Leave it to big industry to tell us that we killed the electric car, and to also get the government to side with them.
I love that Blue Meanie, and White Zombie made it into the vid. The two conversions that prove that EVs aren't just glorified golf carts. I'd love to see a golf cart win a race against an RX-8, or Supra, and White Zombie has.
Curiously, those who complain about pollution from electric cars & hybrids don't actually give a shit about carbon output or climate change - they just think they have a valid argument against these vehicles. They don't however, as even a simple Google search will show.
I am all for electric cars but I have 1 point/ question about the electric trucks. do they have the low-end torque and power required to tow heavy trailers and the such?
@fuzzygoblinwizard Electric motors are all about torque. The amounts of torque electric motors can produce can be up to 10fold of that of a conventional combustion engine and using a single gear.
No one "killed" electric cars, they never had a chance because they are a total joke. Who is going to buy a car that takes hours to charge to drive just 100-150 miles? Oh, and they cost more as well. Oh, and they are not "better for the envrionment" either. If you people think they are so good, invest in a company that makes them. Quit asking they be mandated and quit asking for my tax dollars to pay for them. Just man up and buy one if they are so great.
@CayleyBeiseker I have spent time reading about them and know what I am talking ab out. Why do you think they need thousands in subsidies to sell them? BTW: nice reply, so much for a "tone of civility" you lefties always say we need. Like a typical liberal you could not get ONE SENTENCE out before both calling me a name and using foul language.
@Srd1126 Noone wants to hear a single bad word against the electric car these days! but will these same hypocrites actually buy one? I don't think so! they will never take off as long as they are lumbered by the limitations that you pointed out
Too many people live in the old days of the lead acid battery, which is very heavy and not efficient. Now with the improved LiPo and LiFe Batteries, we can go a lot farther with much less weight.
@CayleyBeiseker Would the slower discharge rate of the Nickel Iron battery be sufficient for vehicles though? And would people be content with slower charge rates? I think these batteries would be more suited to storage vessels with a wind generator. Old technology isn't necessarily outdated is it?
@cdickenson64 Both of those power cells are extremely volatile to heat and excessive discharge. I fly RC helicopters that use LiPo's and you should see the video of the mini van that went up in flames with a little 1" by 5" battery. The little secret with the Chevy Volt and the reason they quickly took all of them back.
@mhills51 I use LiPo's in my E-Revo Brushless... I have had no problems with the batteries getting hot or them leaking, catching fire, or whatever, even after a rough day of bashing. I think the incidents that make people scared of these batteries are few and far between, and under sever or extreme abuse situations. One loudly voiced opinion can ruin a lot of good reviews.
Agendas? yes they kept us down and out, while they raped the world and the people in it! No wasn't us who killed the electric cars. Was the billionaires.
To the pawns of the FOX NEWS cartel, you better delete that channel from your line up, poisons the free will..After all whats been promised this time? more lies? Fox News, Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and his puppets are gutting America.
Never forget, The USS Liberty, Vietnam war, Iraq war. You want more lies? Leader John Boehner!
Surely Fox News will keep the dimensionless people informed?
But you see Donald Trumps puckered fucking lips face is much more important to sit and watch? Stupid Americans!
We are nothing like those Americans that birthed this nation!
Limbaughs radio stand in? NOW I GET IT! FOXY FOX FUX
Sean Hannity FOX NEWS hosted a radio talk show in Atlanta on WGST-AM and was a frequent substitute for fellow talk show host, Rush Limbaugh on WABC in New York. YOU WONDER WHY THERE ARE BIRTHERS?
Electric cars just are not pratical yet. When technology gets to the point that they are pratical and desirable they will take off. The main problem is battery technology isn't much better than it was 80+ yrs ago. The reason the electric car didn't take off 90 yrs ago is still the same reason it isn't taking off now.
You cannot blame the public for the failure of the EV! the car companies need to put forward a viable electric vehicle that people can take seriously half those cars look like bubble cars that no one is gonna want to drive! its really hard! who's gonna jump first? who's gonna take that leap of faith and buy an electric car when the infrastructure is shaky at best! and whats more who's gonna build their own EV? I would'nt have the first idea how to do it!
It is not so much oil companies don't want us to have these cars it because they (cars) are ugly. Also when you have travel long distances and or have power problems in extreme weather conditions electric cars are not worth it.
@jparso3 Their claims for distance before charging are about as reliable as broadband speed claims! all kinds of things effect how far you can get on a single charge (most notably temperature)
@CayleyBeiseker Virtually none of these cars will ever see the light of day! they are fanciful designs at best! hardly to be taken seriously as an alternative to the regular automobile! over and over I see this ridiculous over the top bile against anyone who dare questions their precious electric car! they should dispense with these Jetsons designs and try making a real car for a change! and maybe try a few less four letter words and more counter argument
I agree electric cars are better in a lot of ways, but GM's EV1 cost a lot more to make than what it was leasing to customers. The other aspect is that not everyone owns a house so as to be able to charge their electric cars. Imagine trying to run an extension cord from your apartment to your electric car.
A product doesn't have to be for everybody. A lot of people could use it. Also imagine in the future more electric stations like gas stations, fast recharge times. You could also use a removable batteries design. Take the most empty battery cell home and fill it up (while leaving most at the car). Or replace the batteries fast at the "gas" station with filled up standardised ones for fast refuelling. Solutions exist, the will does not.
if you add a tesla resonant antenna you can make an electric car have infinite milage! i remade nikola teslas wireless energy system, you take energy and make it wireless which can be used for electric motors and run them forever as long as their is a wireless power transmitter! its really important technology and 100 yrs old now!
You guys don't seem to know how much pollution is created by making just one petrol car. The pollution created by the cars life span is only about 15% of that.
Now think about the batteries replacements and manufacture. It's too early for really good el. car yet.
i agree with this vid. although right now that car is expensive and its range per full charge is short. but hey you know business and engineering: it will improve from time to time. so expect a cheap e-car with a 1,000 km per full charge battery.
i know you got the point but you can use them only in city and you have after 150 km rechar it 8 hours and you said its chepaer than gasolin. yeah you idot the electric is free
you calling me idiot(obviously i am all genious are idiots and i do beliebe electric cars are the future) the time of recharging bateries is an excuse they can very well change batteries in 30 secs less than fill the gas tank.
correcting your afirmation the electric is very cheap, not free...150km is more than an average person use in 1 day daily live you can very well putt them to charge at night, if you travel a lot then consider an hibrid
yea but dont forget the price of batteries and their recycling process. Also even if everyone was able to afford an electric car, hundreds of new powerplants would need to be built resulting in more coal pollution or nuclear waste.
of course infraestructures still need to be improved, you can charge your carr at night in dead periods rivers don't stop at night..we can use renewable energy. even is we use coal to produce the energy the polution will be less because electric motors are more effective than the explosion ones..
We don't need anymore coal or nuclear plants. Truth be known, you need roughly 2.5 square miles to build a nuclear power plant. You can cover that same sized area with solar panels and towers and produce the same amount of energy if not more! So we really don't need to deal with any waste! We can save the nuclear reactors for the Starship Enterprise!
Now THAT is a factoid that came from outer space, not science fact. The Kwh output of a single nuke plant will far outstrip a solar station TEN TIMES the square footage.
You're probably right. But land is relatively cheap and the cost of nuclear plant is huge. For the amount it would cost to build it, run it and decommission it (most important cost) you could build more than equivalent solar power (in MW). Sustainable and environment friendly, look up Fresnel Reflectors for solar. They will revolutionise the industry.
please look up nikola teslas radiant energy device, it collects cosmic ray radiation that penetrates us and all matter everyday! you can take the charges off of these particles to make energy forever! please i even show a simple cosmic ray motor that anyone can build to experiment!
you have less range with your tank full of gasoline than an electric car with one single charge, and with electric carrs you only spend 1€ in average per 100kms..dont' know what you mean with that!!
Diesel cars are the way of the future, and of the past. Why people don't like diesels, I'll never know. Diesel engines last longer, diesel is 2X cheaper to make than gas and they get almost 2X better mpg. Europeans know it, why not the USA?
Why to invest in Diesel? we have the tecnology to built only electric cars with the sise of a ferrari with more than 200kms autonomy ...why do we keep financing the oil industry?
