Did consumers kill the electric car?

[Ralph-54]

Several People emailed me about my post-

It has a typo. It should have read that the electric car has been 'killed' numerous times over the last **107** years, not 17!

-Ralph

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Lee Hart]

Thanks folks, for taking the time to think about this and respond. I'll
try to combine my responses to save time and reduce IN box pollution.

Richard Acuti wrote:
 > I disagree with Randy's comments. Lee specifically asked how he
 > would counter this document. Even more important, he's trying to
 > lay his case before a public official who sets public policy (law).

That is exactly it. I don't bother to respond to every nut with an
opinion and a website. But this is a state legislator asking, and they
are debating an energy bill right now!

Gary wrote:
> a good way may be to address the original article... by adding a big
> picture overview that would be harder to counter. The individual point
> rebuttals could still be addressed but an overview would be a nice
> lead-in.

That sounds good to me, too. If the response takes more than a couple
paragraphs, the legislators are likely to lose focus.

I should add that the original few paragraphs had footnotes for almost
every single sentence! The references are longer than the statements
themselves. I would have included them, but the format made it difficult
to cut-n-paste them into my email. The author himself chose to remain
anonymous; but he included an impressive list of famous people and
publications.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in    --    Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Peter VanDerWal]

> <sigh> We're not talking about whether these is *someone* who will accept
> EVs with their present limitations, but rather that it would take for
> *mass market* acceptance.

And you're not paying attention.  Not everyone wants a Corvette, not
everyone wants a Minivan, not everyone wants a hummer, and not everyone
wants a Smart Four2, and yet ALL of these are mass produced.


They sell 30,000 Corvette a year, that's less than 1/2 of 1 percent of the
passenger cars sold per year.

You don't have to sell them to everyone, not even most of the population,
not even a significant percentage, not even 1 percent.

If even 1/2 of 1 percent of the driving population in the US wants an EV,
that is over 1 million people.

>
>> How can you tell costumers one month that you can't keep up
>> with demand and then the next month cancel all orders because
>> there is "insufficient" demand?
>
> Easy.  If you are producing 100 cars a year and have orders for at least
> 101, then demand exceeds supply.  If you need to be selling 10,000 a year
> to be profitable/make it worth your while,

We're not talking a tiny demand here.  Prior to canceling the RAV4 EV,
Toyota stated that the orders FAR exceeded their expectations, they
weren't even close to being able to produce enough to keep up with demand.
And they didn't even advertise it very well, the DEALER here in town had
never even heard of them.


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Roger Stockton]

Lee Hart wrote:

> Gary wrote:
> > a good way may be to address the original article... by
> > adding a big picture overview that would be harder to
> > counter. The individual point rebuttals could still be
> > addressed but an overview would be a nice lead-in.
>
> That sounds good to me, too. If the response takes more than
> a couple paragraphs, the legislators are likely to lose focus.

It occurs to me that all of the points presented in the original article fall into one of two broad categories: EV-related issues; and, issues unrelated to the EV1 being an EV.

I think that it is entirely true that the type of vehicle (2-seater coupe), the limited availability and restrictive leasing qualification requirements, lack of advertising, etc., and other actions/inactions or choices made on the part of the manufacturer had at least as great an impact on its lack of success in the marketplace, whether real or perceived, than did any (either?) of the EV-related issues.

If one were to focus on the EV-specific points raised, then I think one can use the success of hybrids to refute these.  For instance, the battery voltage and/or temperature and servicing requirements clearly could not have been the cause of the EV1's failure since the very successful hybrids use the same battery chemistry at the same voltages and temperaures.  Indeed, one could argue that whether or not these issues were issues at the time of the EV1, the success of the hybrid vehicles since then has eliminated them as a result of large numbers of service and emergency personnel having been trained with respect to vehicles containing large numbers of batteries.

The example of the demand for plug-in hybrids should counter the suggestion that the lack of a charging infrastructure was/is a significant obstacle.  If people are demanding cars they can plug in, surely that must indicate that they have somewhere to plug them in? ;^>

Furthermore, the demand for plug-in hybrids with even 20-40mi of electric-only range suggests that whether or not a perceived lack of range was an issue in the time of the EV1, many consumers now realise/accept that even a 40mi EV range can be useful (and desirable) for them.  So, the 80-120mi range of the EV1 should not be a serious limitation in today's market, and in any event, there are batteries available now that allow even greater range with less weight.

