Slashdot Mirror


The Coda Electric Car at the Detroit International Auto Show (Video)

Last week Timothy Lord looked at the Tesla Model S. He also took a quick look at the CODA electric car. Like Tesla, CODA is based in California. Like Tesla, CODA is building purely electric, "plug-in" cars. But unlike Tesla, CODA is making a bland but practical sedan that can go up to 150 miles on a charge and costs about $37,000. That's not exactly a Kia-competitive price, even though Tim says it looks kind of like a Kia. But it's 100% electric and costs less than a Tesla -- really, hardly more than a Nissan Leaf. And it has a fully-usable back seat and a decent-sized trunk. And unlike the Nissan Leaf, it's made right here in the good old USA.

284 comments

  1. Made in the USA by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And will probably have to stay there last week we had temperatures of -37C with wind chill of -49C. We could hardly get you dino fuel vehicles to work. 4 years ago it was -52C with no wind chill when I woke up in the morning. My fancy lion powered drills stop working at -10C and will not charge below 0C or above 30C.

    1. Re:Made in the USA by luther349 · · Score: 1

      kinda funny we just had strong storms all night in January. dunno what happend to the snow lol.

    2. Re:Made in the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Somehow I'm guessing you might also need to drive more than 150 miles (241.4 km) at a time. I don't think you're the intended audience for this vehicle.

  2. Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I went to Cracker Barrel for breakfast this past weekend. Oddly enough, they had three electric car charging stations near the front entrance. I had to laugh because in all three parking spaces was parked a gas guzzler. For the concept to work, you'd need to instate laws to ticket non-electric vehicles or put the spaces so far away that fat people would stay away from them. Unfortunately, you only need an IQ of about 50 to drive and absolutely no manners whatsoever, so it's going to be a difficult problem to solve.

    1. Re:Electric Charging Stations by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 0, Troll

      The malls/some stores around here have special parking spots for hybrid/electric cars that are closer to the entrance than the handicapped spots in some cases. Not one of the parking spots was being used last time I was at the mall. Driving an EV does not make you more worthy of a parking spot than anyone else.

    2. Re:Electric Charging Stations by dmbasso · · Score: 2

      And when you talk about law you have to remember whose interests are involved: Who Killed the Electric Car?.

      Everybody should watch this documentary, and be revolted with those in command.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    3. Re:Electric Charging Stations by DallasMay · · Score: 1

      We don't need new laws right now. This problem will fix itself as more and more people start buying EVs and retail, offices, and restaurants are forced by the market to add more chargers or enforce the EV parking only themselves. When a large enough percentage of a company's customers stop going to a restaurant because they can't plug-in, then the smart businesses are going to help their customers and the ones that don't will be out of business.

      --
      I've given up on Slashdot's comment scores.
    4. Re:Electric Charging Stations by vlm · · Score: 4, Informative

      The malls/some stores around here have special parking spots for hybrid/electric cars that are closer to the entrance than the handicapped spots in some cases. .... Driving an EV does not make you more worthy of a parking spot than anyone else.

      It does. You/everyone is paying a couple bucks per foot for that buried heavy gauge wire, so the closer the charger is to the entrance, the less you are paying the electrician, who is paid by the mall owner, who is paid by the shopkeeper, who is paid by ... you.

      So its in everyones financial best interests to have the charger as close to the building as possible. Even if you drive a gas guzzler.

      The only people who benefit by putting it further away are the copper wire manufacturers.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    5. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It makes you more worthy of an EV parking spot, which was the Parent Commenters' point.

    6. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for the sequel when Tesla declares bankruptcy and goes out of business. They will claim that the illuminati in league with the oil companies using the Free Masons infiltrate and sabotage Tesla.

    7. Re:Electric Charging Stations by kenh · · Score: 1

      Special EV parkeing spot does not mean "Free Electic car charging station" - it simply means a specially-designated patch of asphalt in the parking lot.

      Your justification based on the cost of running wires doesn't apply.

      --
      Ken
    8. Re:Electric Charging Stations by cpu6502 · · Score: 0

      I'm a proponent of EVs (and electric hybrids), but that documentary is so full of inaccuracies. I wish people would stop citing it.

      EVs died-off for the same reason passenger rail died-off in the early 1900s, why there's no longer such a thing as Atari Computer, why Sega no longer makes consoles, why Circuit City went bankrupt, why CED videorecords failed as a format, and so on.

      Lack of customer interest. They chose other products they liked better.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    9. Re:Electric Charging Stations by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      Maybe I was not clear there are no chargers just little green signs that say "Electric/Hybrid vehicles only". At Kingsway mall in Edmonton they used to be handicap spots.

    10. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In California, the penalty is about $350 to park in a Disabled slot if you don't have tags. Same rule should apply to electric charging slots.

    11. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 2

      I'm sure it has more to do with how easily power can be routed to these spots and the marketing value that these spots may possess. If your trying to appear to be trendy and "green" you want to make sure people have to walk by your charging stations. You don't want to hide them at the back of the parking lot.

      Also, I think it is meant to incentivize buying an electric vehicle. Power companies usually sponsor these sites and want to entice people to buy electric.

      Driving an EV does not make you more worthy of a parking spot than anyone else.

      It may. Speaking as someone who drives gasoline powered vehicles, I see nothing wrong with rewarding people for making choices that benefit our environment AND our (lackluster) energy policy. Similar to bus stops being at the mall entrances, EV charging stations can be more convenient than regular parking places.

      Personally I don't place a high value on a parking place being close to the store. I like to take any opportunity to walk since I spend too much time at work behind a desk. I don't want to walk 6 miles each way to the store, so I drive there and walk a more manageable distance in the parking lot. Including the shopping itself, it's surprising how much distance you'd walk.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    12. Re:Electric Charging Stations by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for the sequel when Tesla declares bankruptcy and goes out of business. They will claim that the illuminati in league with the oil companies using the Free Masons infiltrate and sabotage Tesla.

      Why go to that trouble? They will just blame it on the bad driving habits of Jeremy Clarkson...

    13. Re:Electric Charging Stations by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      You don't need a law. You need a store willing to self-police its own private parking, the same way my local bank tows people who are not banking. If a gasser is sitting in an EV spot, then cracker barrel should have them removed.

      - "$37,000"

      Waaaay too high in price. Solectria made a car similar to this in the early 2000s, and it failed to sell because of that high price. They need to find a way to make the car less than an Lexus or Acura, otherwise people will just buy the luxury car.

      For now I think the only affordable "electric" cars are the hybrids with their 40 mile pure-EV range.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    14. Re:Electric Charging Stations by kenh · · Score: 4, Informative

      So its in everyones financial best interests to have the charger as close to the building as possible. Even if you drive a gas guzzler.

      No, it's in everyone's financial best interest for plug-in electric car owners to charge their car at home, and not soak the local shop owner for the electricity their cars consume.

      Here's an interesting article on the growing number of charging stations from the WSJ last October:

      Charging equipment is popping up largely because of subsidies. As part of a $5 billion federal program to subsidize development of electric vehicles and battery technology, the U.S. Energy Department over the past two years provided about $130 million for two pilot projects that help pay for chargers at homes, offices and public locations.

      With less than 20,000 EVs on the road today, that works out to over $6,500 per EV, and since the subsidies only pay for a part of the expense, which can run $2,000 - 7,000 per charger, it's safe to say we have at least two chargers for every EV in the country.

      --
      Ken
    15. Re:Electric Charging Stations by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe I was not clear there are no chargers just little green signs that say "Electric/Hybrid vehicles only". At Kingsway mall in Edmonton they used to be handicap spots. Also someone has to pay which ultimately is the consumer my second car is a 95 neon that gets almost 40 mpg when the motor or transmission breaks I go to the wrecking yard and buy a used one for $100 to $200. One sometimes two Sundays and it is back on the road and I take the old motor to be melted for scrap, fluids are recycled, rubber is recycled and when its time for another neon (neons are my car of choice due to parts availability and ease of repair) my old one goes the the wrecker and I get $75 a ton for the scrap. Now which is more environmentally responsible my neon or a super expensive EV that most people can not afford.

    16. Re:Electric Charging Stations by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      I'm a proponent of EVs (and electric hybrids), but that documentary is so full of inaccuracies. I wish people would stop citing it.

      Would you care to elaborate? Or give us some pointers to reliable sources? Perhaps I'm being naive, but the arguments the documentary presents are pretty convincing.

      EVs died-off for the same reason passenger rail died-off in the early 1900s [...]

      You meant in the US and other Big Oil dominated countries, right? Here in Europe passenger rail continues to go strong (to the best of my knowledge, myself being a customer in Germany, Italy and Portugal). Sadly for my mother nation Brazil, we don't have a good rail infrastructure not even for agricultural transportation (which comprises most of our GDP, I guess). For that we rely on big diesel trucks... I bet you can guess how things turned out to be that way right?

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    17. Re:Electric Charging Stations by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Personally I don't place a high value on a parking place being close to the store. I like to take any opportunity to walk since I spend too much time at work behind a desk.

      I think it's fair to say that you are an extraordinary person (especially if you are an American). Bill. If you take a look at what waddling in and out of the doors of Wal-Mart, you will find people who have taken any opportunity to sit on a sofa with a giant bag of chips and a Super-Mega-Gulp of high-fructose corn syrup.

      There's a kind of fat going around now that's "not natural" as my grandfather used to say. You don't get that fat just from packing away an extra pork chop or helping of mashed potatoes with dinner. This is genetically-modified fat, science-experiment-gone-wrong fat, industrial-accident fat, out-of-control-tumorous fat. I went to the humongous hardware store a couple of Saturdays ago, and my daughter wanted to stop at Wal-Mart to buy some girl thing. I thought I had crossed some threshold in the metaverse or something. Everybody looked like they were wearing the fat suit that the comedian wears in the movie ("Fat Bastard weighs a metric ton..."). Then I got it in my head that these gargantuan people were looking at my daughter and me like we were some interlopers into their fat world and we didn't belong there and like Children of the Corn Syrup they were going trap me and my daughter in the sporting goods section and sacrifice us to their god of fat. I swear I hurried outside and stood with the few people who were not hugely fat, the smokers, just so I could feel normal again.

      My daughter wanted to stop for lunch, but I couldn't possibly eat. This is a true story. There's something serious going on around here. Some 1950's sci-fi horror story of fat. It scares me.

      Yes, I'd rather walk from the back of the parking lot, too. Plus, my hooptie is less likely to get scratched that way.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    18. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Yes and watch my new documentary: "Everything Is A Conspiracy Even Things That Failed On Their Own Merits!"

      Find out who THEY are and why THEY don't want you driving electric cars!

    19. Re:Electric Charging Stations by garcia · · Score: 1

      There are hybrid parking spaces at the local transit station I use daily. I don't agree with limiting parking spaces in a publicly funded parking lot for those who can afford a new car and especially one that is a hybrid.

      If I had more than one car and actually drove to the transit station myself to park (instead of being dropped off, walking or biking as I do) I would park there with my "gas guzzling" Mazda3 (yes, it is a gas guzzler even though it's very compact).

      Perhaps instead of having "no manners whatsoever" they simply don't agree with such ridiculousness?

    20. Re:Electric Charging Stations by vlm · · Score: 1

      which can run $2,000 - 7,000 per charger,

      Having worked with large industrial scale battery chargers for forklifts and telco C.O.s in the past, I see there is around a 5x to 10x corruption level going on there.

      I'm sure its possible for there to be $5K of profit on the table ready to be taken, but corruption doesn't prove the actual cost is that high.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    21. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Roblimo · · Score: 1

      "Gasser" is going to become the new "hooptie." I say this as someone who drives an 18-year-old, gas-powered Jeep Cherokee with peeling paint.

    22. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fair point. However, I think most people can agree that while electric cars are currently less than ideal, in the long term the shift towards them is a good idea, the tech just needs to develop more and infrastructure needs to be established. And how do you do that? You encourage the early adopters so that an ecosystem can develop around them. Just like hardcore computer gamers are largely to thank for our current blazing-fast computers and fast 3D rendering on phones - they made it profitable to push the boundaries, and later generations of the tech could then "trickle down" into consumer devices.

    23. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who do you think is the head of the illuminati? There is a very good reason the Stig never shows his face.

    24. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I paid out the ass for my fancy 3D graphics and all the CPU's I burnt up overclocking the government didn't subsidise my CPU addiction.

    25. Re:Electric Charging Stations by timeOday · · Score: 1
      I suppose that's an issue for anybody who drives more than 75 miles to go to Cracker Barrel.

      150 miles is far more than enough for most people's day-to-day driving. A typical family has a car and a minivan or SUV. This would replace the car, not the minivan.

    26. Re:Electric Charging Stations by dreemernj · · Score: 1

      But is there a reason why he doesn't know anything about ducks? I WANT TO KNOW THE ILLUMINATI SECRETS!

      --
      1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
    27. Re:Electric Charging Stations by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      Watch the fucking documentary before saying shit please. Then you can contest the specific arguments. 'THEY', as you wrote, are explicitly exposed, with the reasoning for 'THEIR' actions.

      I was about to write some of the arguments presented in the documentary, but what for? In your mind I'm a conspiracy theorist, and no evidence would prove otherwise.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    28. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I moderated, and this is off-topic anyway, so I'm posting anonymously.

      In the last year, several slightly/moderately overweight friends have complained about the BMI scale (mass / height^2). Most recently, BMI Illustrated (Flickr set) has done the rounds on my Facebook news feed. I looked through the pictures, and generally agreed with what the BMI calculation suggested. As more and more people become overweight, "normal weight" is no longer the same as "healthy weight". I know better than to point this out to my slightly/moderately overweight friends on Facebook. I think they criticise the scale rather than admit they're unhealthy -- and there are valid criticisms of it, but the solution for those claiming they don't fit the scale (unusually tall, athletic, etc) is to get a body fat measurement done, rather than complain about BMI.

      My BMI is 57kg/0.176m^2, so 17.8 -- very slightly underweight, much like Stephen (though I don't care to convert his American measurements). It's roughly correct, I am underweight, I could do with doing more exercise.

    29. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly for my mother nation Brazil, we don't have a good rail infrastructure not even for agricultural transportation (which comprises most of our GDP, I guess). For that we rely on big diesel trucks... I bet you can guess how things turned out to be that way right?

      Interesting, I didn't know that. Didn't the Portugese start one? I don't know much about Brazilian history, but the British built their empire they spent lots of time building railways.