Transportation and shipping is almost entirely diesel. Currently, much of our diesel comes from the same crude oil used to make gasoline anyways because of low sulfur emissions standards. Not to mention diesel costs more than regular gasoline right now, at least on the west coast.
When oil hit its peak a year or so ago, they jacked up the price of diesel well beyond normal gas so not to piss of consumers. But because diesel is such a huge part of shipping, everything that needs transport went up and consumers ate the cost at the grocery store rather than the gas pump.
So, unfortunately, diesel suffers from all the same major drawbacks as gasoline; Dependency on foreign markets, price fluctuation and pollution.
Honestly, my 73 Plymouth (without smog regulations) is more eco friendly than any of these cars. Why? : My car is already built and I can rebuild any part of it, it is not disposable. Also, the energy used to create the batteries for the electric cars and the cars themselves, cost the environment more than keeping my than what my rust bucket can pollute. Don't forget about the factories that pollute to make the plastics!
Now, to be honest, I love my older cars. I would never by an electric car thus far, because I feel they all look fairly hideous. Just because its electric does not mean they need to make it look like a bubble. If they where better looking and had good range, I would be right on the band wagon for getting one.
if you have an older car that you like and the engine craps out on you, consider converting it, then the damn thing will go another 100,000 miles without motor service and you can always swap in the latest battery technology.
The power grid thing is a non issue for 95% of the gas stations in this country now. The cars are affordable to build. The cost to install the fuel stations isnt prohibitive, most of the infrastructure is already in place. And consumers DO want the cars, despite what they try and tell us the "average American" thinks. Municipal and construction issues that pop up with such an undertaking is the kind of thing engineers deal with everyday. But it would take the gas stations to be on board.
The average commuter travels around 30 miles a day. The Saturn EV1 got 90-120 miles on a single charge and you could charge them at home. Yeah, you cant take these things on vacation, but you couldnt take any car very far if there wasnt a few hundred thousand gas stations in this country.
We would all be driving electric cars since the early 1900s if it was as easy to hook a remote fueling station up to the power grid as it is to drop a big barrel in the ground and dump gas into it.
The EV1 took around 3 hours for a full charge and supposedly newer battery/charger systems take under an hour. The average commuter is going to have their car parked for at least 3 hours a time.
I dont mean to imply that it was as simple as hooking stations up to the grid, just that the relative ease of putting up a gas station allowed the IC Engine to gain momentum. Imagine if we'd been developing electric vehicle tech for the last 100+ years. Charging up in moments would probably be trivial.
LOL and how many folk back then had steam engines, I grew up in the 30's and 40's on a farm (still live on one) and I just did miss out on the wonders of plowing a field behind a mule by a few years, we certainly couldn't afford a steam engine. It was only the big farms back at the turn of the century that could afford those suckers, and half the time they ended up blowing up because people didn't know how to use them.
see how far you actually need to drive in a day, on average. range is the only thing that kept me from buying a larger electric vehicle, so now i have a little EV scooter i use for short stuff (cost: $1500, no insurance required) and i keep my tdi for the long hauls.. which gets better per drop-of-fuel mileage than the prius.
Electric cars will get there.. we don't have a choice anymore.
It's about range. RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE It's not about lawsuits. Lawsuits are a matter of public record. Name the suit. Name it for us. Name the lawsuit that stopped any electric car. It doesn't exist. Name the county where it was filed. There's no lawsuit and there's no conspiracy. Go back to your mom's basement and put your tin foil hat back on and quit posting dumb conspiracy vids. Nobody wants a car that can only go 40 miles between charges.
its because they arnt efficent enough when the batteries are cheaper and less material effienet to make and last longer then people will change. rite now u have to replace barreries every 5 years, and the batterries will take a long time to deteriate in the environment
You clearly don't understand the word "scam". If you know what you're getting before you buy it, there is no scam. If you plug the GM Volt in to charge the battery and you don't drive over 40 miles between charges, you would use no gas.
Robert Anderson created an EV in 1839. The 1st rechargeable batteries for cars were practical 1881. Batteries created in 1881 are the 'Model T Event' for EVs. By 1900 electric cars were so common in the industry that people assumed no new gas or steam cars would be manufactured. But tech barriers and lack of investing in innovation caused a plateau in EV range and speed. Then a huge drop in gas prices started gas power on its current path of dominance.
True enough, then the cars became easier to buy by the common man, and a lot of those common men did not have electricity to begin with (remember the electric age had just been started in the cities, lot of folk in the country didn't have it), so it wasn't a conspiricy as much as cheaper and easier to use "at the time" (still is to be honest). It had gotten to the point that everything was geared for gas and to expensive and iffy to convert back to electric (money wise)
U assume an in home wall outlet is needed. Lots of practical sources could have been used for charging. Not the least of which was a stationary steam engine driving a generator. SSTs are practical enough that there are some still driving farm equipment & manufacturing plants in the US. Not saying this was an environment friendly or even efficient solution. But it was deployable anywhere, practical, and charging stations would not have been out of 'common' reach or $.
My job is 15 miles from the house. I ordered an e-bike kit and LiFePo4 battery and made my bike electric. I am allowed to park my bike in the shop and charge there. My commute is now FREE. Most though don't want the *inconvenience" of not rolling a small home (SUV) around. Yes we still use a car to go get our needs. Still you can't beat a free commute! The kit and bat total were 750 ... it's already paid for itself and not a year has past ... think about it. It's fun to boot :)
The public did not kill the electric car. General Motors, Oil Companies and the Government at the time (not mentioning anyone in particular.. ehem. Bush admin) and the affordability of gas at the time killed off the electric car.
because of the EV-1's destruction, America is now right at the bottom of the automaker's industry. There is hardly any foreign country that wants our cars now because of the price of gas! That's why the auto companies need that bailout.
@ferraridriver16 Agreed! Hey they stopped forward progress so they could milk the market for every dime it was worth and they ended up nose first at a dead end. I say leave them there! Yes they deserve bankruptcy. My definition of bankruptcy for these huge corporations is - The natural and deserving outcome of stupid decisions based on money grabbing executives, that occurs to naturally weed out those who drain economy and progress.
@shardsofsteel You do know bankruptcy woud have been the best thing GM & Chrysler could have done? It would have gotten them out from under the unions. 0bama didn't want that because they would have lost the UAW support. Where would the US manufacturers be if they didn't have to pay people 3x what they are worth to install lug nuts?
1)SAY THE NAME OF THE BOY OR GIRL U WANNA BE WITH FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE 2TIMES
2)SAY UR BEST FRIENDS NAME 5 TIMES TO UR SELF
3)THEN POST THIS TO FIVE VIDEOS AND THEN PRESS F8 AND YOU WILL SEE UR CRUSHES NAME ON THE screen IF U DONT DO THIS U WILL GET KILLED BUY THIS INSANE GUY WHO THINKS HES THE CHAINSAW MASSACRE GUY AND THEN YA UR SCREWED
No, they are NOT! But the gas prices have not gone as high there as elsewhere due to far lower taxation, so the incentive to have smaller, far more fuel efficient cars or even elec. cars or bybrids have been much lower in the US. And then they have not been really aware that the car and oil companies "may" not "always" (ie."never" ) have the best interest of their customers in mind foremost. I think they are waking up for real now - with the gas prices we have seen in later years - and will see.
We've done 600,000 miles on production Electric cars since 1997, saving 30,000 gallons of gas at our fleet average of 20 mpg, which is at least $60,000 (at $2/gallon) which paid for our solar system 3 times over.
You have to buy the car, anyway; our problem has been GM, Honda and Ford took back our EVs. Only Toyota honorably SOLD an electric car. We don't buy gas, or oil, for the EVs. We drive a lot, so it saves over $300/month, pays for our solar system.
Just like to congratulate GoinGreen for importing a car with no roof to one of the rainiest cities in the world. Ecomentalists are special. JOOOOOOEEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYY!
Hihi, exactly that's the point. Why should an average American customer buy sign. more money on a soapbox car that has no redeeming performance, power, speed, comfort, safety, practicability, etc. And secondly, who said that an electric car is ecological friendly or causes less emissions, damage, etc. to the environment?? The batteries have a life time pf 2 years, e.g., and how do you think the electricity that powers the car is produced??
Consumers have been looking for fuel efficient cars for decades now and all the car companies do is make bigger SUVs. Individuals are able to make workable electric cars in their garages. The Car companies can't make a decent electric car?There is something wrong here!