The hybrid example can also be used to counter the assertion that a lack of battery durability/reliability is/was an issue for EVs.  Hybrids have proven the reliability and durability of NiMH; if one points out that hybrids don't use their batteries in the same way as EVs, then the example of the Toyota RAV4-EV and its NiMH pack can be used to underscore the point that durable and reliable batteries are and have been available for years.

Cheers,

Roger.

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Roger Stockton]

Rick Beebe wrote:

> Roger Stockton wrote:
> >
> > This is true; the mass market probably wants/needs similar
> > range per charge as on a tank of fuel.
>
> Wants, not needs.

I understand what you are saying, but don't think you quite understood what I meant.

Whether or not the person ever drives 300mi in their ICE without stopping, the fact that they *could* results in an unwillingness to accept an EV with lesser range.  Remember that we are talking about the mass market here, not someone who would choose an EV because it is an EV.  I think mass market acceptance of the EV will be achieved when someone can walk into a dealership and choose their new vehicle by the same criteria they do today, with no more thought to the type of drivetrain than if they were choosing between the 4cyl or 6cyl models instead of the EV or ICE models.

Very few people use the size of the fuel tank, or the driving range per tank of fuel as a factor when choosing which model of car to buy.  They may consider fuel economy, but that is not the same thing even though it will impact the range per tank.

As production EVs become available, I expect that gas stations will adapt to serve this new market by offering high-power quick charges.  Unless EVs can be made significantly more efficient than they are now, it will not be practical to recharge a long range EV with residential electrical service in a reasonable time.  Gas stations/service areas already exist and are spaced out more-or-less in accordance with existing ICE driving range, so EVs will need to be capable of similar ranges in order to take advantage of the existing infrastructure.

Cheers,

Roger.

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[dale henderson-2]

i think that is a good view point, if the following
contract was offered to ICE drivers how many would
agree?

CONTRACT:

for the next year you can only drive 40 miles a day,
but you will get gas for 50 cents a gallon.  in
addition you can fill up at home and pay for the gas
automatically thru your existing utilities

--- Rick Beebe <rick@...> wrote:

> Roger Stockton wrote:
> >>> Second, the batteries "could not supply the
> range or durability
> >>> required by the mass market."
> >
> > This is true; the mass market probably wants/needs
> similar range per
> > charge as on a tank of fuel.  The batteries in the
> EV1 may not have
> > been a benchmark in durability, but I'm not sure
> it has ever been
> > established that they were not durable enough.
>
> Wants, not needs. I used to think the same thing
> until it was pointed
> out that an EV generally gets filled up every night.
> How big a gas tank
> would you really need if the Exxon fairy showed up
> every night and
> filled your tank?
>
> Now, what is true is that without an EV with a 200
> mile range AND a
> national infrastructure of fast charge stations, EV
> owners WILL need
> access to a gas/diesel car for taking longer trips.
> Most American
> families have two cars so having to own a second car
> is not a foreign
> concept. Or, if you don't travel much, just rent one
> when you need it.
>
> I've been keeping a log and over the past six months
> 80% of my driving
> could be handled by an EV with a 25 mile range. 95%
> with a 40 mile
> range. If I get up to 90 mile range that handles all
> but two trips and
> both of those were over 500 miles round trip. And
> that was with just shy
> of 7000 miles of driving during the time period.
>
> --Rick
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>

harry

Albuquerque, NM
current bike:  http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/1179
current non-bike: http://evalbum.com/1581

not working [http://geocities.com/hendersonmotorcycles/blog.html]


     

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Bill & Nancy]

Roger Stockton wrote:

