I find it incredible that a site full of car enthusiasts fail to see what is so blatantly obvious. Bob is doing EXACTLY what we all love to heckle Tesla for doing, big baseless promises followed by ever revised diminished targets. The silicon valley .com pump and dump, it’s no way to run a car company.

but i don’t really give a fig: all of these cars
require enormous amounts of resources to make regardless of any efficiency advantage. all of them still pay homage to the oil producers. all of the are designed to assuage dogooders’ desire to
drive as much as ever or more without a shred of guilt for their mindless consumption.

the gullible sheeple swallowed whole bush’s standing by an ethanol pump where he uttered that
this was the future. this stuff is bad for your motors people, and pollutes more than gas, but worse, it takes a gallon of oil to make a gallon of ethanol.

let me be positive for a second. instead of making another prius, i would suggest that all manufacturers be required to license honda engine technology. then we would have cheaper, lighter, simpler, more frugal cars than what is produced with the porky hybrids.

old crazy henry ford did as much work to develop
the electric battery as all of the engineers at
gm all BY HIMSELF.

let gm and ford die peaceful deaths; the government has enough bills already without
bailing out these backwards pathetic incompetent snivelling thieves. we bailed out chrsyler once,
and look at the mess they are in after their recent divorce from daimler. not one of the three knows an automobile from a wheelbarrow. good riddance. if they want heavy industry on the other side of the planet, great. send them all the raw materials they need. certainly they will at least make something good with these precious
resources. NO CORPORATE WELFARE.

Event Horizon:
Frank Williams, First of all, could you please provide your exact source for this statement: "… Lutz said the Volt would hit the streets by November of ‘08 ."

- Mark Phalen, Detroit Free Press, Nov 15, 2007:
General Motors aims to have its revolutionary Volt electric vehicle on the road by November 2010, company vice chairman Bob Lutz said at the Los Angeles Auto Show Wednesday.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007711150381

- Katie Merx, Detroit Fre Press, Jan 16, 2008:
General Motors Corp. gains confidence every day that it will be able to deliver a Chevrolet Volt range-extended electric vehicle by November 2010 and it is the automaker's top vehicle priority, Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said Tuesday.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080116/BUSINESS03/801160427/1002/rss02

- Lyle Dennis, http://www.gm-volt.com, Nov 14, 2007
In particular he [Lutz] gave the first specific production date for the Volt, now more detailed than ever. It will be November 2010; and, per spokespersons, will be released as a 2011 model year.
http://www.gm-volt.com/2007/11/14/lutz-chevy-volt-production-to-begin-november-2010/

- Lascelles Linton, http://www.autobloggreen.com, Jan 15,2008
Bob Lutz: Yes, I guarantee that the official internal General Motors target date is November 2010.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/01/15/bob-lutz-video-its-immaterial-whos-first-on-evs-guarantees/

So if they bring out a Volt that shames the competition and sells great they will still be losers in the end because they lost credibility in the process because the date changed a few times?

Yes, I know project timelines slip. However, every time Lutz opens his mouth he's contradicted something he or Wagner said previously. If an organization's top leadership can't keep their stories straight or they make wild claims, their credibility suffers. (Don't believe me? Ask Bill Ford what his declaration that they'd be producing 250,000 hybrids per year by 2010 did for his reputation and credibility.) And Mr Watanabe's statement about plug-in electrics isn't the same because he didn't start setting deadlines then changing them. And changing them. And changing them.

It's also interesting to read what Martin Eberhard wrote about the Volt and Lutz after meeting him a year ago:

I read it. And reported on it on the same day this was published.

You guys at TTAC get so hung up on what what Lutz says that it is quite humourous. What would you do without him?

We've wondered the same thing. He's God's gift to journalists.

First we have Martin Eberhard with a Masters in Electrical Engineering who founded an electric car company and has met several memebers of the Volt team.

… and who founded an electric car company that has changed deadlines even more than Lutz has and yet has a marketable product.

It's the type of event that is not entirely predictable and full of surprises along the way. They cannot anounce a production date before a validated battery.

Agreed. So why are they doing it?