"We should nationalize the car companies and the oil companies. Then things would show progress."
WTF??? Are you out of your mind? Learn your history PLEASE!
Read up on what happened to the british motor industry. The last time anyone nationalized the nations car manufacurers it spelled disaster for the companies. When was the last time you drove a brand new car made by British Leyland?
What we need to do is to combine the defunct US car companies and reorganize the management. The product is quite good but management has failed the companies. Lack of foresight and limited vision led to this situation. Also the influence of the oil companies held back the production of electric or plug in hybrid cars. I never buy British because they were ALWAYS an inferior product laden down with mechanical problems.
"What we need to do is to combine the defunct US car companies. . ."
Ok You are asking for disaster. That means combining car companies that aren't there anymore. It means resurrecting Auburn, cord, duesenburg, studebaker, tucker, packard, hudson, nash, kaiser, franklin, and dozens of other american makes THEN combining all of those names under one roof. You end up with a situation worse than what british leyland had., because you have no dealer network, a and no brand loyalty/familiarity.
" I never buy British because they were ALWAYS an inferior product laden down with mechanical problems."
Actually, you could say the same of how most people feel about the current state of american cars. You must understand that most of the real mechanical difficulties and unreliabilities resulted from the nationalization of the british motor industry. Nationalization led to even worse management, loads of worker strikes, and odball designs that weren't selling.
Take the story of the triumph stag, the austin princess, or the Morris Marina for example. The stag and the princess were rushed into production without adequite testing. The marina and princess were in the same company but were direct competitors to each other. If you think american cars in the 80's were bad, wait untill they nationalize. I'd give the motor industry only 13 years before it collapses.
Here's what will happen if ford, gm and chrysler all merged and were nationalized. You have as a part of ford, mazda, volvo, lincoln, mercury. Under GM, are Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Opel, Holden, Pontiac, Saab, Saturn, Vauxall, and Hummer. Under Chrysler, you have Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, ENVI.
Thats 20 brands, several of them competing amongst themselves,, ALL of them with brand loyalty. PLEASE read your history on british leyland.
No you don't understand what I am saying. The problem with the British was management and a poor product. We only have a management problem. In fact GM does well in Europe because of the management there. In any case the focus needs to be on replacement of management. The same was true of the banks and financial institutions.
"The problem with the British was management and a poor product." You still need to brush up here. I am a british car enthusiast who has spent a good portion of his time trying to figure out why Leyland collapsed. Please keep in mind that the mini's, land rovers, and several british cars were huge sucesses. Leyland was the third largest automaker. Poor product results from poor management. Dont forget it. If you think the management is bad now, imagine jugling 20 brands!
Lincoln, and Cadillac compete for market share and each are purchased mostly by people loyal to those brands. Ford, Chevrolet, and chrysler all compete with each other. Pontiac, and Dodge, compete with each other. Saturn ,was targeted at mazda. Jeep and Hummer would be under one roof. Holden, Opel, and Vauxaull compete with Ford in foregn markets. Mercury and Buick competing under one roof for market share. It'd be a nightmare!
Each has their share of customers and although there would be some crossover things would pretty much stay the same. The only real change would be in the dull witted management. Nationalization would work very well and it would force the companies to be creative which is something they lack now.
"Each has their share of customers and although there would be some crossover things would pretty much stay the same." No!
See what happens when you have in house competition is a convoluted and costly product structure. You either have more divisions using up LOTS of R&D money on car designs, you badge engineer the bejessus out of them, or you drop names all together from the lineup. I'll go into detail explaining those options.
1) keep all the brands alive with unique product lineups and brand identities. Take the cadillac DTS, and Lincoln Town car for example. Separite platforms sepraite brands. What happens when those models are due for replacement? You have to design new ones! Not 1 car to compete with other companies, but 2! Not only that but the two designs leach sales off each other. In short you spend twice as much for less money in return, and the divisions fight amongst themselves.
Option 2 "badge engineer" The best american example of this is crysler in the 1980's. Build 1 car and give it lots of names. Hence the caddy and lincoln would be the same cars, just with different logos. This cuts costs consideribly over option 1 and it partly solves the problem of the dealer network's and customer's devotion to particular names. However It doesn't solve the problem of in house copetition.
Option 3, Pick and choose which names will carry the torch for a particular market sector and kill the rest off. This option has the potential to make the company a focused well oiled machine able to target the markets well. However in the process you risk losing a good deal of customer base and dealers who were loyal to the brands you killed. Favoritism can also create problems here. For example in BL, MG was killed in favor of Triumph despite stronger MG sales than Triumph.
Avoiding in house competition and overlap in the product structure is important because when ther eis loads of verlap, strong brand identities and inter division competition, the effort put out by cadillac to beat lincoln reduces the amount of attention they can give to making a product better than BMW, Mercedes, etc. Also when they don't cooperate and share parts, you have astronomical inventory costs, R&D costs etc. badge engineering garners harsh criticism.
Now. On top of that, give the government complete controll of the mess. First ask yourself if the government is really that efficciant at running anything. Second, ask your self how much sense it makes to give control of a dysfunctional family that fights internaly over marketshare, to a government burocracy with no expirience running a car company, more intersted on politics, lobbyists, labor unions, and regulations, than on making products that will sell.
Bad management. For example, the Mini cost around £539 to manufacture, while it was being sold at £496! This was due to an accounting error. When Ford contacted BMC of this error after they did some research (the mini competed with Ford's anglia), BMC resolved to not change the price and continued to lose £43 on each of the 1,663,539 minis produced from '59-'67
That's just for starters! There is a lot more there and if interested I can give you some websites. In the BL years though when things got nationalized. The company put into production cars that today make little sense. They had a staunch refusal to make hatchbacks just as that style was really taking off. They had trouble managing the laboor force. Frequent strikes, shoddy workmanship etc. Some cars built during that time could go up in flames within the first 1000 miles.
Bullocks! You don't have a clue about anything, do you??? There are plenty of stupid e-cars on the markets which you can buy. So, why fu&&ckjing don't you buy them, or your fat compatriots in this case??? I can tell you: none of your burger eating Billy Bobs would buy a soapbox car that has no redeeming performance, power, speed, comfort, safety, practicability, etc. And secondly, who said that an electric car is ecological friendly or causes less emissions, damage, etc. to the environment??
I was talking of the stupidity of nationalizing the US automakers. I guess you don't think much before you comment do you? Who said that an electric car had to be a soap box?
Electric cars can be recharged off of solar panels. In LA there are public solar charging stations that were built in the mid 1990's to that end. If you are charging your batteries with the sun, the only impact it has is when you need to change the batteries and dispose of the old ones.
All of them are, because you have reduce the weight of a car to a minimum, which you basically also could do with any regular car. It is only a question of how much you want to use expensive materials or comprise on the car itself. And don't start the discussing with me about solar panels for cars, it is like trying to fill up the ocean with a tea spoon. Please let us laugh all here, why do you think the e-cars have their advantages over regular ones, and why you think they are "green"?
You will not believe, but I am relieving some advantages of e-cars here: the degree of efficiency of electric engines (ca. 70-80 %)is indeed far better than the one of the ICE (ca. 38 %). But as most of the electricity is produced by coal almost everywhere, you have to calculate with 35 % degree of efficiency of regular power plants, then you lose another 20 % during the charging of the battery, so you end up with an overall degree of efficiency which is below the one of the ICE.
Off-peak electric goes begging, it's thrown away. Why not charge EVs from it? And then, if you can buy an EV, the gas you DONT buy pays for your rooftop solar system -- if you have a roof over your head, of course.
The main problem with e-cars, however, still is the storage of electricity. With current batteries you will never get the energy:weight-ratio you have with gas. This is the key, that's why you have to reduce the weight to a minimum, why most of the e-cars are soapboxes.
There is no conflict of interests. Customers only will buy an electric car which is better with the whole packaged (prices, maintenance costs, practicability, power, safety, performance, etc.). For the time being there is none which can match regular cars. The Testla Roadster is not a real match either, given the 16 hours you have to recharge the batteries always.
Obv. he hasn't been keeping up to date. A lot of exciting stuff is going on in this area now, and they are NOT going to look like soapbox cars ! New fuel cell technology will improve the fuel efficiency by a factor 2 or so. So they do not need to run on batteries only, but they can help regaining brake energy or recharge during the night with electr. from wind power ( large scale experiment starting over here next year ).