> Rick Beebe wrote:
>
>  
>> Roger Stockton wrote:
>>    
>>> This is true; the mass market probably wants/needs similar
>>> range per charge as on a tank of fuel.
>>>      
>> Wants, not needs.
>>    
>
> I understand what you are saying, but don't think you quite understood what I meant.
>
> Whether or not the person ever drives 300mi in their ICE without stopping, the fact that they *could* results in an unwillingness to accept an EV with lesser range.  Remember that we are talking about the mass market here, not someone who would choose an EV because it is an EV.  I think mass market acceptance of the EV will be achieved when someone can walk into a dealership and choose their new vehicle by the same criteria they do today, with no more thought to the type of drivetrain than if they were choosing between the 4cyl or 6cyl models instead of the EV or ICE models.
>
> Very few people use the size of the fuel tank, or the driving range per tank of fuel as a factor when choosing which model of car to buy.  They may consider fuel economy, but that is not the same thing even though it will impact the range per tank.
>
> As production EVs become available, I expect that gas stations will adapt to serve this new market by offering high-power quick charges.  Unless EVs can be made significantly more efficient than they are now, it will not be practical to recharge a long range EV with residential electrical service in a reasonable time.  Gas stations/service areas already exist and are spaced out more-or-less in accordance with existing ICE driving range, so EVs will need to be capable of similar ranges in order to take advantage of the existing infrastructure.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
>  

I've noticed that attitudes are changing as gas prices go up. When I
mention that I only have a 30-40 mile range and it works great for
around town or as a work car if you live close to work, I often get
asked where one can be bought, or how hard is it to convert.
Bill

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Roger Stockton]

Peter VanDerWal wrote:

> > Whether or not the person ever drives 300mi in their ICE without
> > stopping, the fact that they *could* results in an unwillingness to
> > accept an EV with lesser range.
>
> True, for some people.  Certainly NOT true for everyone.
>
> There are enough people willing to accept the limitations of
> EVs to make them a viable product, IF THE AUTO MAKERS WOULD SELL THEM.

<sigh> We're not talking about whether these is *someone* who will accept EVs with their present limitations, but rather that it would take for *mass market* acceptance.

> How can you tell costumers one month that you can't keep up
> with demand and then the next month cancel all orders because
> there is "insufficient" demand?

Easy.  If you are producing 100 cars a year and have orders for at least 101, then demand exceeds supply.  If you need to be selling 10,000 a year to be profitable/make it worth your while, then there is still insufficient demand to keep up production once external incentives such as the CARB requirements are removed.

Keep your shirt on, though ;^>, I agree fully that it is pretty hard to determine if you could sell 10,000 or more a year if you've only made a fraction of that number available for sale; do  200 waiting orders represent everyone who would buy one, or just those willing to sign up and wait for one while the rest go away and buy something that is available now?

Cheers,

Roger.

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Michael Hoskinson]

I haven't had time to keep up with the list, but could not help  
commenting about the EV1. I had limited experience with this car,  
having rented one for a week while you still could get them through  
evrentals at LAX.  My wife and I drove one to San Diego and back,  
stopping along the way to do lunch while charging, or do a little  
shopping.

Bad handling because of heavy batteries? Not a bit of it.  This thing  
was dangerous only because of its awesome acceleration.  I had my  
first really big EV grin driving down the freeway a few miles south of  
LA, handily keeping up with traffic in this incredible car that  
promised to go 80 miles on its lead-acid batteries and did.

No room for kids? Leave them at home! What sports car has room for  
kids? Gimme a break! $600 per month lease?  I laugh.  Maybe that was a  
big deal then, but here I am paying nearly $800 per month (financed at  
1.8%, not leased) for a gas-guzzling Subaru XT that I will be happy to  
sell as soon as I get my Scion conversion from Randy Holmquist.

You couldn't get near an EV-1 without loving it.
The reason it failed was that you couldn't get near one at all.

Mike Hoskinson


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[AMPhibian]

The majority of people were never even aware of the EV1 or the RAV4EV, until after the fact.  My father has owned each version of the ICE powered RAV4's but was unaware that an EV version was ever made.  This is someone who has bought only Toyotas for the last 20 years or so.  

[markgrasser]

That just shows that if you advertise it people will buy it, if you don't
advertise it they don't know about it thus they don't want it thus the car
companies can say there is no market for it.

Mark Grasser
 
-----Original Message-----
From: ev-bounces@... [mailto:ev-bounces@...] On Behalf
Of AMPhibian
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:34 PM
To: ev@...
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?