      Wikipedia suggests the railways declined after 1945, but I don't know why.

      (BTW, the US has an excellent freight railway system.)

    30. Re:Electric Charging Stations by dreemernj · · Score: 1

      You meant in the US and other Big Oil dominated countries, right?

      He probably did, but you can't overlook the time he mentioned as well. I don't know who backed light rail in Europe. I'd be interested to know and now that I'm writing this comment I think I'll go look into it later. In the US, light rail was often backed by land developers and power companies. Light rail is one of the things that facilitated power lines spreading out from city centers into suburban areas in the US. And suburbs would spread out as far as light rail could take people in some cases. A mogul could buy up big chunks of land outside a city, run a light rail out to it, and advertise how quick and easy it would be to get from there to the city. Having a cheap light rail while you are selling the land is great. It's worth having. Once the land is sold and developed and the mogul is moving on to another area, how much value does that light rail system have?

      A lot of things contributed to the decline of light rail in the US. Big Oil, I am sure, was part of that. But other forces were at work as well. Which one contributed most to it, I couldn't say. But if you focus on just one part of it, you are sure to find enough evidence to convince yourself that part is the most important part.

      --
      1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
    31. Re:Electric Charging Stations by dreemernj · · Score: 1

      Perhaps instead of having "no manners whatsoever" they simply don't agree with such ridiculousness?

      I think that applies to this conversation if your local Cracker Barrel is publicly funded.

      --
      1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
    32. Re:Electric Charging Stations by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      There's a kind of fat going around now that's "not natural" as my grandfather used to say. You don't get that fat just from packing away an extra pork chop or helping of mashed potatoes with dinner. This is genetically-modified fat, science-experiment-gone-wrong fat, industrial-accident fat, out-of-control-tumorous fat. I went to the humongous hardware store a couple of Saturdays ago, and my daughter wanted to stop at Wal-Mart to buy some girl thing. I thought I had crossed some threshold in the metaverse or something. Everybody looked like they were wearing the fat suit that the comedian wears in the movie ("Fat Bastard weighs a metric ton..."). Then I got it in my head that these gargantuan people were looking at my daughter and me like we were some interlopers into their fat world and we didn't belong there and like Children of the Corn Syrup they were going trap me and my daughter in the sporting goods section and sacrifice us to their god of fat. I swear I hurried outside and stood with the few people who were not hugely fat, the smokers, just so I could feel normal again.

      I have to whole heartedly agree!!

      You get those email threads from friends every once in awhile...showing what people 'see' in Wally world...and those pictures are truly amazing. But just every day, looking around in there, and over much of Americana....the huge fat problem. Even the little kids are all just horribly obese.

      I've porked up a bit in past years...and been working on it, at least being cognizant of my weight, trying to eat better and exercise.

      I watched that video, Fat Sick and Nearly Dead....I'd recommend it to anyone, as that is it free to stream on netflix and amazon prime...

      I'm currently on day 16 of a 30 day juice fast..to 'reset' my life and lifestyle. I've lost almost 17 lbs in 15 days. I feel great....energetic, sleeping well...my blood pressure which was borderline high...is almost normal already.

      While this isn't that hard, I don't wanna do it again. I know how to cook and enjoy it...going forward, I'm gonna keep away from processed foods and crap.

      I'm losing...and starting 'see' the differences really come out more and more between what I'm going for...where I'm already at....and what is quickly becoming the majority of the general public in the US....all obese.

      I've been watching a lot of documentaries...and yes, I think a lot of it is like you said, a science experiment gone wrong. I saw a documentary called something like King Korn...where it shows in the 70's how we changed how the US paid farmers to farm less, into farming as much as possible...and it is all high starch CORN. Something with almost no nutritional benefit...and has invaded our whole food strata that is commonly consumed by our citizens.

      Scary, but dunno how we can possibly get out of the vicious cycle we're currently in...too much big commercial money in this for quick answers.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    33. Re:Electric Charging Stations by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      which can run $2,000 - 7,000 per charger,

      Having worked with large industrial scale battery chargers for forklifts and telco C.O.s in the past, I see there is around a 5x to 10x corruption level going on there.

      i find it more likely that you don't realize that costs you're calling 'corruption' likely include the costs of the support infrastructure (I.E. new power drops, new wiring, etc...) as well as the costs of the charger.

    34. Re:Electric Charging Stations by vlm · · Score: 1

      i find it more likely that you don't realize that costs you're calling 'corruption' likely include the costs of the support infrastructure (I.E. new power drops, new wiring, etc...) as well as the costs of the charger.

      Well yeah, its probably a lot of "this garage is too small for the charger. Lets build a new garage and file it as a charger project expense" and "The owner would just as well hang it on the wall, but my brother owns a trenching company and there's an open spot 50 feet away"

      I redid a bunch of plumbing in my basement (heck, most of it) about a decade ago to install a new bathroom while installing an instant hot water heater. That does not mean it costs $2000 to install a hot water heater, but a hack trying a hack job against instant hot water heaters would probably use that stat to "prove" ... blah blah. Or a hack trying to prove instant hot water heaters are great would use it as a stat to prove the installation cost was zero, after all, I was remodeling the basement anyway...

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    35. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He does know things about ducks. Two things, in fact.

      Granted, they're both wrong, but still.

    36. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Windowser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      my second car is a 95 neon that gets almost 40 mpg when the motor or transmission breaks I go to the wrecking yard and buy a used one for $100 to $200. One sometimes two Sundays and it is back on the road and I take the old motor to be melted for scrap, fluids are recycled, rubber is recycled and when its time for another neon (neons are my car of choice due to parts availability and ease of repair) my old one goes the the wrecker and I get $75 a ton for the scrap. Now which is more environmentally responsible my neon or a super expensive EV that most people can not afford.

      The more environmentally responsible is a car that you don't have to change the motor / transmission every year.
      You should try a good car for a change, maybe a Toyota or a Honda. I've run a Tercel to more than 600,000 km on the original engine/transmission.
      Those Neons are junk, even when new.

      --
      Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
    37. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2

      Do you think that the Federal expenses were spent on just buying chargers?

      Or don't you realize that the money is an investment in inventing and producing the chargers, and the batteries, and the rest of the infrastructure, for the next years and decades of plugin vehicles?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    38. Re:Electric Charging Stations by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      The documentary sounds like something Alex Jones would produce. (I'm serious; it has almost exactly the same style and flawed presentation.)

      EVs didn't die-out because of some secret government of corporate conspiracy. They died-out in the early 2000s because nobody could afford the $45,000 pricetag it cost to buy a Toyota Rav4 or Honda EV. Even with the state of California handing-out 15 thousand dollar checks to customers, these models still experienced poor sales.

      And it's not just EVs. The Original Honda Insight was phased-out too for the same reason (poor sales). No grand Alex Jones-type conspiracy. Just a lack of interest by customers.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    39. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      How is a car's higher cost less environmentally responsible? Especially when that higher cost is an investment in burning less petrofuel, which damages the environment less.

      In fact making cars more expensive is good for the environment. Because it means less driving per person. Making the expense consume less polluting fuel per driving per person is even better for the environment.

      The cheaper car that gets gas mileage competitive with the source fuel mileage of plugin cars, and which you completely recycle, does compete environmentally and wins economically. But the higher cost plugins are an investment, paid voluntarily by early adopters, in scale economies and efficiency inventions that will bring the cost down. By the time a Neon driver has a plugin car they can afford, the motor and battery will last longer than a Neon's drivetrain for the same cost (reduced partially by the longer drivetrain lifetime).

      There are reasons some people shouldn't buy plugin cars yet, just as there are reasons others should. Your high electricity price and high efficiency gas car make you one of those who should wait. And indeed maybe never switch. Until gas costs $20 a gallon.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    40. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Jesus, it was just a joke. Relax.

    41. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The government also didn't subsidize the other HW it was competing with, the way the government does subsidize the petrofuel car industry that plugins must compete with.

      Oh wait, the government did subsidize the other HW. And it subsidized the 3D and CPU development, the way it has subsidized all microchip development.

      How about that your CPU addiction isn't pumping filth into the environment that the government has to pay more to clean up after? Oh wait, it is, which is why the government subsidizes the energy efficiency improvements in CPUs, too.

      You should stop playing games all the time and learn about the real world. This isn't Sim City, and libertarian lies about the government aren't real.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    42. Re:Electric Charging Stations by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      FIX

      The documentary [views] like something Alex Jones would produce.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    43. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Actually, the National City Lines conspiracy saw General Motors, Firestone, Standard Oil, and various other corps competing with streetcars and other rail all get together to kill rail in the US. There were other factors, but there was also the conspiracy ensuring it happened.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    44. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      So what's an electric vehicle called? A "sparker"? Will "sparky" be the new "greaser"?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    45. Re:Electric Charging Stations by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      But how can you explain the awful advertisement? Stupidity? Yeah perhaps, but not likely, as it was completely unprecedented. For me the advertisement felt just like 'The Ring'.
      Or GM's refusal to sell the EV-1, even when people insisted on buying it? Or the counter advertisement to the 40000 interested in buying it?
      Or GM buying the rights of a better battery technology just to later sell it to fucking Texaco???? (this one doesn't make sense at all, if you are trying to see from the engineering PoV).

      Or the change of focus from a proven technology (the EV-1 worked, and the people who leased them were pretty satisfied) to the hydrogen fuel cell that isn't even realistic probably for more ten to fifteen years?

      If you (or anyone reading) have the patience to explain to me, I would really appreciate.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    46. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't a conspiracy theorist, that involves creating your own deranged conspiracy theories. If you just believe the ideas of others then you are a run of the mill kook at best, maybe a loon, maybe an idiot.

      You do appear to have anger issues as well, so you may have deeper psychological issues. So sorry.

    47. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A cars cost is in response to its manufacturing cost. So a more expensive car typically took more resources to create (brand names and fashion excluded). EV and hybrids have very expensive batteries that add to the cost. They are expensive because of the amount of energy needed to blow up a mountain and refine out the nickel, lithium, expensivium or whatever is going into the latest batteries. Then the material needs to be refined and constructed into batteries, and these step are often on different continents, so more energy costs there too.

      You may save the fossil fuels over the life of your expensive vehicle, but only because you paid the energy cost upfront (with tax payer support, you may thank me).

    48. Re:Electric Charging Stations by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'd rather walk from the back of the parking lot, too. Plus, my hooptie is less likely to get scratched that way.

      And much more likely to go missing or come up a catalytic converter and air bag or two short. And for women and the elderly, there are other obvious issues too.

    49. Re:Electric Charging Stations by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Generally that's what it means. Although sometimes it does just mean that they are giving a better parking spot to people who drive more efficient vehicles, just like some places will reserve the close parking spots for expecting mothers.

    50. Re:Electric Charging Stations by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Driving an EV does not make you more worthy of a parking spot than anyone else.

      It does if the owner of the business likes the idea of more efficient vehicles, and would like to promote their use by rewarding people who do with closer parking.

    51. Re:Electric Charging Stations by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      There are those who say, he runs the entire world with the end goal of turning it into a giant F1 track and family fun center.

    52. Re:Electric Charging Stations by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      EVs died-off for the same reason passenger rail died-off in the early 1900s

      The oil and car companies bought them and dismantled them?

      The plot of Who Framed Roger Rabbit (minus the toon parts) isn't far off. The car companies bought the public transit trains in LA to dismantle them.

    53. Re:Electric Charging Stations by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      And how the fuck is the store going to police their parking? Do you honestly think most stores are going to be willing to piss off customers by fining them or having their cars towed?

    54. Re:Electric Charging Stations by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No, they have no manners whatsoever. If they don't agree with it, that's fine, but you don't get to take up the spot. I don't agree with special spaces for new parents either. Doesn't mean I should be able to take those spots.

    55. Re:Electric Charging Stations by CrAlt · · Score: 1

      How so?

      He is using a 2nd hand car and repairing it with recycled parts from the junkyard. When he sells the old parts for scrap they are getting melted down and reused rather then ending up in a landfill.

      Also his feather weight car gets better MPG's (mostly at the expense of safety lol) then just about any non-hybrid made today.

      Going out and buying a new "better" car might be less work but its definitely not more environmentally responsible.

      --
      I have to return some videotapes...
    56. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Of course, the gasoline and the car that burns it are also taxpayer subsidized. But why not thank each other here? We're the only ones who will.

      The cost of the car is based on its cost to manufacture, but there's a lot more to it. Yes batteries are expensive. But the R&D is more expensive per car until quite a bit into the future from now. They're charging what the market will pay, which is the main control of pricing.

      Let's say a plugin car costs $37,000 instead of $20,000 for the gasoline version; $17,000 more. Let's say The gasoline car gets 25MPG (a high average), on $3.50 gas gallons; that's $0.14:mi. The plugin gets 5 miles per KWh, on $0.115 KWh'es; that's $0.023:mi. So the plugin saves $0.108 per mile. After 145,300 miles you're saving money on gas.

      The typical car is driven about 15,000 miles a year. So that's just about a 10 year payback.

      Now, people do finance these cars. A $17,000 loan at 5% for 10 years pays $4637.37 in interest; about another $0.032 per mile. But an additional $0.798 per gallon on the 5812 gallons the gas car would consume for those miles would equal that. I think that $3.50 gas is likely to cost more than $5.10:gal, and increase at least steadily to that amount, in 10 years. In fact I think gas will increase faster than that rate plus the increase in the electric rates. So getting a car loan for the extra plugin expense makes the payback period shorter. And if the plugin lasts longer than 10 years, those $5.10 gallons will mean the savings will make the next years a lot more beneficial by comparison.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    57. Re:Electric Charging Stations by CaptSlaq · · Score: 1

      Stig for president!

    58. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had it with you two! You go to your rooms and wait until your Father gets home, now SHOO!

    59. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Hodr · · Score: 1

      Spoken like someone who has never owned one. Aside from the '95 and '96 models, they are some of the most reliable cars on the road today.

      My whole family drives them, for the same reasons that the OP stated.

      My current neon is a 2003, has 206k miles and has never needed a single repair. I did the preventative maintenance (timing belt at 115k, oil changes, etc).

      My previous neon was a 97, which I put 190k miles on and the only issue it ever had was a bad fuel pump, which took me an hour to fix.