Now all that power is just wasted or sold very cheaply to our neigbours.
Thanks, but I have been thinking why is it so hard for the car companies just to build an ev car today? Not that forty thousand dollar Volt but a EV for the common man that is workable and affordable like the EVI.
Complete rubbish. The car was launched to the market because the government forced auto makers to bring a "Zero-emission"-car to the market (ZEV law). This is what happens if you are forced to launch a technology to the market which is not sufficiently developen (and can't be) to fulfill customers' demands.
The EV was only leased and never 'launched' onto the marketplace. In New Jersey where I live you couldn't even lease one. Oh by the way, all safety improvements were 'forced' onto the marketplace by the government. Also China is coming out with a workable and affordable electric car next year.
"workable and affordable electric car" ... what do you mean with "workable"?? hihi ... you mean that you can drive the car 80 km max, has 7 hp, and the battery needs to be replaced after half a year and then the Chinese build quality?? That's what you call "workable"?? And after all these e-cars are anything else but "green". But maybe it pays off in the USA to tell this bullshit.
I want a car that I can recharge in my garage, one that is reliable, and one that passes all of the safety requirements. Frankly I would be satisfied with a 50 to 75 mile recharge and 80MPH ability. The new batteries will be able to go several years. Since my electric comes from a nuclear plant the carbon footprint is small. Solar panels are good but too costly.
I share your opinion about nuclear energy. It is actually the cleanest form of energy, but ask the dumb and misinformed public about it. Solar panels are not good, because they don't provide enough energy
This stupid EV1 was sold 1,117 times. 1,117 times!!! Surely sufficient to 100s of million euro in R&D for this shit, which is NOT green and does NOT less emit CO2! Of course, the ZEV-law was quit on the behest of the auto industry, because this leads only to waste of money into technologies that do not work and that the customers do not want. On top of it, you f&&cking don't reduce CO2 emissions with it, but create further chemical, toxic waste because the stupid battery wears out after 1 year.
it was leased to every last one of them and then production halted despite growing demand, waiting lists ect. All cars were crushed even though leasee's begged GM to allow them to purchase the car. Your argument is about as valid as claiming that Chrysler corp sold any turbine cars or even put them in the hands of any customers. Offically it never got beyond the testing stage (for undisclosed reasons).
dude... lithium Ion batteries last 7 years now and are 100% recyclable. i'll admit lead acids aren't so great because they have lead and acid but they are mostly recyclable. each year lithium ions are becoming cheaper and cheaper with more power and a greater range.
In Greece??? Hhihihihihihihihi ... too funny. You are shooting yourself in your foot, you know, by saying "GM is considered a good car actually", hihihi hahaha hohoho, it is like saying brass music is considered good music in Germany, or something. Hihiihihih ... tooo funny!!
Leave it to big industry to tell us that we killed the electric car, and to also get the government to side with them.
I love that Blue Meanie, and White Zombie made it into the vid. The two conversions that prove that EVs aren't just glorified golf carts. I'd love to see a golf cart win a race against an RX-8, or Supra, and White Zombie has.
DrFruikenstein 3 weeks ago
EV's do have a lot going for them, but unfortunately they also have some real nasty drawbacks.
Price, battery range, recharging and the fact that most of them are just plain UGLY.
Jesus45U 2 months ago
Behind all this there's a lot of government Cover-Up
One of the biggest coverups, is regarding to Free-Energy Technology
Just go to Google and Search for : "Top Magnet Generator" -- Click the First Result
(skip the ads) website is topmagneticgenerator (dot) com
The evidence will shock you - you'll see for yourself even a Video from Fox-News
regarding the zero point energy magnetic generator which 'somehow' was not developed...
gmesthermax 4 months ago 8
We didn't kill the electric car, they did..
SaveAmericaFightNWO 4 months ago
@SaveAmericaFightNWO they killed/suppressed clean energy technologies too that would blow anyone's mind..
SaveAmericaFightNWO 4 months ago
I can make one, but I don't get the number plates and the papers to get it road worthy
here in europe is forbidden to modify your car :(
215alessio 6 months ago
@215alessio back in missoura the saying was "what thay dont know cant be used against you"
don't tell em and put it back for the yearly inspections
lanceehansen 4 months ago
There is one big limitation for electric cars still, the available battery technology just isn't good enough yet.
Mjarf88 6 months ago
Curiously, those who complain about pollution from electric cars & hybrids don't actually give a shit about carbon output or climate change - they just think they have a valid argument against these vehicles. They don't however, as even a simple Google search will show.
bored1980 6 months ago
I am all for electric cars but I have 1 point/ question about the electric trucks. do they have the low-end torque and power required to tow heavy trailers and the such?
fuzzygoblinwizard 7 months ago
@fuzzygoblinwizard
it's just a question of the electric motor you build in and how much e-power you bring up
sxsissel 7 months ago
@fuzzygoblinwizard Electric motors are all about torque. The amounts of torque electric motors can produce can be up to 10fold of that of a conventional combustion engine and using a single gear.
vortexZXR 6 months ago
@fuzzygoblinwizard
"do they have the low-end torque and power required to tow heavy trailers and the such?"
Electric vehicles have maximum torque at zero RPM.
HaroldHoltCantSwim 4 months ago
I enjoy my American muscle... SORRY
brusieroutlaw 7 months ago
No one "killed" electric cars, they never had a chance because they are a total joke. Who is going to buy a car that takes hours to charge to drive just 100-150 miles? Oh, and they cost more as well. Oh, and they are not "better for the envrionment" either. If you people think they are so good, invest in a company that makes them. Quit asking they be mandated and quit asking for my tax dollars to pay for them. Just man up and buy one if they are so great.
Srd1126 8 months ago
@Srd1126
You're a fucking idiot. If you spent five minutes reading about them you'd know. Go kill yourself, fucking conservative shit.
CayleyBeiseker 8 months ago
@CayleyBeiseker I have spent time reading about them and know what I am talking ab out. Why do you think they need thousands in subsidies to sell them? BTW: nice reply, so much for a "tone of civility" you lefties always say we need. Like a typical liberal you could not get ONE SENTENCE out before both calling me a name and using foul language.
Srd1126 8 months ago
@Srd1126 Noone wants to hear a single bad word against the electric car these days! but will these same hypocrites actually buy one? I don't think so! they will never take off as long as they are lumbered by the limitations that you pointed out
katakisLives 8 months ago
Too many people live in the old days of the lead acid battery, which is very heavy and not efficient. Now with the improved LiPo and LiFe Batteries, we can go a lot farther with much less weight.
cdickenson64 8 months ago
@cdickenson64
Taxi cabs ran on nickel iron batteries a hundred years ago. The weight wasn't a factor then and it isn't now.
CayleyBeiseker 8 months ago
@CayleyBeiseker Would the slower discharge rate of the Nickel Iron battery be sufficient for vehicles though? And would people be content with slower charge rates? I think these batteries would be more suited to storage vessels with a wind generator. Old technology isn't necessarily outdated is it?
cdickenson64 8 months ago
@cdickenson64 Both of those power cells are extremely volatile to heat and excessive discharge. I fly RC helicopters that use LiPo's and you should see the video of the mini van that went up in flames with a little 1" by 5" battery. The little secret with the Chevy Volt and the reason they quickly took all of them back.
mhills51 7 months ago
@mhills51 I use LiPo's in my E-Revo Brushless... I have had no problems with the batteries getting hot or them leaking, catching fire, or whatever, even after a rough day of bashing. I think the incidents that make people scared of these batteries are few and far between, and under sever or extreme abuse situations. One loudly voiced opinion can ruin a lot of good reviews.
cdickenson64 7 months ago
How do you know the Pheonix does 95 miles per hour? Hes one ever lasted a hour without needing to stop for a recharge?
m00nshine2004 8 months ago
Agendas? yes they kept us down and out, while they raped the world and the people in it! No wasn't us who killed the electric cars. Was the billionaires.
To the pawns of the FOX NEWS cartel, you better delete that channel from your line up, poisons the free will..After all whats been promised this time? more lies? Fox News, Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and his puppets are gutting America.
Never forget, The USS Liberty, Vietnam war, Iraq war. You want more lies? Leader John Boehner!
datarecoil 9 months ago
Surely Fox News will keep the dimensionless people informed?