Incidentally, it is fitting to use the "moon shot" example because GM helped get those men to the moon by developing and manufacturing the guidance and navigation systems for the Apollo 11 mission. Not to mention designing and manufacturing the mobility system for the Lunar Roving Vehicle for the Apollo 15 astronauts.

That was done by a division they've since sold off, so they have no direct connection to those accomplishments any more. GM can't even get their production supply lines worked out so they can meet demand. I'd hate to see what they'd do with the moon shot now.

First of all, could you please provide your exact source for this statement: “… Lutz said the Volt would hit the streets by November of ‘08 .” I don’t recall any anouncements to have a production vehicle on the streets by ‘08. He was probably referring to a prototype vehicle that would be tested on the road.

Secondly, If GM does not bring this vehicle to market by 2010 it will not be for lack of effort. They currently have a very dedicated, innovative and bright team assembled to develop this vehicle (with the necessary resources). Would you rather GM continue to stand by and get further behind Toyota in advanced propulsion technologies. Or would you rather them keep this tucked away and kept secret until they can present a fully validated product. Where is the motivation in that? Before anmouncing the Volt I’m sure they had very serious discussions about weather it woud be prudent to show it to the world. They understand the consequenses of not delivering this vehicle and by putting it out there they have gained my full repect. Since when is the pursuit of innovation something to be mocked and frowned upon.

You wrote: “Even IF GM rolls out a Volt by 2010, even IF it offers better performance than the next generation PHEV Prius, even IF it can compete with the segment leader on price, even IF it sells well, even IF it proves to be a reliable automobile, even IF it continues to sell, GM’s Car Czar has already destroyed the Detroit automaker’s credibility.” So if they bring out a Volt that shames the competition and sells great they will still be losers in the end because they lost credibility in the process because the date changed a few times? Right. With any project things are learned and plans need to be reformulated. Toyota even pushed back it’s ICE Corolla so don’t make a mountain out of a mole hill. You guys at TTAC get so hung up on what what Lutz says that it is quite humourous. What would you do without him? It’s statements like the one above that expose the disdain TTAC has for GM and your failure to be objective and fair.

Did you read the fine print about Toyota’s pledge to bring out plug-in electric hybrids? From the January 14 edition of the New York Times: “Mr. Watanabe said the lithium-ion fleet would be made available first to Toyota’s commercial customers around the world, like government agencies and corporations, including some in the United States. He did not say when they would be available to consumers.” In case you missed it, Toyota has also failed to ” fully commit itself” to a retail plug-in electric vehicle deadline. Selling to customers and making “available” to commercial customers isn’t exactly the same thing.

It’s also interesting to read what Martin Eberhard wrote about the Volt and Lutz after meeting him a year ago: “I walked away from that meeting deeply impressed by Bob Lutz and willing to believe that the Volt might be a real program. Over the past year, I have come to meet several more people on the Volt program. Hold onto your seats, people: I believe that the Volt program is real, with top GM talent moved onto the program, major bucks behind the program, and support all the way to the top within GM. I think GM is placing a huge bet with this program.”
Uhm, let’s see…who would be in a better position to judge the progress and possibility of the Volt. First we have Martin Eberhard with a Masters in Electrical Engineering who founded an electric car company and has met several memebers of the Volt team. Then we have Frank Williams….I’m sure you’re a good person but I don’t know a thing about you. All rise…Judge Eberhard presiding.

The bottom line is Toyota and GM are agressively developing a brand new technology. It’s the type of event that is not entirely predictable and full of surprises along the way. They cannot anounce a production date before a validated battery. Toyota is playing defense right now and have put out this pseudo production target in response to the Volt. Regardless of no firm production date, GM has taken an aggressive position with it’s Volt promotion and has backed it up with the appropriate resources. Regardless of what some belive, their credibility has not been destroyed and will be validated in the not to distant future.

Incidentally, it is fitting to use the “moon shot” example because GM helped get those men to the moon by developing and manufacturing the guidance and navigation systems for the Apollo 11 mission. Not to mention designing and manufacturing the mobility system for the Lunar Roving Vehicle for the Apollo 15 astronauts.