    60. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Roblimo · · Score: 1

      Good question, although I'd be leery about driving or riding in a car called "old sparky." Or maybe even just "sparky." Here's why: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_sparky

    61. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I was thinking about old radio operators called "Sparky". I guess I'll have to wait for wireless electric cars.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    62. Re:Electric Charging Stations by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Lack of customer interest. They chose other products they liked better.

      1) You couldn't buy them, you could only lease them. I have no "interest" in leasing a car, so I guess technically you are right. However, I did have a lot of interest in the capabilities of the EV1 at the time.

      2) GM stopped leasing them to the customers who WANTED TO KEEP LEASING THEM, AND CRUSHED THEM.

      How is that not customer interest?

      (BTW, I do drive a gas powered car now.. But hopefully the next car I get will be an electric car, and will be at worst a Prius. I almost guarantee I won't buy a GM car _because_ they had a viable electric car 15 years ago, and took my tax money in a bailout. If they put out a BETTER and CHEAPER car than the competition, then I will reconsider.)

    63. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple solution from Germany:
      1. Remove all speed limits.
      2. Make the driving test much harder.
      3. Publicly announce this.
      4. Let natural selection take its course, sparing those who were smart enough to realize that this will mean chaos and lots of deaths, and take away those too dumb to live.
      5. PROFIT!

      Yes, that is the official 4th step that was missing in all those business plans posted all the time here.

    64. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Roblimo · · Score: 1

      Old radio operators were called Sparks, not Sparky. Typical nickname for a ship's radio operator.

    65. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You meant in the US and other Big Oil dominated countries, right?

      He probably did, but you can't overlook the time he mentioned as well. I don't know who backed light rail in Europe. I'd be interested to know and now that I'm writing this comment I think I'll go look into it later. In the US, light rail was often backed by land developers and power companies. Light rail is one of the things that facilitated power lines spreading out from city centers into suburban areas in the US.

      London is often different (due to its size), but the story is similar: Underground lines was extended (heavy rail, but YGTI), houses built, and the clear air, trees and quick link to the city encouraged people to live in the new suburb. I live in one of these areas. See Metro-land for some information, and any of the articles on the older London Underground lines (those built by private companies). The difference is possibly that the railways were all nationalised in the 1930s.

      However, trams in most parts of the UK (including London) didn't survive, being replaced by buses. I think Blackpool is the only British town with an original tram system, all the other ones are less than 20 years old.

    66. Re:Electric Charging Stations by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Perhaps those are quick chargers?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    67. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Wow, remote executions at sea. Sounds like an Italian vacation!

      In the future electric boats are going to have to be wireless, too, or their extension cords are going to have to multiplex a lot of tin cans.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    68. Re:Electric Charging Stations by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Well, not quite. I was thinking more along the lines of what it took to get 220v 3ph run out to my detached garage. Starting from the garage and working back to the power drop, every dammed step seemed to incur extra expense (bringing stuff up to code, etc...). And you don't seem to understand that these are outdoor installations, not indoors, which incur extra expenses all on their own.

    69. Re:Electric Charging Stations by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      If you have ever lived with a pregnant woman you would understand. They are mean, bitchy and have more sore things than you can imagine. Those spots are also there so if you have to run in with a little baby that is just a few days old say in the middle of winter you don't get the baby sick. Plus mom is really sore after she had that baby. And they never trump the handicap spots.

    70. Re:Electric Charging Stations by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      According to U.S. law, if GM had sold the EV1 they would be obligated to provide service/parts for the next 25 years (2001 through 2025). GM made a decision that it didn't want that expense, and it would be cheaper to discontinue the car and terminate all future costs. As an accountant I probably would have made the same decision (to save the company money).

      GM selling battery rights is not as dumb as you think. That tech was based upon NiCad which is now obsolete. So GM made money and Texaco got stuck with useless patents.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    71. Re:Electric Charging Stations by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Either way, I don't see why that's any different than the store reserving some spots for those who drive more efficient vehicles. I didn't knock the lady up, so why should I have to pay for her to get preferential treatment?

    72. Re:Electric Charging Stations by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Junkyards don't landfill metal, they... melt it down.

    73. Re:Electric Charging Stations by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Now which is more environmentally responsible my neon or a super expensive EV that most people can not afford.
      The inexpensive EV that will be easy to work on and have part easily available.

      1895 -- why would i buy an automobile when my horse...
      2015 -- why would i buy an electic automobile when...

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    74. Re:Electric Charging Stations by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Passanger rail died because we built Interstate hi-ways and the price of automobiles vs. income made having a car affordable for most everyone. Cheap AV's will probably bring rail travel back. If so, high speed rail might become the next necessity.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  3. *Not* made in the USA by tgd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Final assemby is in the USA. Most of the chassis is made in China, and the rest of the parts are sourced from various places around the world.

    Unlike, say, a Hyundai which is almost entirely made in the US.

    1. Re:*Not* made in the USA by lfp98 · · Score: 1

      The batteries, probably ~half the cost, are also from China. They say then intend to eventually make them in Ohio.

  4. 6.6 kW/240VAC input by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And if you buy one you are going to need to hire an electrician. And if you rent or live in a condo/apartment try finding a 240v plug in the parkade. Or a landlord that will let you install one. And power in 15c a kW/h plus transmission charges 33c per kW/h.

    1. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Odd, why didn't they add an option to charge from a standard 120V socket? At whatever the power rate is in the US for standard sockets (over here it's 3.6kW), charging would be slower but it's better than nothing.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not even close to being true. The average cost in America for electricity is around .11/kwh. The transmission costs, are rarely variable, but fixed. That way, it can be broken out. OTH, when the transmission costs are variable, they are rolled into the costs. And transmission costs are less than .02/kwh. In addition, a number of electric companies give price breaks for charging in the middle of the night.

      Even with that, .33 KWH is still less than $3/gal gas. And I doubt that we will see 3/gal gas.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      And if you buy one you are going to need to hire an electrician. And if you rent or live in a condo/apartment try finding a 240v plug in the parkade. Or a landlord that will let you install one. And power in 15c a kW/h plus transmission charges 33c per kW/h.

      33c per kwh? wat? Is that canadian dollars? "expensive" in the US is 14c.

      (yes i know that the exch. rate has been even for some time)

    4. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are getting ripped off on electricity. I pay about 15c a kWh and that is the power plus transmission charges. You are paying 3 times as much.

    5. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      They do have a 110 charger as a backup so I imagine it would be slower.

    6. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      $255 for 780 kW/h on my last bill and the next bill is supposed the be an extra 2c per kW/h.

    7. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And power in 15c a kW/h plus transmission charges 33c per kW/h.

      15 cents is kind of high. 33 cents is rape. Where the hell do you live?

      I'm paying 8.8 cents per kW/h, total (that is including transmission charges). I could have paid 12 cents, and then they would have told me it all comes from wind power, but I'm too poor for that. Granted, I live in Houston Texas, and energy is a little cheap here, but the most you can pay locally is 14 cents. If I lived a bit south of here (Corpus Cristi), I would be paying closer to 6 cents kW/h.

    8. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US the standard outlet has 1.875 kW available, and that's pushing the breaker JUST to the tripping point. On most items drawing that much power, the plug end heats up too... :( Since you are permitted up to ~12 duplex outlets on one of those breakers, you had better hope you chose a circuit with nothing else plugged in, and that nobody else in the parkade within 20 spaces of you has an electric car.

      So, that's 3.52 times slower. I believe the Tesla takes a full day to charge from flat from a standard US outlet.

    9. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      $255 for 780 kW/h on my last bill and the next bill is supposed the be an extra 2c per kW/h.

      zomg where do you live, the north pole? ~600kw/h is my monthly average and that runs me about $70 USD.

    10. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 2

      Alberta and there is rumour our power could double to triple in the next two years. Our power companies are trying to export to the US and build the infrastructure off our wallets. It has gotten steadily worse since the Conservative party deregulated power saying it would get cheaper. I personally want to move to a different province but the wife says no.

    11. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1, Interesting

      >Even with that, .33 KWH is still less than $3/gal gas. And I doubt that we will see 3/gal gas.

      no it's not. MotorWeek tested the Nissan leaf vs Chevy Volt, with $3.25 gasoline according to the Volts's computer it produced electricity at $.10/kwHr. My work is Diesiel generator only, they are averaging (with a widely varying load) $.22/kwHr from $3.50 diesel, so I doubt the Leafs computer, but it is within belief.
      Also If you look at Tesla's numbers, they claim 120MPG equivalent of $3 gasoline using $.05 / kwhr, take that to $.33 you have 20mpg equivalent.

    12. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Judging from the weather report and his post history, I'd guess around the Alberta-NWT border.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    13. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by hitmark · · Score: 0

      Gotta love how in US, 240v is something special...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    14. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Marcika · · Score: 1

      Your leaf computer is lying to you. There are 36.6kWh of heat in a gallon of gasoline, the computer claims to have converted 32.5 of those into electricity. This means a combustion efficiency of almost 90%. Theoretical limit for a single-stage car engine is 37% afaik, and on average even the best cars don't get more than 20%-30%...

    15. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      what gasoline are you using? gasoline has 33.41 kWh/Gal so it is only claiming a 30% conversion ratio, very possible.

    16. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      sorry, your number is correct, I didn't calculate for $3 per gallon so it should be around that $.25kwhr electric rate to generate from a $3 gallon of gas (which is about the current price if you take out the road tax that should be charged equally to electric from the pump price.)

    17. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      There's gotta be something you're not telling us here. Looking up residential electric rates for Alberta and I found numbers in the 11-13 cents/kWh range. Understandable that they probably add surcharges and other bullshit, but I can't see all that being twice as much as the rate itself.

      Could you perhaps break down that bill a bit further?
      =Smidge=

    18. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Informative

      All a 240V plug is, is two 120V plugs that share a ground, on two separate circuits from the panel. Adapters that combine them at the outlets cost $50 each retail or less. An electrician will charge something like $100 to run a new pair of 120V circuits from your panel if necessary. At 6.6KW, 240V means 27.5A, so each 120V line needs only 30A. Which means the whole thing is exactly like installing an electric oven, which is a pretty common little project.

      Once there's more than one or two plugin cars in a parking lot the owners will install the 240V outlets. Because they'll attach a meter that charges more than they pay the grid. A grid that doesn't charge $0.33:KWh; the NYC Con Ed rate is highest in the country at $0.21:KWh. And that's if you don't have Time Of Use (TOU) rates, which charge under $0.15:KWh at night and through the Winter, which is when you'd charge your car at home.

      So in fact the economics of plugin cars makes a lot of sense. Which is why many thousands have already been sold. Of course as that number turns to millions the grid needs upgrades for the switch in power distribution from gas to electric, even though at greater efficiency (fewer source joules per mile travelled). But that problem isn't here yet, and the solutions are already in the works (including decentralized generation, like onsite where the charging happens).

      I don't know where you're getting your numbers from. Is there some oil corp chain email going around?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    19. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Your Alberta oil corps are making electricity far more expensive so it doesn't compete with their gas and diesel products.

      If you keep living under the tyranny of these oil corps everything is going to suck. That's no yardstick for anywhere else, except other oil tyrannies.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    20. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2

      Gotta love how in the EU, 120V is something special.

      What are you talking about?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    21. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Volt or other plugin hybrid. Not a Leaf - electric and batteries only no generator.

    22. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      All a 240V plug is, is two 120V plugs that share a ground, on two separate circuits from the panel.
      Can't be just any old separate circuit. It has to be one that is from the other branch of your incoming 240V.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    23. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      Yay, you've just proven that they're not for everyone. Which is what the entire industry has been saying since the fucking beginning.

    24. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      It has gotten steadily worse since the Conservative party deregulated power saying it would get cheaper.

      You know what really pisses me off about this? In the history of humans providing electricity, politicians always say this. And in the history of humans providing electricity and politicians saying deregulated power would be cheaper, while regulated power would make the Baby Jesus cry, IT HAS NEVER, EVER HAPPENED.

      On average, power costs always go up. The only real exceptions are the power utilities that are owned by the local government. Like the LA Dept. of Water & Power.

    25. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 1

      Here in Ontario and based on a mid-use rate (electric heated floor in the kitchen) my all-in rate including taxes was 14.9 cents/kWh.

      PV is going in around $3.50 if you don't count metering (net meter as opposed to FIT). Over 25 years you'll get 31000 watt hours for $3500, which comes in at around 12.5 cents/kWh not accounting for cost-of-money.

      So I find it difficult to believe rates would ever triple.

    26. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      True, but that's trivial if you're running a new circuit or two, which is cheap anyway. Though the combining adapter approach isn't trivial if the other incoming leg isn't within reach.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    27. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      Edmonton area.

    28. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      Direct Energy regulated Services is the only company that provides electricity where I live (rural). Last month I paid $120.93 for power, $106.22 for distribution that totals $225.05 for 780 kW/h.

    29. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      We in Montreal Quebec are lucky with our electric costs. Our Hydro company has a deal with any home owner that implements dual energy heating. When the weather drops to around 0F or -12C, the non electric heating is supposed to kick in, relieving the demand from the grid. At that low temperature, electricity is at 12 cents per kwh. Above the -12C, electricity is at 4cents.

      My own home is single electric energy, (no other furnace but electric heating). My costs are 7cents per kwh.

      I guess I pay more, but it is very clean, efficient, and quiet. So at 21cents, New Yorkers are being ripped off.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    30. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      Then you are hardly representative of the average electric car customer, who is a suburban commuter and pays 11-16 cents per kW/h.

    31. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      My commute to the shop is 5 3/4 miles takes 6-7 minutes mostly hi-way. When I worked in the suburbs it took an hour to drive 10 miles, on a good day.

    32. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2

      That sounds so good that we're building the Champlain Hudson Power Express HVDC line from you to us. So you can rip us off too :). Though by adding our demand to your local supply, I wouldn't be surprised if your prices go up. Welcome to New York!

      With any luck this 1GW line will help replace the insane Indian Point 2GW nuke plant in NYC's backyard. Thanks, friendly neighbors to the North!

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    33. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      The ripoff as you call it is done by your own companies. Canada sells its energy at wholesale, probably around 2 cents per kw hour, and that fee includes the infrastructure, salaries and the attributable expenses. The other 19 cents are charges from your companies, and from Senior management with million dollar salaries and tens of millions of dollars of bonuses.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    34. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Here in Oregon I pay 6.5cents/Kwh right now, and that is with the winter surcharge.

    35. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Yeah, 14c would over double my rate! (6.5c) And this is the expensive part of the year, in the summer it is cheaper.

