GM's Historical "No Hybrids Here" Decision Revealed
Autoweek's (AW) Special Earth Day Double Issue starts with an opt-out– "'Environmentally friendly' means different thing to different people"– and goes downhill from there. Surprisingly, AW didn't hype GM's next Next Big Thing: the Earth-friendly (providing you overlook the CO2 emissions at the power plants) plug-in Chevy Volt. OK, obviously, they did lavish ink on GM's gas – electric hybrid. Only it was a relatively small article called, get this, "Charged Up." Scribe Greg Migliore held GM's feet to the fire re: the Volt's 2010 deadline. Just kidding. AW hands its main advertiser a "get out of PR jail free" card in the last line. "As Roland Matthe, E-Flex engineering group manager put it, 'It's not a done deal. This project is not normal in regard to risk in the automotive industry.'" So much craven journalism, so little time. Where was I? Roger Hart's "Resurrecting the dinosaurs" road-tripping with the Chevy Tahoe Hybrid to GM ethanol acquisition Coskata? No. "Another Kind of Town" road-tripping the GMC Hybrid to NYC? Nope. Right! " The Believer," a profile of Larry Burns, GM's Veep of R&D. We learn "I personally brought four hybrid proposals before the board in the 1999-2002 period, and all were rejected. It was because of the business case. We just didn't get the courage to lose money on Gen 1." So now you know.
More by Robert Farago
Comments
Join the conversation
Actually, the '92 Civic VX (lean-burn VTEC-E) was compared to the current Honda Fit. The Civic VX was lighter and got better gas mileage.
It boggles my mind why people continue to make comparisons such as "(insert old small car here) gets the same fuel economy as a Prius/Civic hybrid. I don't see what all the fuss about hybrids is about". Old small cars have less safety, less interior room, less features, less comfort, and less refinement. They're also more expensive to maintain than a new hybrid.