NYT Quote Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/business/14plug.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=toyota+plug-in+hybrid&oref=slogin

Martin Eberhard quote source: http://www.teslafounders.com/

yeah, they get pissed, but really can’t do much about it…

http://www.nbc11.com/money/14603421/detail.html

GM’s plan is to use the Volt (and E-85 and “Flex Fuel”, etc) as justification to ask for bailout money from the government.

Come on, we all know it’s inevitable! Don’t anybody here be surprised when we hear GM management claim that allowing GM to go under would be “ecologically irresponsible.” Then we’ll hear the greens and our own congressmen and senators parroting this sentiment.

And there you have it, the taxpayers will pay for GM’s bad management, marketing idiocy, and eventual bailout. And you’ll pay for it with a smile, because we’re saving the environment, dammit!

Will somebody please bookmark my post, so that I can lord it over everybody when it comes true?

Thanks! ;)

But every time he opens his mouth he contradicts himself, or his boss, or he prepares his excuses and obfuscates, or he gives Toyota bulletin-board material (to use a sports metaphor).

Add to that the GM ad campaign that touts their green prowess by prominently featuring vehicles that you can’t buy, and they’ve asked for the snide remarks and the ass-whuppin’.

I think its a good concept, and it is great that they are working at it, but they risk killing what little credibility they still have every time Lutz makes a promise.

You are way off base. Bringing God into it won’t help, and if you think everyone is being “snide” and piling on because we all think it’s cool to beat up on Lutz you need to reevaluate.

And it likely need not be said, but Lutz is no John F. Kennedy. I won’t rehash my whole other post, but there are apparently no leaders left near the top of GM.

One of Edward Deming’s primary messages was that one cannot blame workers for failure when the system is designed to set them up for failure. It’s a shame that decades after coming up with this stuff that Detroit still isn’t listening. (It must be even easier to ignore him, now that he’s dead.)

The future of the Volt is likely to be dim because of issues associated with the batteries, which is beyond the scope of GM’s engineering staff. Unless you just enjoy making whip noises in their general direction, beating them up to urge toward the finish line is just going to draw blood from the wrong people.

GM’s longstanding problem is not with the people at the bottom, who are stuck with working through the limitations of the system, but with the leaders charged with managing those people and that system. Imposing a deadline that ignores the obstacles is just a cop out that allows people like Lutz to parade around like the proverbial naked emperor, unaware of his own shortcomings.

And if the goal was to urge on the team, then he should be speaking to them, not to the media. Of course, Lutz is focusing his communications efforts on the press because he is less concerned about urging on the employees than he is about convincing the public to buy GM products, while Wagoner persuades the shareholders to hold on to their stock.

The reasons for these dramatics are simple: With Toyota’s success in the hybrid arena, GM is looking pretty primitive and second-rate these days in comparison to its main rival. Toyota’s ability to use its hybrid efforts to build its reputation as an R&D leader is what will help them to push GM out of the number one slot, a defeat that GM desperately wants to avoid. This is a huge boon to Toyota, which built its reputation on copying stuff very well; now, it has risen up the ladder by emerging as an innovator.

Because GM doesn’t have leading technology to sell you, Lutz is doing the next best thing by selling the promise of technology. Even if it doesn’t exist. Or won’t.

This might be whip cracking, but it’s not accountability.

If you were working on an advanced project and your boss was going to the principal customer every other day or so and telling themm something new and different about the product – that you haven’t figured out how to build yet – do you think you’d be happy?

I used to be in a similar position and our management was very careful about what they said we’d deliver and when we’d deliver it. They didn’t tell people what would be in the product or give an estimate of when it would be delivered until AFTER we figured out how to produce it. They were extremely careful to keep in touch with the team leaders to make sure their projections weren’t getting ahead of capabilities.

Stop and think about this a minute. Just a month or two ago, they took the prototype to a wind tunnel and discovered it was not a good design. They don’t have a battery. It’s not clear that they have an engine. Do they have samples of the electric motors? The generator set? The control software hasn’t been written. Nothing in the design could possibly be final. Yet, Lutz is talking trash about how Toyota’s going to have egg on its face over this “when the Easter Bunny arrives?”

I think I’d find it rather de-motivating to have my boss making random pronouncements about the project.