But you see Donald Trumps puckered fucking lips face is much more important to sit and watch? Stupid Americans!
We are nothing like those Americans that birthed this nation!
Limbaughs radio stand in? NOW I GET IT! FOXY FOX FUX
Sean Hannity FOX NEWS hosted a radio talk show in Atlanta on WGST-AM and was a frequent substitute for fellow talk show host, Rush Limbaugh on WABC in New York. YOU WONDER WHY THERE ARE BIRTHERS?
datarecoil 9 months ago
Electric cars just are not pratical yet. When technology gets to the point that they are pratical and desirable they will take off. The main problem is battery technology isn't much better than it was 80+ yrs ago. The reason the electric car didn't take off 90 yrs ago is still the same reason it isn't taking off now.
shananagans5 9 months ago
You cannot blame the public for the failure of the EV! the car companies need to put forward a viable electric vehicle that people can take seriously half those cars look like bubble cars that no one is gonna want to drive! its really hard! who's gonna jump first? who's gonna take that leap of faith and buy an electric car when the infrastructure is shaky at best! and whats more who's gonna build their own EV? I would'nt have the first idea how to do it!
katakisLives 10 months ago
It is not so much oil companies don't want us to have these cars it because they (cars) are ugly. Also when you have travel long distances and or have power problems in extreme weather conditions electric cars are not worth it.
jparso3 10 months ago
@jparso3 Tesla looks good and back in January a guy drove one from London to Edinburgh in one day.
I think that covers looks, range and weather in one trip. Oh and it costs less than 5 bucks to charge it!
Now if it only cost as much as a Nissan Leaf...
marshgre 10 months ago
@jparso3 Their claims for distance before charging are about as reliable as broadband speed claims! all kinds of things effect how far you can get on a single charge (most notably temperature)
katakisLives 10 months ago
@katakisLives
Fucking idiot. Go delete your useless piece of shit ass.
CayleyBeiseker 8 months ago
@CayleyBeiseker Virtually none of these cars will ever see the light of day! they are fanciful designs at best! hardly to be taken seriously as an alternative to the regular automobile! over and over I see this ridiculous over the top bile against anyone who dare questions their precious electric car! they should dispense with these Jetsons designs and try making a real car for a change! and maybe try a few less four letter words and more counter argument
katakisLives 8 months ago
they are gay anyways
bnorris1904 10 months ago
@bnorris1904 How can a car have a sexual preference? Have you seen one EV mount another or something?
marshgre 10 months ago
0:36 is a pontiac solstice
Some1BesidesMe 11 months ago
@Some1BesidesMe No. It is a Venturi Fetish.
marshgre 10 months ago
If you make a easy build-it-yourself electric car, CHEAP... I'll buy and build me one. What is Fresnel reflectors do for solar?
superpencil007 2 years ago
I agree electric cars are better in a lot of ways, but GM's EV1 cost a lot more to make than what it was leasing to customers. The other aspect is that not everyone owns a house so as to be able to charge their electric cars. Imagine trying to run an extension cord from your apartment to your electric car.
WaltGe 2 years ago
A product doesn't have to be for everybody. A lot of people could use it. Also imagine in the future more electric stations like gas stations, fast recharge times. You could also use a removable batteries design. Take the most empty battery cell home and fill it up (while leaving most at the car). Or replace the batteries fast at the "gas" station with filled up standardised ones for fast refuelling. Solutions exist, the will does not.
komninosm 2 years ago
I agree wholeheartedly.
WaltGe 2 years ago
They are here for more than 150 years, the first car wich could go 100km/h was electric car in 1899!
MrJDdesign 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
if you add a tesla resonant antenna you can make an electric car have infinite milage! i remade nikola teslas wireless energy system, you take energy and make it wireless which can be used for electric motors and run them forever as long as their is a wireless power transmitter! its really important technology and 100 yrs old now!
boxa888 2 years ago
You guys don't seem to know how much pollution is created by making just one petrol car. The pollution created by the cars life span is only about 15% of that.
Now think about the batteries replacements and manufacture. It's too early for really good el. car yet.
garagecrap 2 years ago
Did you pull those statistics out of your ass?
icec0o1 2 years ago
No, out of my calculator.
garagecrap 2 years ago
The average commute to work is 30 miles (45km) per day, why do you need a range of 1000 miles per charge?
Who killed the electric car? The DUMB consumer.
eggaweb 2 years ago
elecrtic cars suck and are all ugly and you stupid hippies need to shut up about the enviorment
daaduc 2 years ago
the car at 0:40 is a Venturi, made in France.
hugozoom 2 years ago
Poop, I can't hear anything... But I like the way the Truck looks haha :D
AlizarinRipley 2 years ago
i agree with this vid. although right now that car is expensive and its range per full charge is short. but hey you know business and engineering: it will improve from time to time. so expect a cheap e-car with a 1,000 km per full charge battery.
dmfreak 2 years ago
Electric cars are faster, quiet, more reliable no expenses in gas and oil taxes, the only periodic manutencion you need is tyres changes
tozeslp 2 years ago 2
i know you got the point but you can use them only in city and you have after 150 km rechar it 8 hours and you said its chepaer than gasolin. yeah you idot the electric is free
patko1610 2 years ago
you calling me idiot(obviously i am all genious are idiots and i do beliebe electric cars are the future) the time of recharging bateries is an excuse they can very well change batteries in 30 secs less than fill the gas tank.
correcting your afirmation the electric is very cheap, not free...150km is more than an average person use in 1 day daily live you can very well putt them to charge at night, if you travel a lot then consider an hibrid
tozeslp 2 years ago
yea but dont forget the price of batteries and their recycling process. Also even if everyone was able to afford an electric car, hundreds of new powerplants would need to be built resulting in more coal pollution or nuclear waste.
Ukrainatrain 2 years ago
of course infraestructures still need to be improved, you can charge your carr at night in dead periods rivers don't stop at night..we can use renewable energy. even is we use coal to produce the energy the polution will be less because electric motors are more effective than the explosion ones..
tozeslp 2 years ago
yes that's true, I look forward to the day when electric cars will be able to compete with conventional ones..
Ukrainatrain 2 years ago
We don't need anymore coal or nuclear plants. Truth be known, you need roughly 2.5 square miles to build a nuclear power plant. You can cover that same sized area with solar panels and towers and produce the same amount of energy if not more! So we really don't need to deal with any waste! We can save the nuclear reactors for the Starship Enterprise!
AlizarinRipley 2 years ago 2
Now THAT is a factoid that came from outer space, not science fact. The Kwh output of a single nuke plant will far outstrip a solar station TEN TIMES the square footage.
cecilbdml 2 years ago
You're probably right. But land is relatively cheap and the cost of nuclear plant is huge. For the amount it would cost to build it, run it and decommission it (most important cost) you could build more than equivalent solar power (in MW). Sustainable and environment friendly, look up Fresnel Reflectors for solar. They will revolutionise the industry.
komninosm 2 years ago 2
please look up nikola teslas radiant energy device, it collects cosmic ray radiation that penetrates us and all matter everyday! you can take the charges off of these particles to make energy forever! please i even show a simple cosmic ray motor that anyone can build to experiment!
boxa888 2 years ago
ive uploaded all of this - the documentary
oreolvrs 2 years ago
i dont like them becouse you have to charege them evrywere
patko1610 2 years ago
you have less range with your tank full of gasoline than an electric car with one single charge, and with electric carrs you only spend 1€ in average per 100kms..dont' know what you mean with that!!
tozeslp 2 years ago
rhe very good video
GiUs97MiTo 2 years ago
I know the plan!! They intend to wipe out most of us!! its that simple.. the NWO banker Zionists scumbags..
dumalucky 2 years ago
Thats true, and if given the same subsidies as oil companies, many more battery developers could bring better technologies to market.