The majority of people were never even aware of the EV1 or the RAV4EV, until
after the fact.  My father has owned each version of the ICE powered RAV4's
but was unaware that an EV version was ever made.  This is someone who has
bought only Toyotas for the last 20 years or so.  
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Did-consumers-kill-the-electric-car--tp17239485p172654
03.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Dave Davidson-2]

Reminded me....  As I make my rounds driving a school bus, I would see a guy in a Plymouth/Chrysler Prowler (a fun, but quite impractical car).  Passed by his house and he has TWO Prowlers in his garage.  Chrysler doesn't seem to have any trouble selling this expensive two seater.  Nor do they have a problem selling the Dodge Viper, even a more expensive niche car.  

I had a chance to test drive an EV1 and loved it, but, being on the east coast, could not even lease one.  Show me any other car that was leased, not sold; that you had to jump through a multitude of hoops to even lease; that was only available through a few select dealers in only two states; where customers were not even allowed to continue leases once they expired; and where even the old turned in cars were destroyed rather than sold.  These cars were not marketed, not sold, initially had battery problems, and yet every single vehicle available for lease was leased.  If GM had offered the cars FOR SALE throughout the country where you could just walk into a dealer and drive out with one, I believe they would have been a huge success, certainly outselling the Corvette, at whatever price they chose to put on it.

Dave

> To: ev@...
> Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 10:02:55 -0400
> From: kenscircus@...
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?
>
> Just a few...
>
> The "lease" issue was not the car's fault.
> Cost? There are a lot of very expensive two seater cars on the road.
> People obviously do buy them and they are not routinely used as long
> haul vehicles.
> The issue of battery temperature is false. I drive electric in all
> seasons. I have never measured battery temperature over ambient - and I
> don't drive Mrs. Daisy.  Also, no EV parts develop the temperature of
> an ICE exhaust manifold.
> Infrastructure? I have never experienced an infrastructure problem. I
> charge at work, grocery store, etc.
> It was even mentioned on this list that driving an EV required giving
> up time to charge.  I drive electric every day and have never had to do
> that.  I spend less time charging than I ever did pumping gas.  The
> difference?  I don’t have to go somewhere else to fill up, and I don’t
> have to stand there holding the nozzle while the car is filling.
>
> Just a few off the top of my head.
>
> Ken
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Hart <leeahart@...>
> To: EV list <ev@...>
> Sent: Wed, 14 May 2008 2:42 pm
> Subject: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?
>
>
>
> My local EAA chapter had an exhibit at the Living Green Expo in St.
> Paul
> MN earlier this month. One of our state representatives visited, and
> became quite interested in EVs. He's been contacting us for additional
> information and offering help and advice.
>
> Interestingly enough, as soon as he began talking about EVs, he started
> receiving anti-EV propaganda. The same sort of thing happened to me the
> instant an article mentioning me appeared in Mother Jones magazine. It
> makes me suspect that oil and auto company PR organizations have set up
> "trip wires" that alert them the instant anything appears, and have
> prepared robot responses so they can instantly respond. A friend of
> mine
> called them "sock puppets" -- robot responses from nonexistent people
> that automatically appear to attack anything counter to the client's
> interests. Be on your toes!
>
> Anyway, here is one he sent us. He asked for a rebuttal. How should we
> respond?
>
> --------begin included document--------
>
> Did Consumers Kill The Electric Car?
>
> As detailed in "Who Killed the Electric Car?" and other sources, many
> observers and passionate EV1 fans feel that automakers and oil
> companies
> conspired to destroy the electric car. An alternative theory, however,
> is outlined below.
>
> After an early wave of interest, enthusiasm for the EV1 subsided
> because
> of the car’s limitations. First, EV1s were expensive; they cost two or
> three times as much as comparable gasoline powered cars. They could be
> leased (but not sold) for $400-600 per month. Second, the batteries
> “could not supply the range or durability required by the mass market.”
> Third, the infrastructure for recharging was not in place. Fourth, the
> high voltages and operating temperatures of the batteries presented
> some
> unique safety hazards, and “only a relative handful of mechanics knew
> how to work safely on the powerful batteries.” Fifth, the EV1 was a
> tiny
> two-seater that simply did not work for families with children.
> Finally,
> the car was fast, but the handling was odd because of the heavy
> battery.
>   These limitations prompted an alternative-fuel specialist at J.D.
> Power & Associates to conclude that EV1s “are just not acceptable to
> consumers.” Honda had even less success with its electric vehicle, the
> Plus, leasing just 300 in three years.
>
> The final nail was driven into the electric car coffin by hybrid
> gas-electric cars like the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight, which
> have maintained great popularity partly due to their ability to
> recharge
> while cruising down the road. Other automakers took note. Now virtually
> every manufacturer has announced that it will produce a hybrid vehicle
> by the end of the decade.
>
> Thus, as one commentator noted, it is likely that market forces, not
> nefarious tactics, killed the electric car: As the market success of
> cars like the Prius and the market failure of cars like the EV1
> illustrate, it wasn't a shortage that prevented battery electric
> vehicles from selling and it wasn't a desire not to offer clean
> vehicles
> that prompted manufacturers to stop producing them. The reason for the
> market response to these vehicles is because, if given the option, the
> general public would buy environmentally friendly automobiles if the
> sacrifices that had to be made to drive them were minimal. Accordingly,
> the level of sacrifices that has to be made to drive battery electric
> vehicles discourages all but the most enthusiastic consumers from
> leasing them.
>
> --------end included document--------
>
> Now, this is a *very* cleverly written piece of work. Nothing it says
> is
> an outright lie that you could prove false. It doesn't rant or rave; it
> sounds completely rational and objective. But it is designed to create
> a
> totally false impression!
>
> How do you counter such a thing? I think the key is to get as many
> solid
> facts and references as possible, but not bury the reader in statistics
> or it won't get read. You have to give someone who is entirely
> unfamiliar with the subject an objective view of the situation that
> will
> stand up to careful scutiny and fact-checking.
>
> --
> Ring the bells that still can ring
> Forget the perfect offering
> There is a crack in everything
> That's how the light gets in    --    Leonard Cohen
> --
> Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Jeff Shanab]