“Maybe in Japan, Toyota motivates its workers in some other way…”

Japan? Try Kentucky. You could go there to ask people how they get motivated at Toyota to get things done. You might share whatever you learn with Lutz.

5 pages of snide remarks and I think i cought maybe 1 positive one.

I understand it is easy to pile on. I mean, if everyone else does it, maybe I should to.

Perhaps Bob should shut his mouth. But I haven’t yet heard anyone mention that by doing what he’s doing, he’s lighting a fire under every single ass at the RenCen to make this thing work. Imagine if Kennedy had never said they’d go to the moon, but instead simply said “we’d like to try to go to the moon someday, and maybe beat the Russians, and we’ll spend some time on it and see what happens”. How effective would that have been?

This simply keeps crackin the whips. Deadlines and accountability are how great things get done, not just “workin on something” with the hope you’ll win. Instead of the Russians, GM has Toyota. Bob Lutz has decided this is how he will motivate General Motors. Maybe in Japan, Toyota motivates its workers in some other way.

I guess I just look at this and want to see it happen. I think it is great GM is pushing itself this hard. This is exactly the mentality they haven’t had for 30 years, and they need it back if they want to have any chance to be a leader in the auto industry. Even if they miss it, if it still gets done just a bit later, it still gets done. Is that not better than not really trying?

This is the automotive equivalent of a moon landing. You do everything you possibly can to get it done, save face, and change the world. And yet people here are bashing the idea they’re even trying this??? You talk about lack of accountability? He’ll be held accountable, and you bet your ass he won’t be made to look bad. This is Bob’s legacy here. There isn’t anything else after the Volt. He either does it and rides off into the sunset as the greatest excutive the auto industry has ever known, or he ends his career with a thud. Lutz I doubt has ever ended anything in his life with a thud. I don’t expect he will this time either.

You completely missed the logic. I did not say anything about being willing NOT to use them. I said you must be willing TO use them. You cannot take what I said and make any conclusion about what you said. Being willing not to use them is all fine and dandy, but if you are not willing to use them (and more specifically, if others percieve you are unwilling to use them) then you might as well not have them.

The remainder of your post deals with the assumption that we invaded over oil. Once again, you make an invalid leap. It MAY be true that we would have no interest in Iraq were it not for their oil, but that does not necessarily mean that any invasion is therefore BECAUSE of the oil. The case for an oil invasion is terribly weak when you consider that we did not conquer them and take their oil, as would have been expected of any country before the example we set at the end of WW2. We changed the rules by showing the superiority of befriending a foe, rather than subjugating them.

All the brouhaha over the big mean US is just a bunch of meaningless whining. The truth is that we could take from this world about whatever we wish, and it is because we have shown so much restraint for so long that most of our rivals are content not to attempt to try to defend themselves from us.

I would further attempt to explain my original point, but I don’t think it would do much good.

So, for the time being, throw in any batteries and get on with the demo car!

That is correct, but the power will be delivered by electric motors running off batteries being charged by the gas (or diesel or fuel cell or…, hence the “flex” in “E-flex”). The PHEV is similar to the two mode hybrid being introduced now, but the operator has the capability of charging the batteries by plugging it in. It has both electric drive and mechanical drive. The Belt-alternator (“mild”) hybrid has mechanical drive only with electric assist.

Either a country has, and has the will to use, a military, or it does not. The cost of the latter is incalculable and makes Iraq look like a bargain. Having fancy weapons and not being willing to use them is a waste of money as well.

If you want to call Iraq a bad idea then fine, but your other ideas for the money are going to get judged in hind sight as well. Maybe they turn out better, or maybe not. We will never know the costs we would incur had we NOT invaded.

I am quite sure that 35 new GM cars would not help stabilize the middle east. Let’s not argue about whether we helped or not, because no one planned to fail. In fact, we may not have failed. History will take decades to decide.

Let’s have more fun and talk about what GM has done, and should be doing. Should they pull the plug on the Volt? Will it be their Bay of Pigs? Will someone several years from now talk about all the money they spent on it and how it could have been better used to listen for signals from outer space?

GM, if it really wanted to, could produce the car quite quicklY if it did it in the same way as VW employees put together the first GTI.

But that would mean executives (like somebody I could mention) would have to get out of the way. Fat chance.