(the stimulus is good, but its nothing compared to gas subsidies so we can keep it "cheap")
dhymers 2 years ago
no, but really, every comment I post with a wikipedia link in it doesn't appear. WTMFF ?
dhymers 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
electric cars suck biofuel or hydrogen is the way to go
dluppers1 2 years ago
Diesel cars are the way of the future, and of the past. Why people don't like diesels, I'll never know. Diesel engines last longer, diesel is 2X cheaper to make than gas and they get almost 2X better mpg. Europeans know it, why not the USA?
celloprof 2 years ago
Why to invest in Diesel? we have the tecnology to built only electric cars with the sise of a ferrari with more than 200kms autonomy ...why do we keep financing the oil industry?
tozeslp 2 years ago
Transportation and shipping is almost entirely diesel. Currently, much of our diesel comes from the same crude oil used to make gasoline anyways because of low sulfur emissions standards. Not to mention diesel costs more than regular gasoline right now, at least on the west coast.
parasite057 2 years ago 2
When oil hit its peak a year or so ago, they jacked up the price of diesel well beyond normal gas so not to piss of consumers. But because diesel is such a huge part of shipping, everything that needs transport went up and consumers ate the cost at the grocery store rather than the gas pump.
So, unfortunately, diesel suffers from all the same major drawbacks as gasoline; Dependency on foreign markets, price fluctuation and pollution.
parasite057 2 years ago
@parasite057 Yeah but all Diesel Engines can run off Bio Fuel with no Modifications. there's a movie called FUEL you might want to watch......!
METALMAN4Wii 10 months ago
hey youtube, why can't I post wikipedia links in my comments ? WTF IS UP ?
dhymers 2 years ago
electric is not the way forward hydregeon is in the new honda clarity
glenobrien2008 2 years ago
Honestly, my 73 Plymouth (without smog regulations) is more eco friendly than any of these cars. Why? : My car is already built and I can rebuild any part of it, it is not disposable. Also, the energy used to create the batteries for the electric cars and the cars themselves, cost the environment more than keeping my than what my rust bucket can pollute. Don't forget about the factories that pollute to make the plastics!
Liloldcricketbug 2 years ago
Now, to be honest, I love my older cars. I would never by an electric car thus far, because I feel they all look fairly hideous. Just because its electric does not mean they need to make it look like a bubble. If they where better looking and had good range, I would be right on the band wagon for getting one.
Liloldcricketbug 2 years ago
if you have an older car that you like and the engine craps out on you, consider converting it, then the damn thing will go another 100,000 miles without motor service and you can always swap in the latest battery technology.
dhymers 2 years ago
The power grid thing is a non issue for 95% of the gas stations in this country now. The cars are affordable to build. The cost to install the fuel stations isnt prohibitive, most of the infrastructure is already in place. And consumers DO want the cars, despite what they try and tell us the "average American" thinks. Municipal and construction issues that pop up with such an undertaking is the kind of thing engineers deal with everyday. But it would take the gas stations to be on board.
parasite057 2 years ago
The average commuter travels around 30 miles a day. The Saturn EV1 got 90-120 miles on a single charge and you could charge them at home. Yeah, you cant take these things on vacation, but you couldnt take any car very far if there wasnt a few hundred thousand gas stations in this country.
We would all be driving electric cars since the early 1900s if it was as easy to hook a remote fueling station up to the power grid as it is to drop a big barrel in the ground and dump gas into it.
parasite057 2 years ago 2
But it takes 8 hours to fill a car with electricity. With hydrogen its a couple of minutes.
crowbarftw 2 years ago
Comment removed
parasite057 2 years ago
The EV1 took around 3 hours for a full charge and supposedly newer battery/charger systems take under an hour. The average commuter is going to have their car parked for at least 3 hours a time.
I dont mean to imply that it was as simple as hooking stations up to the grid, just that the relative ease of putting up a gas station allowed the IC Engine to gain momentum. Imagine if we'd been developing electric vehicle tech for the last 100+ years. Charging up in moments would probably be trivial.
parasite057 2 years ago 4
Exactly!
komninosm 2 years ago
LOL and how many folk back then had steam engines, I grew up in the 30's and 40's on a farm (still live on one) and I just did miss out on the wonders of plowing a field behind a mule by a few years, we certainly couldn't afford a steam engine. It was only the big farms back at the turn of the century that could afford those suckers, and half the time they ended up blowing up because people didn't know how to use them.
candr 2 years ago
see how far you actually need to drive in a day, on average. range is the only thing that kept me from buying a larger electric vehicle, so now i have a little EV scooter i use for short stuff (cost: $1500, no insurance required) and i keep my tdi for the long hauls.. which gets better per drop-of-fuel mileage than the prius.
Electric cars will get there.. we don't have a choice anymore.
katzw 2 years ago
realjoefriday 2 years ago
I do!!!
slh950 2 years ago
its actually about energy density. I could make an electric car go 500 miles, but it would weigh about 8,000lbs.
dhymers 2 years ago 2
Touche', sir. Touche'.
realjoefriday 2 years ago
fuck you Wave54
floorwalker6 2 years ago
**They have been in use for over 30 years.**
Actually, cost aside, they been around for over 100 years
YOu should be able to pull up Jay Leno's 1909 Baker Electric car on YOuitube
TheRealArchAngel 2 years ago
its because they arnt efficent enough when the batteries are cheaper and less material effienet to make and last longer then people will change. rite now u have to replace barreries every 5 years, and the batterries will take a long time to deteriate in the environment
AnThOnYrox8 2 years ago
They have actually been in use for over 100 years.
Werevixen 2 years ago
that's true we should go put some bombs on that oild pumps ^^
WalterSolano 2 years ago
GM makes a Volt It goes on electric power but power is generated by an fosil fuel engine.....what a scam
tyranus11 2 years ago
You clearly don't understand the word "scam". If you know what you're getting before you buy it, there is no scam. If you plug the GM Volt in to charge the battery and you don't drive over 40 miles between charges, you would use no gas.
wave54 2 years ago
but to make electricity they burn fosil fuel....and i know some is made by turbines...
andruha11234 2 years ago
30 years?! More like 128.
Robert Anderson created an EV in 1839. The 1st rechargeable batteries for cars were practical 1881. Batteries created in 1881 are the 'Model T Event' for EVs. By 1900 electric cars were so common in the industry that people assumed no new gas or steam cars would be manufactured. But tech barriers and lack of investing in innovation caused a plateau in EV range and speed. Then a huge drop in gas prices started gas power on its current path of dominance.
Zerothis 2 years ago
True enough, then the cars became easier to buy by the common man, and a lot of those common men did not have electricity to begin with (remember the electric age had just been started in the cities, lot of folk in the country didn't have it), so it wasn't a conspiricy as much as cheaper and easier to use "at the time" (still is to be honest). It had gotten to the point that everything was geared for gas and to expensive and iffy to convert back to electric (money wise)
candr 2 years ago
didn't say "conspiracy"
U assume an in home wall outlet is needed. Lots of practical sources could have been used for charging. Not the least of which was a stationary steam engine driving a generator. SSTs are practical enough that there are some still driving farm equipment & manufacturing plants in the US. Not saying this was an environment friendly or even efficient solution. But it was deployable anywhere, practical, and charging stations would not have been out of 'common' reach or $.
Zerothis 2 years ago
Thank you for this video.
CI9TK 2 years ago
My job is 15 miles from the house. I ordered an e-bike kit and LiFePo4 battery and made my bike electric. I am allowed to park my bike in the shop and charge there. My commute is now FREE. Most though don't want the *inconvenience" of not rolling a small home (SUV) around. Yes we still use a car to go get our needs. Still you can't beat a free commute! The kit and bat total were 750 ... it's already paid for itself and not a year has past ... think about it. It's fun to boot :)
bob25552 2 years ago 2
Is funny how people can still defend gm and capitalist after bank faillur, insurance, cars company, healt care.
bobilator1 2 years ago
The public did not kill the electric car. General Motors, Oil Companies and the Government at the time (not mentioning anyone in particular.. ehem. Bush admin) and the affordability of gas at the time killed off the electric car.
because of the EV-1's destruction, America is now right at the bottom of the automaker's industry. There is hardly any foreign country that wants our cars now because of the price of gas! That's why the auto companies need that bailout.
They deserve bankruptcy
ferraridriver16 2 years ago 16
@ferraridriver16 Agreed! Hey they stopped forward progress so they could milk the market for every dime it was worth and they ended up nose first at a dead end. I say leave them there! Yes they deserve bankruptcy. My definition of bankruptcy for these huge corporations is - The natural and deserving outcome of stupid decisions based on money grabbing executives, that occurs to naturally weed out those who drain economy and progress.
shardsofsteel 11 months ago
@shardsofsteel You do know bankruptcy woud have been the best thing GM & Chrysler could have done? It would have gotten them out from under the unions. 0bama didn't want that because they would have lost the UAW support. Where would the US manufacturers be if they didn't have to pay people 3x what they are worth to install lug nuts?
shananagans5 9 months ago
Hybrids that run off of biodiesel that is what we need 100 miles per gallon
Thunderhook715 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Those cars are deadly !