    36. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      The only real exceptions are the power utilities that are owned by the local government. Like the LA Dept. of Water & Power.

      Or like in the case of my provider, EWEB, where the utility is a separate governmental agency approximately equal to the City, and with direct elections for its board. It is great, we can elect engineers to most of the board, even though they would never be willing to be a normal sort of politician dealing with all the city business. And since they are directly responsible to the voters, and they have no other political issues to mix in, they have no reason to engage in any shenanigans. They keep the rates low, and set the service level at what we want to pay for.

      It makes me love elected commissions, where you vote on somebody to head a certain part of government instead of electing executives and councils that cover every issue.

    37. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      There is an easier way to equate. The model S is going to do about 160 miles on a charge with the 40 KWH pack. That means that it is getting about 4 miles / KWH. At .11/ KWH, that means that it will costs $1.1 to run 40 miles. Well, a car that get 40 mpg will cost 1 gal of gas, or between $3-4 in the USA.

      Now, in light of Iran and the threats, do you think that prices are going to go or down? My guess is that by 1.5 years, the price for gas will be closer to $5/gal. And yet, the price for electricity will have gone up what, .02/KWH?

      The fact is, that electrical cars make a lot of sense esp. for EU, and the coastal USA, as well as any cities in America. Most American familes own 2 cars. It makes good sense to buy electric when you go to buy a new one, but hang on to a gas burner for the other one.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    38. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by doccus · · Score: 2

      You doubt you will see 3$ a gallon gas? we pay 7$ a gallon in Canada..and electric vehicles are so legally bogged down in power and speed restrictions that make them almost useless.. I don't want to get int o all of it, but an electric bike, for instance, cannot have more than 500 watts power, or a top speed of 20 miles an hour.. I asked if I could increase the power to the 750 watts allowed minimum in the rest of the world.. I was told not without licencing and insuring the bike.. and i was told I couldn't insure or licence an electric bike.. Electric cars (as low speed vehicles)aren't allowed to have enough power to go on the highway.. So we pay 7$ a gallon to drive gas powered vehicles..After all, we supply the gas to a third of the world, so naturally, we pay more than they do for our gas (HUH?)

    39. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      for me, no it makes no sense to consider a closed electric car platform like any of the commercial electric cars. Although I have worked on hybrid electric vehicles for the last 15 years I couldn't replace the battery in one of these, if a new battery tech comes GM/Tesla/Nissan are not likely to give the support on the existing, risk of fires... unless thoroughly tested... they will put all effort into new cars mostly (and if tesla disappears, good luck getting the ability to tweak their system for different charge/discharge characteristics of new batteries.) Also I drive 9000 miles a year, 300 gallons of fuel a year, even at $5 a gallon the $1500/ year and my electric cost of $.15/kwhr (since I will not be driving the under 55 MPH that tesla adverts that range for) wouldn't cut that price more than in half, so would likely take 15 years to pay off the $10k+ premium these cars cost. Not to mention living in the south, the range wouldn't work at all, for me personally.
      Also since my dad owns a corn farm, I know how to procure, and produce my own E85 (that I can burn now) cheaper than that $5 if it happens to go higher. (3 acres of corn, every other year, yeast, a heat source is all thats needed) So for me personally it would have to be a open platform to consider a electric, solar needs to be affordable to charge without that expensive undersized grid we have, and gasoline has to more than double in price. All will happen some day. But for now that's just too far out to do little more than drool over.
      But sure if I could stand being a city rat, and didn't have the fear of spending $35k on something that will likely be so obsolete as to be a throw away in 10 years, nah.

    40. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Interesting. So, why do you buy a gas car? They have engines that are actually more closed then electric cars. With an electric car like Tesla (who will be around for at least 30 or more years), you can replace the motor, the electronics, or the batteries. In fact, UQM is looking at upgrading the motor in the Model S to give it better performance. Of course, it will cost you, but it is STILL cheaper than an engine for a comparable gas car. Heck, you can even manufacture your OWN motor. Not that hard. Electronics are all over the place. And part of the reason why I have suggested to several of my friends to NOT buy the future batteries with tesla, is because battery prices are dropping quickly, AND new tech is coming. In 10 years, the tech will likely include Lithium-air.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    41. Re:6.6 kW/240VAC input by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      currently I am taking a LS1 engine from a wrecked 2001 truck and putting it in a 1970 truck, their are plenty of open source projects allowing me to replace the timing/injector controller on the engine, and I only do manual transmissions, so it is fairly simple to replace one component and update whatever you want with gasoline motors. If this was a DC drive vehicle, you would be correct, you could do the updates you suggest, it is not, you will not be successful. It is possible to measure all the characteristics of the Tesla motors, and build a new design for it, and only for it. You will not be able to buy a battery that will work in the Tesla and the Volt, or even adapt one from the other without software changes, or replacing the entire control system. If your friends buying a Tesla, and you trust them to be a viable company in 5 years, they better buy that battery update, because their is no chance of having a better cheaper battery than the deal Tesla offers at purchase. Unless you are in the industry, and have a insider connection, their is 0 chance that even if their is a breakthrough in 5 years in batteries, that you as a consumer would be able to buy a pack, except through purchasing a entire new car, within 5 years of it being "discovered."

  5. Final Assembly in USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I asked where they are "made" and the gentleman at the booth said "final assembly in California". I'm not sure what the domestic content is. Anyone know?

    1. Re:Final Assembly in USA by slack_justyb · · Score: 3, Informative

      Smyrna, TN
      That's the town right next to where I live. They've had billboards up in the area talking about how the Leaf is coming to Smyrna and how awesome it's going to be to live in the same area as they are made in. However, as someone pointed out. Pretty much the only thing they will do there is put the pieces together. All the parts will be sourced from elsewhere.

      Total impact? Well they aren't opening a new wing (you can tell when they are doing that because Nissan Blvd and Enon Springs road becomes a nightmare with all the heavy construction. Traffic usually backs up onto US 41/70S (aka Murfreesboro Road). So no one new is getting hired at the plant. Instead I think they are phasing out some sort of truck they use to make. So no new construction, no new hire, pretty much the Nissan Leaf has brought zero new jobs... Oh I take that back! CSX hired sixty some odd workers for about nine months to expand the capacity of the rail yard at the Nissan plant.

      However, aside from the job issue. The local malls (Stones River, The Avenue, etc...) have added EV charge stations to welcome our new Leaf overlords. So I'm guessing that's good that we are suddenly going from zero EV charging stations to now twenty-six, three packs, and counting.

      However I will say that Nissan is doing something with their site in the back. You can see that they are leveling the ground from Florence Rd but there has yet to be any structures added. So more likely we'll be seeing little white canopies going up soon or we'll see the start of, hopefully, a new building.

    2. Re:Final Assembly in USA by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Other than the motor, which is from UQM in Colorado, EVERYTHING from it is Chinese. The Chinese are watching to see if CODA can sell. If so, they are going to simply rip it off, produce it by multiple companies there, and then dump here to destroy CODA.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Final Assembly in USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HA! Lemme guess, you live in La Vergne or Murfreesboro, or possible Lebanon?

      I used to live in smyrna back in 1993. I actually only started liking nissan again. Their shit they pulled politically out there pissed me off.

      then I realized all big companies do that.

      I moved back to california though in the end.

    4. Re:Final Assembly in USA by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      I was under the understanding that they would be manufacturing battery packs in Smyrna as well, with the electric motors being made in Decherd.

      =Smidge=

    5. Re:Final Assembly in USA by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      I was under the understanding that they would be manufacturing battery packs in Smyrna as well, with the electric motors being made in Decherd.

      I have some friends out in Winchester and they know some people who work inside the powertrian plant there in Decherd. I'll ask them. I've not heard that, but makes sense since they railroad the stuff from there to Smyrna. I'll have to get back with you on that. Of course, you'll have to remember that anything about Decherd that I would have, would be like third hand information so take it with a grain of salt.

      There has been talk about moving the battery packs to Smyrna, but I believe the ones that are going in now are not made there. I don't know exactly how concrete the plans are for the battery packs. That might actually create some jobs, but I don't know where they would be doing this. Everyone I've talked to that works at the Smyrna plant say that they would need some add-on to be built to have the room to do something like that. However, I can confirm that I *have* heard talk about the battery packs being assembled there.

      I don't work there personally but I have a couple of friends that work there and I've done some network contract work there back in 2001. So again, don't cite me as some universal source.

    6. Re:Final Assembly in USA by Spoke · · Score: 1

      You are correct. Nissan got a DOE grant to build a large battery manufacturing plant there in Tennessee. The 2013 LEAF will be produced there and will have a very high domestic content label. Probably not as good as the Camry which has had the highest domestic content for a number of years. But it will be a lot better than the basically 100% foreign LEAF now. It will probably be better than the Chevy Volt which gets it's batteries from Korea.

      I'd wager that the LEAF will be the most "American" EV on the market for model year 2013 unless a domestic manufacturer builds an EV using A123 batteries (GM may be closest to doing this, I think).

    7. Re:Final Assembly in USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nissan's press releases say they will be producing the batteries in Smyrna, TN. It's all about weight and international shipping. The batteries will be lithium ion based ( I think Mg also ) but in any case that should be a major component.

      Of course it would be great if like Tesla it was all being created over here.... Let me know when you convince a major automaker to make an all electric all here. In the meantime I'd say that batteries is a decent start.

  6. Coda video by susanai · · Score: 1

    Why is "content unavailable" posted over video?

    --
    susanai
    1. Re:Coda video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why is "content unavailable" posted over video?

      DMCA takedown notice from Nissan.

  7. But why? by Theophany · · Score: 0

    $37k for a car that can travel *up to* 150 miles on a full charge? My diesel fiat cost less than half that, can go *up to* 400 miles on a tank of the dirty stuff and when I put my foot down it goes like a scalded cat (gotta love turbos). Still not seeing the market viability for full electric cars amongst the real road warriors (30k+ miles p.a.) who, let's face it, are the group of drivers that pollute most.

    I'll be ready to listen to a coherent argument for electric cars when they cease to be the vanity articles of the rich doing >1,000 miles p.a.

    1. Re:But why? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      $37k for a car that can travel *up to* 150 miles on a full charge? My diesel fiat cost less than half that, can go *up to* 400 miles on a tank of the dirty stuff and when I put my foot down it goes like a scalded cat (gotta love turbos).

      150 miles means that most commuters never need to charge it anywhere except at home. They just park it in the charging spot each night and it's ready to go in the morning. No more visits to petrol stations to fill up the car, except when you're making a long trip.

      Still not seeing the market viability for full electric cars amongst the real road warriors (30k+ miles p.a.) who, let's face it, are the group of drivers that pollute most.

      Per capita? Sure. In total? I doubt it. The people doing their daily 30 mile commute each way outnumber the road warriors by a huge amount. Get them all into electric cars, and you can easily switch the energy source to nuclear, solar, or whatever.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:But why? by Theophany · · Score: 0

      Per capita? Sure. In total? I doubt it. The people doing their daily 30 mile commute each way outnumber the road warriors by a huge amount. Get them all into electric cars, and you can easily switch the energy source to nuclear, solar, or whatever.

      But just how many sources of electricity for these cars is renewable/clean/carbon neutral/whatever? Because if you're still burning coal to generate the electricity required to get the car moving then the whole exercise is both expensive and pointless. Maybe speaking as a Brit my vision is skewed; it's not sunny enough to generate any meaningful amounts of solar power, the old guard still think nuclear power will result in Chernobyl II, we can't build wind turbines because there's not enough space available and tidal power arrays are deemed to interfere with precious nature.

    3. Re:But why? by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      While you make a good point that you will get the most benefit from people who drive the most using an EV, there's also the reality that we need to start *somewhere*, and if you're ever going to hope to be able to get to the point of helping the heaviest users, you might just have to start with helping lower-mileage drivers first to develop the technology further.

    4. Re:But why? by w_dragon · · Score: 1

      If you're in Britain then wikipedia tells me that oil/coal makes up about 75% of your electricity, so it's not 100% by any means. The other thing is that a power plant has no weight limitations, can capture emissions, and will generally be better maintained than your average car. The efficiency gains on the generating end alone make it worth it to switch to electric.

    5. Re:But why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the 5th fleet doesn't have to spend billions of dollars (and burn millions of gallons of fuel) to keep coal flowing through the straits of Hormuz

    6. Re:But why? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No. Stop being an idiot. The vast majority of people don't need to go more than 40 miles in a single day, let alone 150. As a daily commuter car, it's just fine.

      You're bitching about something that is hardly used at all, and most people who would be buying these cars have a second car available should they need range.

    7. Re:But why? by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      But just how many sources of electricity for these cars is renewable/clean/carbon neutral/whatever?

      Doesn't matter. Because the great thing about our grid is that it can easily adapt to new power sources being hooked up into it.

    8. Re:But why? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Because if you're still burning coal to generate the electricity required to get the car moving then the whole exercise is both expensive and pointless.

      Not pointless at all. Large, stationary fossil fuel power plants are much better than tiny, mobile fossil fuel power plants. They are significantly more efficient, and much easier to apply large environmental controls to since unlike a car they don't automatically pay an efficiency penalty for every added pollution control due to having to cart around the extra mass for it.

      Coal electric power is not ideal, but it's better than millions of tiny gasoline engines. And that's today. In the future, if more renewable or cleaner power sources come online, then your electrical vehicle benefits automagically without having to pay the price of revamping the entire vehicle fleet.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    9. Re:But why? by Theophany · · Score: 0

      What's with /.'ers claiming anybody who disagrees with them is an idiot? Some kind of superiority complex?

      So you're argument is drop $37k on this overpirced Scalextric and have a second car for when it doesn't do what you want it to. Alternatively, spend $20k on a car and it does everything you need it to.

      No, you're right. I'm an idiot. Just like the 99% of the developed world not buying into this expensive beta phase.

    10. Re:But why? by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Switching an ICE automobile's fuel requires replacing parts. This makes changing from one alternative fuel to another a difficult task. Using an alternative fuel to generate electricity for electric cars is just plain smart. ie. Fuel technology advances don't require hugh changes to social behavior.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  8. Almost Perfect by DallasMay · · Score: 1

    Besides the high "early adopter" price, this car is missing one serious feature that makes EVs truly preactical cars -Level III fast charging. The Leaf and the i both have it standard, and it really should be standard on an EV. I would say that even if it raised the price of the vehicle an extra $3000, it should be standard. Add a fast charger and this guy is the perfect EV.

