find out more about its quality, weight, safety, and many other criteria, it's too early to judge.
Andy 9:51PM (12/17/2008)
Sorry folks this is desperado PR.
You can't have affordable AND profitable EV's until volumes scale up significantly.
Look towards a more cashed up outfit to trailblaze EV's. Chrysler doesn't pass muster.
Reply
Nixon 1:07AM (12/18/2008)
I'm not sure why everyone needs to pit each green car against the other. There is room for both a Volt and a Dodge EV in my 2-car garage. Both would complement each other well for our family's lifestyle. One for long trips and 4 people, the other for out-running rush hour traffic.
Unlike the cynics here, I REALLY want EV's to succeed. Especially the Dodge EV in the exact current form it appears now.
Dodge; Don't waste a single penny trying to make it look like the rest of the Dodge line of vehicles. Just build it and sell it the way it is right now in the pictures. OK, you could take off the rear wing/lip to cut down on drag. But that's it!
Reply
Jared 10:21AM (12/18/2008)
Many of us cynics want electric cars to succeed. I just don't think that Chryslerbus has a hope in heck of remaining an independent car company -- it is going to fail and most of its car lines will never be seen again.
Furthermore Chryslerbus' EV cars are just a publicity stunt. There is no there there. They are vaporware.
Chris M 2:37AM (12/24/2008)
The "Dodge EV" is really a model designed and developed by Lotus and their parent company, Proton of Malaysia. Since Proton doesn't have dealerships in the US, they are eager to partner with a firm that does. If Chrysler fails, it is likely that car will still come to market under another name.
Frank 8:30AM (12/18/2008)
Snowdog,
"Chrysler is left to CH11/CH7. This will open a bigger domestic market for GM/Ford, making them more viable."
Wrong. The only difference between GM and Chrysler is that GM is bigger. That’s it. They have no future. If they could go thru a C11 with DIP financing, whether from the taxpayers or private sources, chances are they would probably not make it. Especially if there is no change in mgt. It’s that bad. If we did the viability test, the only recipient of any funds would be Ford. You could argue that Chrysler being smaller would have a better chance of a turnaround with a prepack DIP financed C11.
If GM went bust and split it’s market share with Ford and Chrysler you would have two profitable automakers. If Chrysler went bust and split it’s market share between Ford and GM - guess what? You would have a viable Ford and a GM that was STILL dying.
Now as to the EV's... The Chrysler plan is better than GM's because it will feature production ready vehicles. That keeps costs down and development times short. GM is spending a ton of $ on an all new vehecle when they really need it to just keep the lights on. I guess if Chrysler had the money they would create an all new car like the Prius but they don't. The Dodge? Not gonna happen. They just wanted something to show for Dodge. The car is not theirs. Most likely first candidate is the minivan.
Reply
bvz 2:10PM (12/18/2008)
"The only difference between GM and Chrysler is that GM is bigger. That’s it."
Actually, I think you are overstating it a bit. There is a significant difference between the two - even though GM may still go under regardless.
GM has
a) some decent products on the road today (malibu most notably)
b) some decent products in the wings (cruze and volt)
c) some seriously decent products in foreign markets that are recognized as good vehicles (opel)
Whether any of this is good enough to overcome their current difficulties (and amazingly stupid management team) is yet to be seen. But compare to Chrysler:
a) Not a single decent vehicle in the showrooms today (nothing of consequence anyway)
b) Nothing in the pipeline. Check out: http://www.autoblog.com/2008/12/17/brouhaha-over-embargoes-leads-to-reveal-of-chryslers-auto-show/ where it is revealed that the best they can show this next year are a couple of Jeeps and Dodge Ram's
c) No products or engineering resources beyond the North American market that they can tap for future sales.
As to whether the Chrysler plan is better than GM's... I don't know. I do know that I hope they succeed. I really do. I just don't see how.
bvz 2:13PM (12/18/2008)
That's "whether the Chrysler EV plan is better than GM's..."
Stupid internet.