88cutty 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1)SAY THE NAME OF THE BOY OR GIRL U WANNA BE WITH FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE 2TIMES
2)SAY UR BEST FRIENDS NAME 5 TIMES TO UR SELF
3)THEN POST THIS TO FIVE VIDEOS AND THEN PRESS F8 AND YOU WILL SEE UR CRUSHES NAME ON THE screen IF U DONT DO THIS U WILL GET KILLED BUY THIS INSANE GUY WHO THINKS HES THE CHAINSAW MASSACRE GUY AND THEN YA UR SCREWED
Bleeder26 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
glad my friends don't have electric cars...they would be chargin their shit up here all the time...
alabamafilmfestival 3 years ago
No, they are NOT! But the gas prices have not gone as high there as elsewhere due to far lower taxation, so the incentive to have smaller, far more fuel efficient cars or even elec. cars or bybrids have been much lower in the US. And then they have not been really aware that the car and oil companies "may" not "always" (ie."never" ) have the best interest of their customers in mind foremost. I think they are waking up for real now - with the gas prices we have seen in later years - and will see.
ElvenDane 3 years ago
I don't think the electric car is "dead." I mean I'd love nothing more than to own a Tesla Roadster.
danthemanpatrick 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
its a shit car
WKaliber1 3 years ago
Why the emphasis on "did"? O_o
EikC 3 years ago
question who here would trade their powerstroke,cummins, or duramax for a car that has to be plugged in to charge? not to mention butt ugly.
dosentmatter 3 years ago
dosentmatter -
uhm... a cell phone "has to be plugged in to charge"... it ranks right up there with not having to stop at a gas station EVER again.
I think you've been playing with your powerstroke a little too much.
paraminion 3 years ago
I LOVE ELECTRICARS !
LaPieinsky 3 years ago
We drive production Toyota RAV4-EV every day, last sold in Nov., 2002, and still running fine.
liveoilfree 3 years ago
yeah, and what's the 0-60 on that piece of crap and how much did you pay for it? LOL!!! I bet you still haven't broken even on gas savings.
fahquedood 3 years ago
We've done 600,000 miles on production Electric cars since 1997, saving 30,000 gallons of gas at our fleet average of 20 mpg, which is at least $60,000 (at $2/gallon) which paid for our solar system 3 times over.
liveoilfree 3 years ago
You have to buy the car, anyway; our problem has been GM, Honda and Ford took back our EVs. Only Toyota honorably SOLD an electric car. We don't buy gas, or oil, for the EVs. We drive a lot, so it saves over $300/month, pays for our solar system.
liveoilfree 3 years ago
Wow, "solar systems" do come cheaply these days ROFL - just kidding. Nice to know.
ElvenDane 3 years ago
Just like to congratulate GoinGreen for importing a car with no roof to one of the rainiest cities in the world. Ecomentalists are special. JOOOOOOEEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYY!
gloucesterharry 3 years ago
Hihi, exactly that's the point. Why should an average American customer buy sign. more money on a soapbox car that has no redeeming performance, power, speed, comfort, safety, practicability, etc. And secondly, who said that an electric car is ecological friendly or causes less emissions, damage, etc. to the environment?? The batteries have a life time pf 2 years, e.g., and how do you think the electricity that powers the car is produced??
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
We should nationalize the car companies and the oil companies. Then things would show progress.
chairde 3 years ago
YEAH :) down with the pollution !!!!!
solunasunrise 3 years ago
Consumers have been looking for fuel efficient cars for decades now and all the car companies do is make bigger SUVs. Individuals are able to make workable electric cars in their garages. The Car companies can't make a decent electric car?There is something wrong here!
chairde 3 years ago
"We should nationalize the car companies and the oil companies. Then things would show progress."
WTF??? Are you out of your mind? Learn your history PLEASE!
Read up on what happened to the british motor industry. The last time anyone nationalized the nations car manufacurers it spelled disaster for the companies. When was the last time you drove a brand new car made by British Leyland?
joness105639 3 years ago
What we need to do is to combine the defunct US car companies and reorganize the management. The product is quite good but management has failed the companies. Lack of foresight and limited vision led to this situation. Also the influence of the oil companies held back the production of electric or plug in hybrid cars. I never buy British because they were ALWAYS an inferior product laden down with mechanical problems.
chairde 3 years ago
"What we need to do is to combine the defunct US car companies. . ."
Ok You are asking for disaster. That means combining car companies that aren't there anymore. It means resurrecting Auburn, cord, duesenburg, studebaker, tucker, packard, hudson, nash, kaiser, franklin, and dozens of other american makes THEN combining all of those names under one roof. You end up with a situation worse than what british leyland had., because you have no dealer network, a and no brand loyalty/familiarity.
joness105639 3 years ago
" I never buy British because they were ALWAYS an inferior product laden down with mechanical problems."
Actually, you could say the same of how most people feel about the current state of american cars. You must understand that most of the real mechanical difficulties and unreliabilities resulted from the nationalization of the british motor industry. Nationalization led to even worse management, loads of worker strikes, and odball designs that weren't selling.
joness105639 3 years ago
Take the story of the triumph stag, the austin princess, or the Morris Marina for example. The stag and the princess were rushed into production without adequite testing. The marina and princess were in the same company but were direct competitors to each other. If you think american cars in the 80's were bad, wait untill they nationalize. I'd give the motor industry only 13 years before it collapses.
joness105639 3 years ago
Here's what will happen if ford, gm and chrysler all merged and were nationalized. You have as a part of ford, mazda, volvo, lincoln, mercury. Under GM, are Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Opel, Holden, Pontiac, Saab, Saturn, Vauxall, and Hummer. Under Chrysler, you have Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, ENVI.
Thats 20 brands, several of them competing amongst themselves,, ALL of them with brand loyalty. PLEASE read your history on british leyland.
joness105639 3 years ago
No you don't understand what I am saying. The problem with the British was management and a poor product. We only have a management problem. In fact GM does well in Europe because of the management there. In any case the focus needs to be on replacement of management. The same was true of the banks and financial institutions.
chairde 3 years ago
"The problem with the British was management and a poor product." You still need to brush up here. I am a british car enthusiast who has spent a good portion of his time trying to figure out why Leyland collapsed. Please keep in mind that the mini's, land rovers, and several british cars were huge sucesses. Leyland was the third largest automaker. Poor product results from poor management. Dont forget it. If you think the management is bad now, imagine jugling 20 brands!
joness105639 3 years ago
Lincoln, and Cadillac compete for market share and each are purchased mostly by people loyal to those brands. Ford, Chevrolet, and chrysler all compete with each other. Pontiac, and Dodge, compete with each other. Saturn ,was targeted at mazda. Jeep and Hummer would be under one roof. Holden, Opel, and Vauxaull compete with Ford in foregn markets. Mercury and Buick competing under one roof for market share. It'd be a nightmare!
joness105639 3 years ago
Each has their share of customers and although there would be some crossover things would pretty much stay the same. The only real change would be in the dull witted management. Nationalization would work very well and it would force the companies to be creative which is something they lack now.
chairde 3 years ago
"Each has their share of customers and although there would be some crossover things would pretty much stay the same." No!