    --
    I've given up on Slashdot's comment scores.
    1. Re:Almost Perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw it at the NAIAS, and they just need to work on making the exterior more like the EV1 instead of a Honda Accord from 1990. They could use fiberglass panels or carbon fiber to make it lighter weight.

      The technology is there, and the interior works, but the exterior just needs to be a little more sports car to get better range. They do have some steep competition at that price from the Volt, Leaf, and plug-in Prius.

  9. Business Case Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's compare. At 15 MPG for my 30 mile commute, that $14/day in gas. At 48 work weeks a year, that's $1680 a year in gasoline for my beat up, unstoppable pickup. Back of the envelope math says about $650/mo in payments for the $37K car at 2%. 20 years to pay off if electricity is free? Yes, I'm using 30 years of data that shows that the price of gasoline is pretty constant, but also ignoring the whole PG&E assraping. There's a reason that the average age of a vehicle on the road is growing. That beat up old pickup, at $75/fillup is making me rich.

    1. Re:Business Case Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't forget that the electric car can't do much other than be a metro runabout.

      Your truck will go places (not even gnarly off-road terrain, think plain old rutted roads) that will have the small, high MPG vehicle's axles for lunch and the oil pan for dessert.

      I fear that you have too much sense. There is a push to force people to buy high MPG cars... but I'd rather keep a paid off pickup and pay the higher gas cost than have to deal with a $600+ car payment. MPG-wise, but pound foolish. Plus, it takes a lot of energy to make a car, far more than the difference in MPG between a truck and a new subcompact.

    2. Re:Business Case Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget PG&E has this great deal with Solaren to get electricity beamed down from orbiting solar panel arrays. How's that coming along? Oh yeah.... It's a scam.

    3. Re:Business Case Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why didn't you include the monthly payments of an unstoppable pick-up for your side-by-side comparison?

    4. Re:Business Case Analysis by s73v3r · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that the electric car can't do much other than be a metro runabout.

      Which is good enough for the vast majority of people.

      I fear that you have too much sense.

      I fear you're an idiot.

    5. Re:Business Case Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because he already has it, and it is paid off. The point was that it makes more sense to keep an existing vehicle than to get a new one.

    6. Re:Business Case Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, $14/day. 5 days a week, 48 working weeks in the year comes to (14×5×48) $3360. 15mpg!!!!, a modern diesel sedan can easily get 50 mpg.

    7. Re:Business Case Analysis by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      Because he already has it, and it is paid off. The point was that it makes more sense to keep an existing vehicle than to get a new one.

      Well no shit. Who's been saying otherwise?

      If, on the other hand, you're getting a new vehicle anyway...
      =Smidge=

    8. Re:Business Case Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes... The bait has been taken and the fish hooked. But instead of a fish, we caught the equivalent of an old boot. We just got yet another /. poseur, douchebag who demands everyone runs their way and drives a vehicle that suits them (as opposed to other people's needs). Define "vast majority of people". Please. I can happily pull up stats in most of the country that the range of this electric vehicle and the lack of charging stations makes them useless. Of course, if you live in Paris or London, you don't need a vehicle.

      You know what. I'm sure the grandparent poster can use a Prius or an electric car. How about you (the parent) buy him one, since you seem to be so concerned about ragging on some guy with a working, well maintained vehicle on the roads. Don't have the money for a Prius? $12,000 will buy the GP a SMART car to replace his pickup truck. Seems like you are so concerned about it, might as well actively do something.

      We need a better term than douchebag for these types. At least a real douchebag has seen or will see the inside of a vagina.

      Oh well, please continue your snide comments about cars and people's choices. We on /. are all elated to read self-righteous bloviations. It doesn't take up much space on /.'s servers -- they have deduplication functionality, so the comments on "ride a bike, dumbass" or "get a Prius" just generate pointers to one single post.

    9. Re:Business Case Analysis by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      Oh fuck you. Just because you had your ass handed to you in your false assertions does NOT mean that anyone is trying to force anyone to "conform". The vast majority of people have a commute that is well within the range of these cars.

      And nowhere did I make comments on his vehicle of choice. I merely pointed out the flaw in his thinking, that most people couldn't get use out of these cars. It's absolutely false.

  10. NOT MADE IN THE USA by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Informative

    The car is made in China. All that CODA does is install a UQM motor (American made with Chinese parts), Chinese made electronics and a chinese made battery.
    This car is 99% Chinese.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So you mean, it's just like Apple was with the Macintosh? II series anyway... Boards made by Foxconn, plastics made in China, shipped here and assembled in Sacramento by minimum wage fanboys who were nonetheless happy to claim they "worked for apple"

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Just like every GM car made.

      You want american made? Buy Toyota or Honda.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, few of Toyota or Honda are even close to 100% made here. That is why when Japan was hit by the tsunami, All Japanese plants outside of Japan came to a crawl. Probably the most American made is Tesla Model S. Other than the lithium and some of the electronics, allmost all of it is from America. And the Lithium is about to be from USA as well within 2 years.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    4. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't worry as much about American Assembled as I do about American Designed, I personally want to make sure we keep engineering jobs around because any trained monkey can work on an assembly line, regardless of what language they speak.

    5. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      That's not true. For one thing, "made in America" includes Canada and Mexico which puts most U.S. models ahead of Toyota and Honda. If you limit the definition of "made in America" to U.S.-only and consider the entire fleet that a company sells here, the U.S. brands still come out ahead.

      People should buy whatever suits them but they shouldn't pretend to be patriotic when they're driving Japanese cars on American roads.

    6. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by Lumpy · · Score: 1
      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    7. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      I have to disagree. The most popular models sold here are built and assembled here, with the exception of the electrical components. Computers etc... are made in China for almost every car manufacturer. The less popular selling models are complete imports.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    8. Re:NOT MADE IN THE USA by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Let me translate this. Fuck the working class, not me. How very 80's of you.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  11. Standard arguments by vlm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well lets get the standard arguments out of the way so newer, more interesting discussions can happen

    1) It ONLY GOES 150 MILES? I always drive 151 miles per trip, even if its only to the corner store I drive around the block 604 times because I love to drive! Why my commute is over 5 hours per day, each way, because I'm a True American (TM) and you "30 minute commute" people are wimps, democrats, terrorists, or whatever..

    2) If it can't charge in 5 minutes its dead to me. I only sleep in 3 hour shifts before moving to a new location because the T9000 is after me, so it would never get a chance to charge and I only travel to and from places that have no AC power service because otherwise my tinfoil hat sparks excessively.

    3) One model vehicle cannot meet the needs of all buyers, therefore all electric vehicles are useless, because one model of gasoline car meets all human needs. What you say, there are more than one model of gas vehicle? Oh.

    4) It doesn't work too well below -40 degrees C/F so I can't buy it. Sure, I live in southern Florida, but I'm worried about resale value. Oh you say my gas vehicle doesn't work too well at -40 either? So what, everyone knows that, I just felt the need to point this out about electrical cars, because I'm sure none of you lowly serfs would think of that yourselves.

    5) My gas car's SLI battery was carefully engineered to fail in 3 years to maximize corporate profits, and surprise, surprise, it fails every 3 years. I'm sure an electric car will fail in 3 years too, and I don't care if the average Prius battery was engineered to last the life of the car, and in fact it does last the life of the car, you can't force me to think so I won't. Nahh naahhh nahhhhhh! I don't believe in engineering and you shouldn't either.

    6) I will not be satisfied until an automated robot tentacle snakes out of the wall and plugs itself into the charger socket, mostly because I want to watch youtube videos of what the tentacle inserts in women wearing miniskirts. I don't care if everyone north of the mason dixon line already has a block heater and battery heater and battery trickle charger and they perfectly successfully use it every time it gets below zero, because I'm certain no one will ever be able to plug a car in when they park, after all, I don't, so no one in the whole universe every has, can, or will.

    7) What is the charger connector going to be, there is no standard. I don't care if there actually is a perfectly good deployed standard which I could find on wikipedia if I wanted, I just like to post this every singe time there is an electric car article. Also, did you know there is no standard low voltage DC connector? Oh wait, there is. Oh how I love to post this over and over.

    8) Thousands of american military personnel have died for oil, and its disrespectful of their memory not to burn as much gasoline as humanly possible, after all you don't want their relatives to think they died for nothing. My Chinese imported yellow support the troops ribbon sticker on the trunk of my 8 MPG SUV absolves me of all guilt, much like purchasing a pre-reformation indulgence.

    I think that'll do it, does anyone have anything NEW to offer to the standard lineup of /. electric car stories?

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Standard arguments by cc1984_ · · Score: 2

      Personally, wrt your 1st point, some kind of long haul system would make this point mute. I make infrequent, but regular trips of > 400 miles. If I could pop my car on a train, everything would be gravy. I can't see it being too hard to get the infrastructure in place.

      Failing that, I see many lorries carrying new cars to showrooms. If someone with enough clout and ingenuity could realize that with the growing number of electric cars, some kind of courier service for cars would make a lot of money, I'd be very happy to sign up.

      Of course someone will come up with "it's too expensive", but where I live (London), money is the last reason I'd tout for being a car owner vs taking public transport.

    2. Re:Standard arguments by Theophany · · Score: 1

      You can make any argument seem ridiculous when you push it to idiotic extremes. Some of these criticisms, when reined in to more sensible levels, are valid and until they are addressed by EV manufacturers they will continue to diminish the relevance of them to the mass market.

      So yeah, same old arguments, the question is why are they not being addressed?

    3. Re:Standard arguments by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      "Oh you say my gas vehicle doesn't work too well at -40 either?"

      I regularly drive my gas vehicle at -40. Works fine so long as we plug it in at work to keep the engine warm enough to start easily.

      "I'm sure an electric car will fail in 3 years too"

      Last I read Honda Civic Hybrid owners were suing Honda, supposedly because the batteries were failing so fast that Honda reprogrammed the computer not to use them much so they'd survive the warranty period... wihch made them pointless.

      http://www.autoblog.com/2010/08/16/hondas-fix-for-prematurely-dying-civic-hybrid-batteries-hurting/

    4. Re:Standard arguments by ledow · · Score: 2

      How about:

      I've never paid more than £1000 ($1500) for a car in my life, and they all give me at least 30,000 miles before dying and often that's after 100,000 miles of usage by other people? My maintenance costs are never more than about £500 ($750) over the year for any one particular car because if it costs that, it's cheaper to buy another car in the long run.

      I have no more reliability or service issues than any other car driver (in fact, probably a lot less) and I don't really care if the car never starts again because I can replace it next month without having to budget specifically.

      When I see second-hand electric cars that do the same, then we can talk. Your number 5 is going to make that nigh-on impossible for current models, whether you want to argue it or not.

      Batteries of any kind do not last forever. Of those that last longest, lead-acid has proven the best value choice (and hence why the previous generation of all-electric cars in Britain - otherwise known as milk-floats - have been using them since the 60's) and that's the only battery in my current car and costs about £50 to replace when it dies. Your battery will never make it to any reasonable second-hand market, which means no-one will buy it, replacing it will be uneconomical (and the car will end up being recycled quicker) and you won't be able to recoup its cost. It also means that the second-hand market for electrics is dead before it starts until someone comes up with someone marvellous and hence lots of people (who have NEVER owned a new car) will never be able to use one.

      Why buy something that's new and untested when you can wait a few years and get the same benefits at a cheaper purchase price? Give me a nudge when I can buy an electric car with 100,000 miles on the clock, a full service history, no major historical problems and no current mechanical problems. For a petrol car with the same criteria, they publish magazines full of nothing but the damn things being advertised.

    5. Re:Standard arguments by tgd · · Score: 1

      That's a good list. Did you furiously jackhammer that out on your keyboard when you saw there was an EV post on /. or did you have it ready to go and just cut in paste?

      (And, to be clear, the first sentance is serious, the second is mildly sarcastic.)

    6. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be honest, I wish the point HAD been made "mute", then we wouldn't have to listen to all the whining.

      For crying out loud, it's MOOT

    7. Re:Standard arguments by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      1. No electrical infrastructure to support these.

      2. All of the things you mentioned are true to a degree, that's what makes the market for these things so tiny right now.

      3. We need more nuclear power, small nuclear power right on board of these cars.

    8. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many of the enthusiast modders that have converted a gasoline car to an all electric also make a gasoline generator trailer for long hauls. Just hitch it up to the rear of the vehicle and plug it in to the car's charging circuit and you can go a lot further than 400mi on a tank of gas. The ones I've seen are generally the back ends of a regular car (rear axel, gas tank, trunk) chopped off and finished to make it more aerodynamic. I'm surprised nobody has tried to market something like this.

    9. Re:Standard arguments by Tim4444 · · Score: 2

      You missed a few:

      <sarcasm>

      The electric grid can't handle any more load and there's too much government regulation preventing us from upgrading it.

      Using electricity in this country means burning coal and obviously it's much harder to mine coal and haul it by train across the country than it would be to extract oil from unstable countries, move it around the globe in a boat, refine it, then truck it to filling stations, and then for me to personally go get it every week or three. Oil is just so much simpler.

      I have a gas guzzler now. Nobody's going to tell me that I don't already have the best thing on or off* the road.

      I need a vehicle I can use for my weekend trips to the mountains / lakes. We only have my truck, my wife's car, my daughter's sports car, my son's car, the RV and the jeep. If I get an electric car I just won't have anything for the weekend trips.

      * off road refers to that time I drove through my neighbor's lawn to run over his campaign posters

      </sarcasm>

    10. Re:Standard arguments by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      1 - there is electric infrastructure for these. even my podunk town has several electric car charging points. Problem is some moron in a Pickup truck or SUV is always parked in front of it. The city is doing a tow and impound on them starting this year, no tickets the police tow trucks just hook up and take your vehicle, so maybe that problem will fix it's self.

      2 - The real problem is true range and price. They claim 150 miles, I am betting real world is 1/2 that. Also the real price is over $40,000 which makes it a toy for only the very rich.

      3 - you are 100% correct here.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    11. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Motorail trains used to exist - you could ship your car from London to Sctoland on one but there was so little take up they stopped about 15 years ago - still exist on the continent.

      Many companies exist to ship luxury cars around where the owners don't want to rack up the milage which reduces resale value

    12. Re:Standard arguments by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      "even my podunk town has several electric car charging points. Problem is some moron in a Pickup truck or SUV is always parked in front of it."