Perhaps the trick being employed in this article is the premise in the
title doesn't match the true points supporting it.  They try to trick
you into believeing Consumers are at fault but supply arguments for
something entirely different.

Maybe it would have a different impact if the only the question was
changed. Perhaps "Did Automakers really offer viable electric cars"

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[gary k]

Jeff Shanab wrote:
> .....
>
> Maybe it would have a different impact if the only the question was
> changed. Perhaps "Did Automakers really offer viable electric cars"
>
>
>  
yes, another good lead-in to the response;

Sales of production electric vehicles;
- the EV1 was never offered for sale even though consumers offered to
buy them
- the RAV4 sold out and they are still on the road with exceptional
reliability and above retail resale value
- Ford Ranger, Solectria, Jet, etc.?
- Tesla is sold out in advance X years into production

this shows that the technology is available and the production has never
met the demand.

Lee - I'd be happy to gather some information if it would help.  Maybe
your response could be shared with the list and posted on websites.

gary

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Jeff Andre]

> A couple months later California caved in and dropped the law
> mandating ZEVs.  As soon as they did that, Toyota canceled
> the RAV4 EV citing insufficient demand.
>
> How can you tell costumers one month that you can't keep up
> with demand and then the next month cancel all orders because
> there is "insufficient"
> demand?

Simple .... the backlog of orders and sales were for a vehicle that was
HEAVILY subsidized.  It they probably couldn't come up with even a break
even scenario for many many years.  

Lets say they needed 100 times their best estimates to make it a viable
commercial product (based on actual sales, backorders, and optimistic
projections from notoriously wrong sales departments).  It's a no-brainer to
discontinue production once the legal requirement was gone.  

Compare it with the progression of production/sales numbers on the Prius.
They started out FAR higher than the EV numbers, and still Toyota had to
subsidize it for years to get it to break even.  A huge risk - the kind
CEO's are fired for if they don't pan out.  If gas prices hadn't picked this
point in time to spike, the Prius may have been a footnote in Toyota's
history book, and the CEO might have been looking for a job.

Try and convince your shareholders that throwing away LOTS of money for say
10 years without any real evidence of a likely successful outcome is a good
idea.  Public companies are by nature conservative institutions.  It's built
into their structure and governance.  No one should expect a cow to behave
like a race horse.  A good marketing department might dress it up to LOOK
like a race horse, but it still won't win any races.