See what happens when you have in house competition is a convoluted and costly product structure. You either have more divisions using up LOTS of R&D money on car designs, you badge engineer the bejessus out of them, or you drop names all together from the lineup. I'll go into detail explaining those options.
joness105639 3 years ago
1) keep all the brands alive with unique product lineups and brand identities. Take the cadillac DTS, and Lincoln Town car for example. Separite platforms sepraite brands. What happens when those models are due for replacement? You have to design new ones! Not 1 car to compete with other companies, but 2! Not only that but the two designs leach sales off each other. In short you spend twice as much for less money in return, and the divisions fight amongst themselves.
joness105639 3 years ago
Option 2 "badge engineer" The best american example of this is crysler in the 1980's. Build 1 car and give it lots of names. Hence the caddy and lincoln would be the same cars, just with different logos. This cuts costs consideribly over option 1 and it partly solves the problem of the dealer network's and customer's devotion to particular names. However It doesn't solve the problem of in house copetition.
joness105639 3 years ago
Option 3, Pick and choose which names will carry the torch for a particular market sector and kill the rest off. This option has the potential to make the company a focused well oiled machine able to target the markets well. However in the process you risk losing a good deal of customer base and dealers who were loyal to the brands you killed. Favoritism can also create problems here. For example in BL, MG was killed in favor of Triumph despite stronger MG sales than Triumph.
joness105639 3 years ago
Avoiding in house competition and overlap in the product structure is important because when ther eis loads of verlap, strong brand identities and inter division competition, the effort put out by cadillac to beat lincoln reduces the amount of attention they can give to making a product better than BMW, Mercedes, etc. Also when they don't cooperate and share parts, you have astronomical inventory costs, R&D costs etc. badge engineering garners harsh criticism.
joness105639 3 years ago
Now. On top of that, give the government complete controll of the mess. First ask yourself if the government is really that efficciant at running anything. Second, ask your self how much sense it makes to give control of a dysfunctional family that fights internaly over marketshare, to a government burocracy with no expirience running a car company, more intersted on politics, lobbyists, labor unions, and regulations, than on making products that will sell.
joness105639 3 years ago
If they were so good why did they fail????
chairde 3 years ago
"If they were so good why did they fail???? "
Bad management. For example, the Mini cost around £539 to manufacture, while it was being sold at £496! This was due to an accounting error. When Ford contacted BMC of this error after they did some research (the mini competed with Ford's anglia), BMC resolved to not change the price and continued to lose £43 on each of the 1,663,539 minis produced from '59-'67
joness105639 3 years ago 2
That's just for starters! There is a lot more there and if interested I can give you some websites. In the BL years though when things got nationalized. The company put into production cars that today make little sense. They had a staunch refusal to make hatchbacks just as that style was really taking off. They had trouble managing the laboor force. Frequent strikes, shoddy workmanship etc. Some cars built during that time could go up in flames within the first 1000 miles.
joness105639 3 years ago
Bullocks! You don't have a clue about anything, do you??? There are plenty of stupid e-cars on the markets which you can buy. So, why fu&&ckjing don't you buy them, or your fat compatriots in this case??? I can tell you: none of your burger eating Billy Bobs would buy a soapbox car that has no redeeming performance, power, speed, comfort, safety, practicability, etc. And secondly, who said that an electric car is ecological friendly or causes less emissions, damage, etc. to the environment??
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
I was talking of the stupidity of nationalizing the US automakers. I guess you don't think much before you comment do you? Who said that an electric car had to be a soap box?
Electric cars can be recharged off of solar panels. In LA there are public solar charging stations that were built in the mid 1990's to that end. If you are charging your batteries with the sun, the only impact it has is when you need to change the batteries and dispose of the old ones.
joness105639 3 years ago 2
All of them are, because you have reduce the weight of a car to a minimum, which you basically also could do with any regular car. It is only a question of how much you want to use expensive materials or comprise on the car itself. And don't start the discussing with me about solar panels for cars, it is like trying to fill up the ocean with a tea spoon. Please let us laugh all here, why do you think the e-cars have their advantages over regular ones, and why you think they are "green"?
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
All electrics are soap boxes? lol Please do a google search for "Current Eliminator V"
joness105639 3 years ago
Well, then I am pretty sure that you will buy this car, will you?
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
You will not believe, but I am relieving some advantages of e-cars here: the degree of efficiency of electric engines (ca. 70-80 %)is indeed far better than the one of the ICE (ca. 38 %). But as most of the electricity is produced by coal almost everywhere, you have to calculate with 35 % degree of efficiency of regular power plants, then you lose another 20 % during the charging of the battery, so you end up with an overall degree of efficiency which is below the one of the ICE.
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
Off-peak electric goes begging, it's thrown away. Why not charge EVs from it? And then, if you can buy an EV, the gas you DONT buy pays for your rooftop solar system -- if you have a roof over your head, of course.
liveoilfree 3 years ago
The main problem with e-cars, however, still is the storage of electricity. With current batteries you will never get the energy:weight-ratio you have with gas. This is the key, that's why you have to reduce the weight to a minimum, why most of the e-cars are soapboxes.
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
ev1 didn't have such problems and this was like 2 decades ago. we have the technology to make electric cars but there is a conflict of interests
cyberlord64 3 years ago 2
There is no conflict of interests. Customers only will buy an electric car which is better with the whole packaged (prices, maintenance costs, practicability, power, safety, performance, etc.). For the time being there is none which can match regular cars. The Testla Roadster is not a real match either, given the 16 hours you have to recharge the batteries always.
joaquinveyron 3 years ago
Obv. he hasn't been keeping up to date. A lot of exciting stuff is going on in this area now, and they are NOT going to look like soapbox cars ! New fuel cell technology will improve the fuel efficiency by a factor 2 or so. So they do not need to run on batteries only, but they can help regaining brake energy or recharge during the night with electr. from wind power ( large scale experiment starting over here next year ).
Now all that power is just wasted or sold very cheaply to our neigbours.
ElvenDane 3 years ago 2
watch "who killed the electric car" its on itunes. there's so many factors that can't be explained on a youtube comment.
th3muff1nman 3 years ago
Thanks, but I have been thinking why is it so hard for the car companies just to build an ev car today? Not that forty thousand dollar Volt but a EV for the common man that is workable and affordable like the EVI.
chairde 3 years ago 2
Complete rubbish. The car was launched to the market because the government forced auto makers to bring a "Zero-emission"-car to the market (ZEV law). This is what happens if you are forced to launch a technology to the market which is not sufficiently developen (and can't be) to fulfill customers' demands.
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
The EV was only leased and never 'launched' onto the marketplace. In New Jersey where I live you couldn't even lease one. Oh by the way, all safety improvements were 'forced' onto the marketplace by the government. Also China is coming out with a workable and affordable electric car next year.
chairde 3 years ago
"workable and affordable electric car" ... what do you mean with "workable"?? hihi ... you mean that you can drive the car 80 km max, has 7 hp, and the battery needs to be replaced after half a year and then the Chinese build quality?? That's what you call "workable"?? And after all these e-cars are anything else but "green". But maybe it pays off in the USA to tell this bullshit.
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
I want a car that I can recharge in my garage, one that is reliable, and one that passes all of the safety requirements. Frankly I would be satisfied with a 50 to 75 mile recharge and 80MPH ability. The new batteries will be able to go several years. Since my electric comes from a nuclear plant the carbon footprint is small. Solar panels are good but too costly.
chairde 3 years ago
I share your opinion about nuclear energy. It is actually the cleanest form of energy, but ask the dumb and misinformed public about it. Solar panels are not good, because they don't provide enough energy
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
This stupid EV1 was sold 1,117 times. 1,117 times!!! Surely sufficient to 100s of million euro in R&D for this shit, which is NOT green and does NOT less emit CO2! Of course, the ZEV-law was quit on the behest of the auto industry, because this leads only to waste of money into technologies that do not work and that the customers do not want. On top of it, you f&&cking don't reduce CO2 emissions with it, but create further chemical, toxic waste because the stupid battery wears out after 1 year.
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
correction the EV1 WAS NEVER SOLD!
joness105639 3 years ago
It was brought into the hand of 1,117 customers between 1996-1999.
shanghaikidx 3 years ago
it was leased to every last one of them and then production halted despite growing demand, waiting lists ect. All cars were crushed even though leasee's begged GM to allow them to purchase the car. Your argument is about as valid as claiming that Chrysler corp sold any turbine cars or even put them in the hands of any customers. Offically it never got beyond the testing stage (for undisclosed reasons).
joness105639 3 years ago
dude... lithium Ion batteries last 7 years now and are 100% recyclable. i'll admit lead acids aren't so great because they have lead and acid but they are mostly recyclable. each year lithium ions are becoming cheaper and cheaper with more power and a greater range.
th3muff1nman 3 years ago 2
Here in greece GM is considered a good car actually
cyberlord64 3 years ago
In Greece??? Hhihihihihihihihi ... too funny. You are shooting yourself in your foot, you know, by saying "GM is considered a good car actually", hihihi hahaha hohoho, it is like saying brass music is considered good music in Germany, or something. Hihiihihih ... tooo funny!!