      Why should pickup drivers be forced to pay an EV driver's fuel bill?

    13. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't afford to spend $37,000 on any car, electric or gas. That's quite a premium to pay, for less of a car.

    14. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Mustang/M3/Corvette sounds/looks WAY sexier than any electric car?

      Oh, and electricity really isn't very "green" in my area since almost all of it is produced by coal (what do you expect in Pennsylvania). I guess I could cut down a bunch of trees for a solar panel or ten but that seems counter productive if you're concerned about the environment. Not getting a mini-windmill either - I like birds and bats.

      Also, my commute is about 180 miles a day. I'd like to work closer to home and I'm trying but no bites yet in the job market.

    15. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be clear, what's a "sentance"? Is that like an "artical"?

    16. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh you say my gas vehicle doesn't work too well at -40 either?"

      I regularly drive my gas vehicle at -40. Works fine so long as we plug it in at work to keep the engine warm enough to start easily.

      Whooooooooooooosh.... That's EXACTLY his point. If you don't plug it in, you don't have a working vehicle either. They make battery warmers too. Surprise, you need only plug it. Which means, whiles it charging, its also staying warm. And when you drive it, the battery warmers stay running. Its the same situation. He was pointing out how hypocritical it is for people to say these things about batteries but pretend its not a problem for engines. It absolutely is the EXACT SAME PROBLEM whic is addressed the EXACT SAME WAY. The only difference is, you're filling up the electric car when you plug in to keep it warm, whereas, the gas car still needs to be taken to the corner gas station and you need to get out into the weather to pump that gas while its -40.

      So in case its not clear, -1 engine, +1 electric.

    17. Re:Standard arguments by vlm · · Score: 1

      I make infrequent, but regular trips of > 400 miles.

      Rental. Been there, done that. Frankly, if I'm moving something big and heavy I'd prefer to mess up the heavily insured rental rather than my daily driver anyway. Besides its fun to drive something new once in a while. I've rented and driven a giant F-350 duallie, the GMC equivalent diesel truck, and several different "moving vans".

      If you're just moving yourself, you're better off taking public transport like a plane, and renting a car at the site. Or, if available, rent a completely impractical but fun car, like a convertible (impracticality depends on your local climate)

      The coolest thing about rentals is for practically no money they provide all the insurance and AAA service you can imagine. I'd much rather have a rental break down half way thru a 400 mile trip than my daily driver.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    18. Re:Standard arguments by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      "Whooooooooooooosh.... That's EXACTLY his point."

      No, it's not. Gasoline engines work fine at -40, they just don't like starting; EVs suck ass at those temperatures at all times because batteries really don't like sub-zero temperatures. If you don't heat the battery you'll probably lose at least half the range and you'll then need to suck more power from it to heat the car.

      "If you don't plug it in, you don't have a working vehicle either."

      I've started it without plugging it in, but there's just no reason to put that much extra stress on the engine for the sake of a few cents of electricity. In addition, if the car's only been parked for half an hour it will start fine with no additional heating.

    19. Re:Standard arguments by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mostly agree, but the market for used hybrids (at least in the US) remains strong, and I don't expect plug-ins to be different in the short to mid term.

      The Smug Poor want to flaunt their eco-credentials nearly as much as the Smug Rich, and it'll take a while before everyone knows someone whose cousin bought one of those damn electronical cars which then crapped its $7K battery all over the floor the next month.

      Of course, in civilised nations, if we want "eco", we buy a small turbodiesel returning 88 of Her Brittanic Majesty's Miles per Greenwich Gallon on either DERV or chip fat (or 73mpg in Colonial jibber-speak), and that isn't packed full of rare earths that have been strip mined by Chinese orphans, or powered by a coal fired power plant in the next valley.

      Eco isn't just about tailpipe emissions, but it'll be a long, hard slog to convince the 'mentals of that.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    20. Re:Standard arguments by DigiTechGuy · · Score: 2

      WRT point #5, what is the life of a Prius? My daily driver is nearly 30 years old, and I plan on driving it until I die or until I find one from '76-'77 that I like. My summer saily driver is nearly 50 years old and I'll be driving that until I die. I don't envision people driving a Prius in 50 years as I suspect the useful life is far less than that. It's a point A to point B until it dies cookie cutter car. Most new cars are not made to be serviceable. Look at how undersized critical componenets like tie rods and ball joints are, and they have no zerks... They're "sealed for life" and as such fail early at which point you need to replace parts since they're not rebuildable. Chintsy rotors and drums that warp easiy and don't have any meat to cut them, "sealed for life" steering boxes and racks, etc. These are overpriced disposable cars made to last 5-10 years and after that they get very expensive to maintain since you can't just rebuild whatever is worn out.

    21. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say the problem is liability. Most people don't haul trailers often, and as a result they suck at it - there's lot's of non-intuitive dynamics involved in hauling a trailer *especially* in crisis situations. Now take that trailer, fill it with a flammable toxic fluid... yeah I'm not seeing that end well. Especially when towed behind a car driven by Joe and Jane Sixpack and their bored, screaming kids going on holiday.

    22. Re:Standard arguments by cc1984_ · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but not ideal in my situation. I want to load up the car, get to Edinburgh, spend a month there or so, and get back. Putting the car on a train would mean I could load luggage at home and have /my/ car available to me in Edinburgh which I can pootle around while feeling smug (that is if I owned an electric car).

      Rental would leave me with a petrol car (not exactly the point of the exercise) to do trips that, once I get to Edinburgh, are ideal for electric. It would also mean a long drive which I don't like. Public transport would limit the stuff I could carry easily (I have done courier before, which proved expensive, both upfront and in replacing the stuff they break.)

      As I said, not ideal. I could work with either of your propositions, but for me having a train take me there so I don't have to think about a long journey (the plus of public transport) coupled with the convenience of having my car full of my stuff hits that sweet spot that nothing as yet offers me.

      I'd much rather have a rental break down half way thru a 400 mile trip than my daily driver.

      Just to be clear, that isn't what I want either.

    23. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. most people never see -40F, and if they do once every 10 years consider it a snow day. We have early warning now of upcoming temperatures.

      2. Insulate the batteries and pre-warm them or pre-cool them when plugged in or when experiencing those extreme temps.

      3. New battery formulas aren't impacted by cold as much.

    24. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how does something stop being new and untested? The early adopters buy and use them. Let them have their fun, and encourage them where you can. I think we can all agree that EV's will *eventually* be a good solution, but the only way we'll ever get there is if the early adopters make the first few generations profitable.

      As for batteries - yeah, that's kinda the sticking point. Once you separate the power source from the drive system though you open the way for modders to replace the latter, which I imagine is what will happen to a lot of those "useless" used EVs with dead batteries. And there are some interesting alternatives out there - I remember a decade or so ago somebody had developed ultra-high-speed carbon-fiber flywheels with some truly staggering efficiency and energy density properties - obviously you'd need some sort of gimballed suspension system to avoid gyroscopic effects dragging your car all over the road, but I'm sure that's doable, and it's hardly the only other option either.

    25. Re:Standard arguments by w_dragon · · Score: 1

      -40 plus some windchill can freeze fuel in the fuel line of a running car if you don't use fuel line antifreeze and your car has fuel lines where they're exposed to the wind. I had it happen once on an old car, I think they've just changed the location of the fuel lines to keep them out of the windflow, but ICEs aren't immune to the cold of a northern Alberta winter.

    26. Re:Standard arguments by Sepultura · · Score: 1

      Just wanted to say that this was the first post in years on Slashdot that actually made me laugh out loud. Kudos!

    27. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your vehicle isn't affected by windchill. If it's -40 out with a 100 km/hr wind, your car will still only get down to -40.

    28. Re:Standard arguments by olau · · Score: 1

      So yeah, same old arguments, the question is why are they not being addressed?

      Eh, but they are? For instance, as far as I know, the U.S. is supposed to get out of Iraq?

    29. Re:Standard arguments by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      It really depends how regular "regular" is. If you make a 400 mile drive, that's probably a 2 day rental minimum, and more likely 3+. (I figure it's roughly 6 - 7 hours of just driving to get there, and unless you're acting as a courier you're probably going to spend some time at your destination.)

      That adds up pretty quickly ($36 a day for an Aveo at Enterprise) to the point that, if it's a monthly trip, you should probably just buy a suitable car.

      If you have a family, and it's a regular trip with the family, the public transport thing is financially unattractive. Flying 3 people gets expensive, and have you priced Amtrak tickets? If they even go where you want to go, it costs more than flying.

      I don't know what your daily driver is; mine is a 2008 VW, and my wife's is a 2007 Camry. Neither has ever stranded us, or even given any particular mechanical trouble whatsoever that would result in having to stop halfway through a trip.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    30. Re:Standard arguments by bobcat7677 · · Score: 1

      LiFePo (the chemistry used in these cars due to it's stability, energy density and long life) does not work below -20C (-4F). Much of North America sees temperatures lower then that at least once per year making the technology problematic. At temperatures well below that (like -40F), even with heaters there will be difficulty keeping the battery pack warm enough to operate consistently. In Alaska and Northern Canada you would pretty much be screwed. Even down around the 45th parallel where I live much of the landscape sees those temps regularly during the winter. Going even further, states normally thought to be "warm" like New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and Texas have seen temps below -20F.

    31. Re:Standard arguments by cc1984_ · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I didn't know that.

    32. Re:Standard arguments by j-beda · · Score: 1

      These are overpriced disposable cars made to last 5-10 years and after that they get very expensive to maintain since you can't just rebuild whatever is worn out.

      My understanding is that the longevity and reliability of modern automobiles has been steadily improving. A car reaching 100,000 miles used to be relatively rare without major work, now it is relatively common. In the 1980s, a ten year old car in good condition was difficult to find, while today they are much more common. The fraction of cars that reach beyond the 5-10 year mark is greater for cars made after 2000 than it was for those made in before that date.

      Yes, today's cars are expensive to fix, and a challenge for even a well supplied garage to rebuild due to sealed components and specialized components, but modern cars also require much less in the way of ongoing maintenance and are much less likely to need major repairs due to regular wear and tear.

    33. Re:Standard arguments by DigiTechGuy · · Score: 1

      Interesting, but I've never owned a vehicle newer than 1986 and none with under 100,000 miles. The most miles I've had on a car was 302,000 on a '67 Ford when I sold it. Ran great, but the frame was rusting out and I didn't have the means to pull the body and repair the rusted frame at that time. Aside from that, rebuilding an engine or transmission is pretty cheap and easy. Same for suspension components. Body work really isn't that difficult or expensive either if you are patient about it. The reason most cars didn't last long back then is the bodies rust out in northern climates well before anything else needs to be repaired or rebuilt. New cars don't do much better. Look at Toyta's frame rot issue on brand new trucks. Or all the crusty vehicles out there around 10 years old from snow/salt climates. New stuff doesn't do much better... But the body work required to repair is more or less the same.

      I am a weekend mechanic and frequently work with newer cars. Mechanically they are a nightmare. Take a lot more diagnostics time, more cost to repair/replace parts. Things just wear out quickly and you're always swapping out undersized parts like ball joints. In the past couple years I've seen dozens of new cars, only a couple years old, sitting in the middle of the road or crashed off the side of the road from separated ball joints. Compare the size of these components on a new Honda, Toyota, or even domestic econobox and then compare to a '60s Ford/GM/Mopar. They're tiny and not greasable... Hence accelerated failure rates of parts that should last around 100,000 miles.

    34. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to be pedant, but I see this a lot.

      It is MOOT not MUTE.

    35. Re:Standard arguments by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      On the plus side, only being able to take what you can carry on to public transit does make you decide what's really important to you, and what you really need, rather than just grabbing a bunch of crap because you "might need it", and might as well take it.

    36. Re:Standard arguments by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      No, actually, most of those criticisms are NOT valid. They're pushed by people who don't represent the average driver.

      The arguments are being addressed. Just not fast enough for people like you, and you come up with more worthless complaints to replace them.

    37. Re:Standard arguments by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I regularly drive my gas vehicle at -40. Works fine so long as we plug it in at work to keep the engine warm enough to start easily.

      And are you gonna try and tell us that you can't do this with an electric vehicle?

    38. Re:Standard arguments by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      YOU ARE NOT THE TARGET MARKET. SHUT THE HELL UP THEN.

      Are you seriously going to bitch about the price of cars when you say you only buy cheap used cars to start with? Shut the fuck up. No new car, gas or electric, would meet your criteria.

    39. Re:Standard arguments by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      They're not. They're choosing to shop at an establishment that has set one of them up.

    40. Re:Standard arguments by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      The real problem is true range and price.

      No, it's not. Range is NOT an issue for some 90% of regular drivers. Quit making it seem like people regularly drive over 200 miles a day. They don't.

    41. Re:Standard arguments by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Of course, in civilised nations, if we want "eco", we buy a small turbo diesel

      And of course in *really* civilized nations, we ride a bike. A decent commuter bike can be had (used) for a less than $1000 (sometimes even for free), it requires no rare earths to build, and your only fuel cost is the price of the food that you were going to eat anyway.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    42. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they are the lowest IQ of all drivers.

      They cant read, which is why they park in "small cars only, EV parking only" spots.

      therefore morons that drive SUV's and Pickups should flit the bill, simply because they are so incredibly stupid.

      you must be a truck owner as you are too stupid to have read that the truck morons are parking in the EV charging spots, in lumpy's post.

    43. Re:Standard arguments by thrich81 · · Score: 1

      You are a brave person to be seeking out '76-'77. In my (amateur but significant) experience '74 through '84 were the worst cars from '55 up. Engines were loaded down with first generation emissions controls, bodies were bloated, heavy and rust prone, suspensions were unsophisticated and barely able to keep those behemoths on the road. Ever rebuilt a carburetor from '76? I found the early fuel injected, computer cars ('85-'97 or so) to be far superior vehicles and easier to work on. Mid-60's cars I liked but are getting really old and hard to find. I'm rebuilding a '96 Turbo Volvo now and finding it a pleasant experience. After about year 2000 I can't handle all the electronics, so the cars have become disposable, but they do last a long time -- lots of good +100k mile examples on the road, you didn't see that in the 60's or 70's.

    44. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's blatantly untrue. He was talking about a running car. A running car produces heat, so the wind can affect it. A running car isn't a big slab of metal sitting at ambient.