What surprises me is the number of comments on this list expressing surprise
at this kind of behavior from some of the biggest public companies on the
planet.  As an example, while most car companies have small "experimental"
programs to develop alternate fuel vehicles, GM is committing to something
different.  The Volt/eflex program and their public commitment to production
is an ENORMOUS risk, and is only possible because of their precarious
financial position going in.  The CEO decided that in order to survive and
grow, they will have to re-invent the company, and he's betting his career
on it.  If it flops, he's history and probably won't find another job in
this business.  If it succeeds, he'll preside over years of growth and
prosperity for his company.

We'll see if he can sustain the commitment in the face of corporate risk
aversion long enough to get it to market and test his theory.  I know there
is HUGE skepticism on this list about that, but I think $3.50+/gal gas is a
game changer, and I don't expect it to come down.  Many people are seeing
for the first time that the cost to operate their vehicles equals or exceeds
the cost of the note to buy it, and the difference impacts their ability to
buy groceries, pay the rent, etc.  That's changes the rules of the game more
than anything in the last 75 years.




Just my 2 cents.

Jeff Andre'
Chapel Hill, NC

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

[Bob Rice-2]

  Hi EVerybody;

   "Did consumers kill ther electric car?" Bah Humbug! Horse Exhaust! They
were never OFFERED any electric cars, to begin with! Sorta like talking
about the lost horses AFTER they got away. We KNOW that if they were offered
at dealerships, like ICE mobiles, they would be selling! Anybody that has
driven an EV-1 or Rav-4 from Toyota, I have, and marvelled that if EVERYBODY
could share the experiance, they, the car builders COULDN'T make enough of
them, for years, they would have a backlog! Hell! I get calls EVery day
about "How can I get Started?" with BUILDING an EV.For every one of these
guyz there are folks that would just love to go into a EV dealer and just
DRIVE out! Amps, Smamps, Volts ,Dolts, like my Mom, they wouldn't care. Car
RUNS that's all that matters. Like my computer I don't know or CARE how many
gigabytes RAM or Smigabites It better WORK when I turn it on in the AM!  I
THINK it's a Compac, but not sure? It works, MOST of the time, that's all I
care.It runs on Micro Sloth ,THAT I know!

    I'm preaching to the Choir here, anyhow. You know we'd ALL go buy EV's
IF we could? Right? Or go out in the garage and diddle with our conversions,
taking a "It'll do" mentality, for now. Prei are just training wheels for
the Next Generation of EV's. A Sunrise EV-2? WhatEVer we can afford? Which
isn't gunna be a lot, with the way the US-ian economy is going,
nowadaze!Christ! We'll be lucky to be able to AFFORD frivilities like
HEATING oil, electricity, gas, other stuff, like food, because of the
Ethenal Scam, you guyz(me) that buy food know where that's heading. Howcum
Real Estate taxes are going up yet you can barely give away your house with
the real estate market in the toilet?

   A few points to ponder. Wree spinning our wheels here asking and using up
bandspace on " Consumers killing the EV" We knowe better. Let's talk about
the nuts and volts reality of getting the damn Vacuum Pump quieted down,
Important stuff like that<g>?!

  Seeya at P of DC, gunna be a Biggie!

   Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: "gary" <gkrysztopik@...>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@...>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Did consumers kill the electric car?

>
>
> Jeff Shanab wrote:
>> .....
>>
>> Maybe it would have a different impact if the only the question was
>> changed. Perhaps "Did Automakers really offer viable electric cars"
>>
>>
>>
> yes, another good lead-in to the response;
>
> Sales of production electric vehicles;
> - the EV1 was never offered for sale even though consumers offered to
> buy them
> - the RAV4 sold out and they are still on the road with exceptional
> reliability and above retail resale value
> - Ford Ranger, Solectria, Jet, etc.?
> - Tesla is sold out in advance X years into production
>
> this shows that the technology is available and the production has never
> met the demand.
>
> Lee - I'd be happy to gather some information if it would help.  Maybe
> your response could be shared with the list and posted on websites.
>
> gary
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
>