    45. Re:Standard arguments by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Windchill will affect the speed with which the car gets down to -40 though, by resupplying the surfaces with cold air to transfer heat to. However, even at -40, the fuel will still burn and will not be frozen unless it had some water in the line as well.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    46. Re:Standard arguments by jandrese · · Score: 1

      If it's -20 in Arizona, the entire state would be shutdown anyway and nobody would be going anywhere. That's a level of cold that they're just not prepared to deal with.

      Plus, with Global Warming this probably won't be an issue in the future anyway.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    47. Re:Standard arguments by DigiTechGuy · · Score: 1

      Good point about '76-'77! I would be looking for a '76-'77 Supercab Ford 4x4 pickup. Trucks of that vintage were not nearly as bad as the cars. Regardless, it would likely have a 351m or 400, both undesirable smog engines. Whenever I find one with a solid body in need of minimal body work it'll be getting a fresh 545 cubic inch stroker which should push out about 1 HP per cube and a mountain of torque. Along with that it'll get a NV4500 5 speed manual for economical highway driving at 12+ MPG and of course a small lift and tires. If it ends up being a F-150 I'll swap out the half ton axles for a one ton setup... Sterling 10.25" full floater rear and a high pinion Dana 60 front. That would be my ideal daily driver. So no goofy smog era anything. Just a nice efficient and simple truck to pull my boat and drive through winter.

      Basically the same truck I drive now except 10 years older. I would do a '60s pickup but they didn't make Supercabs until the 70s and even then you couldn't get a 4x4 Supercab until '76, then in '78 they changed the body style and again in 1980 to the style I have now. Frame widths were different in the 70s from 2wd to 4x4 so it's not simple to drop a 4x4 front axle under a 2wd frame due to the offset differential.

    48. Re:Standard arguments by j-beda · · Score: 1

      The reason most cars didn't last long back then is the bodies rust out in northern climates well before anything else needs to be repaired or rebuilt.

      I think I read a few years ago that when Ontario (or was it some other place?) mandated an increased warranty period for body rust (eight years I think), the longevity of cars increased accordingly.

      Compare the size of these components on a new Honda, Toyota, or even domestic econobox and then compare to a '60s Ford/GM/Mopar. They're tiny and not greasable... Hence accelerated failure rates of parts that should last around 100,000 miles.

      I think this might be, at least partially, a case of "survivor bias". Any car we see today from the 1960s is necessarily an exceptional vehicle. All the crappy ones from that period are now off the road. The ones with poor maintenance, poor construction, and poor luck are dead and buried. In comparison, the newer ones are still limping along, available to be visible. A young adult will have NEVER see a car on the road from 1960 that is not being babied by some collector - of course they are in great shape.

    49. Re:Standard arguments by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Said trailers are more normally the front section of a car, not the back - most vehicles made today are FWD, so you don't need the rear axle or trunk. For generator use, you need the engine - which is in the front. aerodynamics is satisfied with the front, you simply need to relocate the gas tank.

      Personally, I think it's a great idea - when do you need the most cargo space, typically? Ans: When you're going on a long trip. Make the generator system also provide additional storage space, and you're gold.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    50. Re:Standard arguments by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Typically you're going to be looking at 10-20 gallons of gasoline, which is hardly 'full', and what your typical gasoline vehicle carries anyways.

      Hauling a small trailer isn't that hard when you're really only taking it on the highway and unhooking it for random driving around town.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    51. Re:Standard arguments by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      By your description, you'd be better off taking public transportation there, then renting a local electric vehicle. Either that, or you obtain a gen-trailer for the trips, purchase an EV with ~200 mile range(top off the charge over lunch), or just consider yourself a non-average driver and purchase a hybrid instead.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    52. Re:Standard arguments by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      ...forcing regular people in cars to waste fuel by braking and accelerating to get around your random wobbling progress, hopping pavements and shooting red lights, and having 3 showers a day.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    53. Re:Standard arguments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      7) What is the charger connector going to be, there is no standard. I don't care if there actually is a perfectly good deployed standard which I could find on wikipedia if I wanted, I just like to post this every singe time there is an electric car article. Also, did you know there is no standard low voltage DC connector? Oh wait, there is. Oh how I love to post this over and over.

      The great thing about standards is, you have so many to choose from.
      DC connector standards

    54. Re:Standard arguments by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Make me a city bus sized flat bed and I'll show you a way to put 20 NV-1's on it, all without the need to wait in line to em/debark.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    55. Re:Standard arguments by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      The master cylinder on 76/77 trucks need to be replaced every two years. The 4x4's need new rotors just as often. btw. 351m/400 is the best torque/horse power conversion. You can also add a supercharger to gain advantage off the line and a turbo charger to kick in when the supercharger hits its maximum gain for a very very powerfull engine without buying special fit versions. And, yes. I owned a 76.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    56. Re:Standard arguments by DigiTechGuy · · Score: 1

      What is failing in those master cylinders you used? A good quality rebuild kit should be fine. Cheapy Mexico rebuild units for $20 will not last as long as a brand new American made unit or a good original rebuilt with quality parts. Been there done that with other vehicles master cylinders. Regardless, if it is a fault with that particular design of MC, it's easy to convert to an '80-'86 style master which I know are reliable and last decades.

      As for front rotors, I don't have a lot of experience with the early low pinion Dana 60s under these trucks but I do know rotors from any year Ford D60 are a bolt on swap. Regardless, since I use mine off road and it would be lifted I would be swapping the low pinion D60 for a '78-'79 high pinion D60. Either way, I could run good quality brake components through better factory parts or aftermarket.

      Supercharger adn turbo on the same engine? Terrible idea. If you're suggesting this I doubt you've built many engines. When I say built I don't mean order some parts and slap them together, I mean designed, built, and blueprinter high performance engines. It involves a lot of math, measurements, theory, and experience to get it right.

      The 351m/400 can be made into a good performer... It is after all more or less a Cleveland, but was encumbered by low compression and smog equipment. It is not the best HP/torque engine though. The 385 series engines get you the most HP/torque per dollar and the most room to grow.I didn't see any HP/torque numbers on that site but I did see $3500 into it.

      My budget 460 build ($2000) for my lifted '86 which weighs in at 6000 lbs and tows ~6000 lbs puts out appox 425 HP and 550 ft/lbs as per Desktop Dyno. I've found on previous builds DD is very accurate to actual dyno numbers. Regardless, it's a simple build... .030" over 460, stock truck crank and rods, KB137 hyper pistons, Ported E6TE heads (basically D3VE), ~9.7:1 compression, Comp 262/268 cam, 1.75" into 3" long tubes, Edelbrock Performer intake, Holley 750 DP. I forget my dynamic compression ratio but it's right on the ragged edge of detonation, especially comsidering the very mild cam. Polished chambers and singh grooves help to keep it pump gas friendly down to 91 octane. It tows great and gets 10.8 MPG towing with a total weight of 12k+ lbs at 70 MPH. Not bad for a lifted truck on 35" tires. You won't find a 351m or 400 pushing those torque numbers or those MPG numbers under the same conditions. The 385 series is simply a superior platform.

    57. Re:Standard arguments by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Having a turbo engage when the supercharger is flat is bad math? O.K.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    58. Re:Standard arguments by DigiTechGuy · · Score: 1

      Cubic dollars. While there are some benefits of having both it's absurdly complex and expensive. Compared to one or the other. The dollars per HP does not justify it in nearly all applications. Beyond that, in a truck application as we are discussing here, forced induction is not a great idea. I prefer not to worry about detonation when I hook 10k lbs on the back of my truck or travel to different parts of the country with different octane fuel available.

  12. I think Tesla maybe has better business model by JSBiff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems to me the problem with trying to create a new technology sedan for the "everyman" is that, in order to get "everyman" pricing, you need the kinds of economies of scale you just can't get when you make 10,000 or 12,000 cars.

    I think that GM made a huge mistake with the Volt. I love the idea of a volt - a plugin hybrid that uses electricity till it can't, then uses gas when necessary.

    The problem is, it seems they made a car with no glamour or mystique to it. If you're going to only make 10,000 vehicles and they are going to be more expensive than most people can afford, then just go ahead and make it a luxury car. The volt should have been a Cadillac, not a Chevy. It should have had lots of interior luxury and beautiful exterior that was to die for. Maybe it should have cost $50,000+.

    GM should have done everything it could to make it the year's "It Car", getting tv, movie, music and athletic celebrities, the children of the rich, and hipster-CEO's to buy it as a green conspicuous consumption item. Then, use those profits to ramp up the economies of scale. Meanwhile, the "average joe" sees all the "cool rich people" driving them, and maybe has increased desire for one of them.

    That seems to be the model that Tesla is pursuing. I think GM could have had more clout to get the Volt to be an "It Car" if they had pursued that strategy, but since they didn't, I wish Tesla luck.

    1. Re:I think Tesla maybe has better business model by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      GM only made the Volt, because the president of the USA ordered them to make it. One of the reasons president Obama fired Wagoner and replaced him with an aparatchik was because he refused.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    2. Re:I think Tesla maybe has better business model by LandKurt · · Score: 1

      Really? The Volt concept car was shown in January 2007 and the production design model in September 2008. I suppose once Obama took office in 2009 he used the secret presidential time machine to go back and force GM to create the Volt.

      Or are you suggesting GM was just wasting money on a project they never intended to market until Obama forced them to follow through?

  13. Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by tp1024 · · Score: 2

    $3700 is the kind of price when people would be much less bothered whether a car can go for 600km or 60km. Qualitatively less performance on almost all counts for over twice the price of an ordinary car just doesn't make sense beyond the idealistic fringe with very deep pockets, trying to polish their better-than-thou attitude to the rest of the world.

    However, qualitatively less performance for a much smaller price of entry is justifable. Netbooks did this. Of course their performance rather laughable compared to a proper laptop - but you couldn't get laptop for $200. It satisfies the need of a basic mobile universal computer for a price below all other offers. The same would work for cars for a lot of commuters - it need not be all or even most. There are 300 million americans, even if it only appeals to 3 in 100 people, that's 10 mio customers.

    1. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5-seat version:
      Lower the Cd to something better than a Corolla (0.19 or lower - no way this has that).
      Allow 240VAC 100A charging at home (24kW).
      Reduce the price below $25000.

      2 seat version:
      Chop it in half, lengthwise, like the this Volkswagon.
      Reduce the battery capacity by 70%.
      Reduce the weight by 70%.
      Reduce the price to $15000.

      1-seat microcar:
      Do the same as the 2-seat, but find a way to lower the price below $10,000.
      Extreme measures would be required.

      Nobody wants a $30,000 base-model Kia, especially when you can get a really nice Prius with leather in the same ballpark.

    2. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      $3700 is the kind of price when people would be much less bothered whether a car can go for 600km or 60km. Qualitatively less performance on almost all counts for over twice the price of an ordinary car just doesn't make sense beyond the idealistic fringe with very deep pockets, trying to polish their better-than-thou attitude to the rest of the world.

      However, qualitatively less performance for a much smaller price of entry is justifable. Netbooks did this. Of course their performance rather laughable compared to a proper laptop - but you couldn't get laptop for $200. It satisfies the need of a basic mobile universal computer for a price below all other offers. The same would work for cars for a lot of commuters - it need not be all or even most. There are 300 million americans, even if it only appeals to 3 in 100 people, that's 10 mio customers.

      Generally you are right, but... Those in the US "trying to polish their better-than-thou attitude to the rest of the world" make up a staggeringly large percentage... Oh, and netbooks are dead.

      And lastly (on a more serious note) not everyone in the US has a car (far fewer can actually drive one,) and the typical run rate for cars is 6 million a year. Capture 3% of that market and you are moving 180k units a year. Sounds easy? Volkswagen (no slouch when it comes to marketing and diversity) does 300k in a good year (and thats including their Audi brand.) A niche, in the auto industry, is somewhere on the order of half a percent of market share.

    3. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are out of your mind if you think ANY car can be sold new for $3700. I do not outright fault your argument of 'by pricing the car+capabilities below that of a standard car they may make a previously unseen market', however I believe that baring the government forcing insurance companies to accept 'two cars, one policy, one one on the road at any given time == insurance for the higher risk car only', it will never fly- because if your car costs you an extra $1200/yr in insurance and can only be used a limited subset of the time it will never be viable- however if you could pay the same insurance and an extra $10,000 for an extra vehicle that has an equivalent to ~.5l/100km and is good enough to get you to and from work in warm weather, and get to and from the grocery store/other small errands- then you may have something that will get you a net gain over the life of the vehicle.

    4. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by tp1024 · · Score: 1

      You are out of your mind is almost exactly what people told Henry Ford when he started making cars. By 1925 or so the Model T ended up selling for around $3000 in todays money.

    5. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by RichMeatyTaste · · Score: 1

      Safety rules have changed a bit since the 20's. The cost of airbags alone averages between 600-800 each, and that is just two parts out of a few thousand. Ask you dealer how much the computers in the car cost, or even the ignition systems that ties the key to the car via electronics.

      --


      Ever feel like you are driving the getaway car?
    6. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by tp1024 · · Score: 1

      Micro cars don't require airbags by law in most juristictions as far as I know. As the maximum speed would be limited anyway (to save on battery drain) they are still safe enough - much more so than quads or motorbikes anyway. And if electrics are so expensive, than that's one place where you should start to save on costs, they became a whole lot cheaper since the 20ies, you know?

    7. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by jandrese · · Score: 1

      I suspect that it just isn't possible to build a car for $3700 that is safe enough to pass the Federal impact safety requirements. You could do that in India or China where the regulators are willing to look the other way with regards to safety, but the US would never let you sell it. $10k or $15k would probably be a more realistic target, and maybe a 60 mile range and 2 seats. Basically a purpose built commuter car. I could see a market for that, but it will be hard to make much money with it since you're building the cars from the ground up yet you need economies of scale to make them affordable and profitable. It's the same problem Tesla has, they can't make enough cars to recoup their R&D costs even when they are flying off of the shelf as fast as they can make them.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    8. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by tp1024 · · Score: 1

      China, India, the rest of Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America ... basically, the other 6.7billion people not living in the US (which seems to be paranoid about car-safety regulations, but for some reason hasn't banned quads or motorcycles that are much less safe any microcar...)

      So, yes. The price should not be $3700 but 3000 Euro.

    9. Re:Get rid of that last zero and it's a winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably true, and probably possible--if gov't regulations weren't involved. There's a reason the cheapest new car you can get here is about $13,000, and it's not because of the cost of steel. The minimum legal automobile is a whole different thing than the minimum viable one.

      A vehicle classed as a motorcycle (three wheels) could approach that price, but the compromises (vary by state, but may include: special license, helmet use, cannot be enclosed) required would severely hurt its appeal.

  14. This is Slashdot by Dareth · · Score: 1

    "it has a fully-usable back seat"

    This is Slashdot. They probably think the back seat is for passengers!

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  15. Federal subsidies, grants, and loans by kenh · · Score: 1

    I'd be very interested to know how much money this company took/was given by the federal government to get started.

    A range of 150 miles is suitable for someone that spends less than 3 hours a day driving, which includes many, many people - but how many of those people can afford a $37,000 (list price est.) sedan? With all the federal and state "gifts" (subsidies, loans, and grants) available to deploy charging stations at owner homes, apartments and stores/offices I don't think the "where are you gonna plug it in" question will be an issue for very long - once the car starts selling, the charging stations will come.

    --
    Ken
    1. Re:Federal subsidies, grants, and loans by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      Affordability depends on how much you drive. Savings on gasoline costs could reduce lease payments to something comparable to what you'd have for a less expensive car. Saving over $100/mo in fuel costs alone is not at all uncommon, which effectively makes a $350/mo lease a $250/mo lease . Affordability is about more than just sticker price.

      The "where are you gonna plug it in" isn't really an issue NOW for most people. Unless your car is also your house, chances are you have someplace with electricity - a simple 120V outlet overnight will easily recharge most people's daily needs with room to spare. Here's one way to look at it: At 120V you get roughly 5-7 miles of additional range per hour of charging. 240V charging is slightly more than double that for various reasons. Since normal people sleep, finding the time to recharge 40+ miles of range each day is not a problem.
      =Smidge=

    2. Re:Federal subsidies, grants, and loans by Spoke · · Score: 1

      I don't believe that Coda has received any federal money.

    3. Re:Federal subsidies, grants, and loans by s73v3r · · Score: 1

      I'd be very interested to know how much money this company took/was given by the federal government to get started.

      Who cares? I'm gonna guess its orders of magnitude less than what the oil companies have received.

    4. Re:Federal subsidies, grants, and loans by samwichse · · Score: 1

      Ugh, posting undoes ALL my moderation, but this is definitely not "Offtopic"

  16. In Summary: by Kagetsuki · · Score: 1

    They have a terrible looking electric car that can theoretically drive about 10 miles further per charge than its closest competitor (the Leaf), but is more expensive and unlike the Leaf which is primarily produced in Japan/USA it's produced in China/USA. Oh, and they introduce the car with showtunes.

    I get the feeling this CODA company isn't going to be around so much longer.

    1. Re:In Summary: by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      The leaf has less than a 70 mile range. this has been proven everywhere. These guys are claiming 150 mile range.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:In Summary: by Kagetsuki · · Score: 1

      150 miles is theoretical under idea circumstances. Nissan calculated the range theoretical range under ideal cicumstances at 140 miles. The 70 mile range for the Leaf is a (more realistic and generalized) calculation for the Leaf using a calculation defined by the EPA. I can't find any numbers from CODA where they note any calculations but their own.

      If they get 150 miles for the EPA calculation it will be impressive - but for a small no-name company to more than double the performance of a vehicle from mega-corporation Nissan using basically the same technology? Prove it with real numbers on equal terms.

    3. Re:In Summary: by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      The Leaf has over a 70 mile range. This has been proven "everywhere" and I'll actually provide owner testimony to prove it.

      There's even a user-formed "100 mile club" for people who've driven the Leaf over 100 miles on a single charge.
      =Smidge=

    4. Re:In Summary: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I own a Leaf.

      On temperate days (50F deg - 100F deg) 85 miles at the speed limit driving gently - not hyper driving - is easy. I will say Americans do not like to drive 55 - even setting my Leaf to 56 which radar says is really 55 isn't enough. Many people can get quite annoyed even when you consistently stick to the right lane. I always drive in the right hand lane when I need full range - which is seldom. Even when unconcerned and I do 60-65 ( about my limit ) and about 9 over lower posted speeds I can get about 75. Low temps can drop me also to 70-75 at speed limits and I've learned to adjust but no way does below zero driving stop working etc. I have the 2012 cold weather package with battery pack heating where needed. If I really need range finally I'll look for low speed city or back road alternatives which makes 110 miles on a charge possible.

      My 26 mile commute is easily satisfied by this along with all my evening activities. Then I pull up to the friendly pole in my back yard, plug into 110volt and sleep. Generally I'm not fully discharged when I arrive and even if I was near zero (Which actually means the Lion battery has hidden charge left.) - I plug into the magic pole and 8 hours later an amazing 35 miles has been added. Not to mention charging opportunities as need.

      On 110v I don't draw much more then a coffee pot. Tax that my Oxycontin popping friends of big oil. Ha!

      (And if you find a way I'll put up solar panels like several of my fellow Leaf owners..)

      By the way when figuring the economies remember my old gas car needed two catalytic converters in the space of two years at 100k and 160k. That alone helps pay for the Leaf with no mufflers, belts, spark plugs, oil, etc, etc, etc.

      Leafy

  17. Powered by... Coal? by bobs666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As long as we understand electric cars are powered by Coal! Until we figure out that that wind, water, corn, grass, and geothermal power will never meet the demand for powering our cars. That Nuclear power is the only practical green solution. Electric cars will not reduce pollution no there own. None the less electric cars do allow for alternative power solutions. And we will run out of petrol sooner or later.

    1. Re:Powered by... Coal? by janimal · · Score: 3, Informative

      Coal transport from mine to plant requires less carbon than oil from Saudi Arabia to the pump, plus refinement. Also, I'm not sure what the combustion energy effectiveness of a highly specialized generator turbines is, but I suspect it's a bit better than a pocket piston combustion engine that you'll find under your hood. Please consider city driving conditions for the combustion engine efficiency, because that's the niche for the new electric vehicles.

    2. Re:Powered by... Coal? by WindBourne · · Score: 2

      In the USA, 44% of our power is from Coal, and that is dropping fast. Less than 25% of our power comes from NG, with 20% from Nukes, 1% oil and the rest is AE.

      As such, electric cars are MUCH cleaner than oil to run. In addition, they use LOCAL fuel, as opposed to supporting terrorists.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Powered by... Coal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll take a few hundred well-maintained coal plants that can be inspected regularly for pollution over tens to hundreds of thousand or millions of cars. Most places don't even have car inspection areas.

      But for what it's worth, my power is nuclear/hydro in composition, with a side of solar/wind. I live within visual sight distance of both, even though I'm sure there's coal generated power on the grid, I doubt it gets to me unless there's some major shutdowns that cover hundreds of miles of distance.

    4. Re:Powered by... Coal? by bananaquackmoo · · Score: 1

      Your state is not the same as ALL states. In fact many parts of the US have very little to no power at all coming from coal.

    5. Re:Powered by... Coal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need social changes. We clearly need to "desymbolize" the car of its potent social imagery first. Then we need to seriously consider just what it is we do all day long. Do we just perform like actors to convince each other we have important jobs? And that's what we burn oil for?

    6. Re:Powered by... Coal? by wytcld · · Score: 1

      Coal plants are 35-45% efficient, where your stock car engine is about 20% efficient.

      --
      "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
    7. Re:Powered by... Coal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      War is peace [1]
      Freedom is slavery. [2]
      Nuclear is green. [3]

      Welcome to America!

      ___
      1) Bombing Lybia, but stating "We're not at war with Lybia."
      2) Cheering for the "Free Market", even though it's is actually the polar opposite of democracy.
      3) Uranium is depleted even before oil! If it's taking something out of the earth, or putting something back in, and this is not leaving earth exactly as it is, it's not "green". Solar power towers in the desert (hear the insects say "yay! free shade and water!")... *that* is green. And together with pumped-storage hydroelectricity, it makes nuclear power utterly pointless.

    8. Re:Powered by... Coal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To power my electric vehicle, I put solar hot water on the roof. The electricity I save not heating hot water electrically can be withdrawn at night to recharge my vehicle to me go the first 30 to 40 miles each day electrically. The difference in price between electricity and gasoline will pay for the solar hot water in 3 to 7 years. My electric bill stays the same or there abouts. Also, the power companies tend to have excess generation capacity with respect to boiler minimum load.

      While the Energy Returned on Energy Invested for photovoltaics is debatable, recent announcements that coal has reached peak production in the Southern Appalachians and by 2018, coal production could be one-half of what it is today, does not bode well for my electric bill. Which makes me think that maybe the ERoEI "today" maybe a worthwhile investment going forward. The PV covers a portion of my roof and therefore should help reduce my A/C requirements.

      My state, North Carolina, is considering the exploitation of shale gas using facking. That takes up a lot of fresh water and every few years, we get into drought situations where we are asked to conserve. This leads to what will happen to the drillers? I'd rather see solar hot water and rain barrels as mandatory in the building codes but then common sense should prevail. I do grow some veggies and fruits and water restrictions are not conducive to a good crop. Rain barrels help spread the water period and help reduce my water bill.

      It is obvious that even with all the shale oil that is being found and exploited, we are far from energy independence. Our politicians once touted hydrogen fuel cells as our saviour. But where are they (and the Main Stream Media)? Anyone who looked closely enough saw too many technical hurdles for them to become viable anytime soon or vaible anytime in the future. For instance, Toyota used 3 carbon wound cylinders to store hydrogen at 700 bar (14.7 pounds per square inch/bar) to power a Camry for 300 miles. 700 bar works out to be 5 tons per square inch in a car that weighs 1.5 tons. What happens when there is a catastrophic failure?

      When hydrogen is produced by reformatting from natural gas, a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle can get the equivalent of 30 mpg. Minute amounts of CO from reformatting can poison the PEM membrane. The average replacement time for a PEM membrane was 2,000 hours. What is the average driving speed of the average car? 30mph??? 20 mph??? (It's actually 18 mph [think of stop and go in Los Angeles and 5 minute waits at traffic lights]) So at 30 mph, the fuel cell would have to be replaced every 60,000 miles. The PEM cell is also eroded by other ambient pollutants.

      Using electrolysis, the mpg equivalent of electrolysis works out to be around 12 mpg.

      PEM cells use about 3/4 of an ounce of platinum. Platinum was $900 an ounce when gold was $700 an ounce. The Platinum Association predicted platinum would rise to $2500 per ounce. Gold is now at $1600 an ounce.

      Honda announced that they had a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle that would work down to -20. They "forgot" to mention the units were Celsius. It means that at -5 degree fahrenheit, their Honda would not go. Think of how a lead acid battery behaves in really cold temperatures, fuel cells are akin to lead acid batteries in that respect. BTW, we have two rovers up on Mars that are powered by Lithium Ion batteries and they are working in -100 fahrenheit temperatures.

      I counted at least 9 different major technological breakthroughs that have to be made before hydrogen fuel cells could become viable replacements for Internal Combustion Engined and Electric Vehicles. Where was the Main Steam Media in all this???? [Hint: Kissing GM's ass]

      Next are the bio fuels. Simple question: do you want to eat or drive? There is not enough switch grass nor corn to power our US fleet and provide us with nourishment. I like eating.

      Natural gas??? I love hour showers and natural gas delivers on that. Could power a car 200 m

    9. Re:Powered by... Coal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google "LFTR"s - hope for the future.

  18. Fails fiscal sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    CODA cost: $37k
    Superbly equipped VW Golf TDI with all the bells and whistles (navigation, sunroof, DSG gearbox, etc): $30k.

    Going to CODA's site and using their electricity numbers and fixing the price of diesel at $4.00, the mileage of the Golf at 38 (4 lower than EPA highway), and calling it 10k/year* in miles traveled, they say I will save $922 a year.

    * = Most of my driving is country roads at 55mph. Actual fuel economy on my 2005 Golf TDI is 39MPG. I drive 60 miles (round trip) to work every day.

    So, it will take 7 years for the car to break even vs. a diesel, and I'll STILL need a second car to visit my family, who live about 200 miles away, because I can't get there on one charge.

    1. Re:Fails fiscal sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is your fuel economy so bad ?

      I have a 2005 Skoda Octavia 1.9TDi which is likely the same engine. Yesterday i drove reading to far side of Newbury on Motorway and the A4 at a "spirited " speed 90mph motorway then 65 on A-Road other than urban bits. returned 62.1 mpg (uk gallons) over the 60 mile return trip. That was me, a teenager and a boot full of kit.

    2. Re:Fails fiscal sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no such thing as a superbly equipped VW. VW, Porsche and Audi are all shitboxes and only yuppy morons buy them.

  19. Where did he het the $37,000 price? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Their website shows it's $40,798 for a BASE MODEL.
    Come on, if you guys at Slashdot are trying to act like journalists, at least get some of your facts right.

    This car is a failure out of the gate. It's smaller than a honda civic and costs as much as a BMW 325i.

    Cut the price in 1/2 and there is where it has a chance of selling.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Where did he het the $37,000 price? by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      Which is exactly why I think everyone but Tesla is going about this wrong. The only way EVs are going to launch is as high-end luxury status symbols. Do that for a few years to begin to develop economies of scale, then try to down-scale the cars into the mid-range market around $25,000.

      Selling a car which has gas-equivalents at 2x the price, seemingly targeted at the average income family, makes no sense.

    2. Re:Where did he het the $37,000 price? by Roblimo · · Score: 2

      They quoted "about $37000" to Tim at the auto show, and when I checked their website Saturday it showed $37,400. It seems to have changed since then. Interesting.

      I wouldn't mind having a low-power, very cheap electric car for in-town use. Think glorified golf cart, which is now being called a "neighborhood electric vehicle" (NEV) here in Florida, and is legal to drive on roads with low speed limits in some jurisdictions. To attract me, an NEV would need to be able to comfortably hold 45 mph into a headwind, carry two people + groceries or other items, and have enough range to make it to the beach and back, which for us is about 12 miles each way. And I'd only pay around $5000 (max) for such a limited vehicle.

      We'd keep our current Hyundai for longer trips, of course. And if we drop to having one car, which we may, it will have to be one with enough range to make Miami -- 4 hour drive -- or Atlanta -- all-day drive. And that means a gasser. Oh, well. Guess we won't be joining the cool elite electric car kids anytime soon.

  20. Uuuuuuglyyyy by janimal · · Score: 2

    Premium price for truly crappy looks? How is that supposed to work? How would that look next to the stylin "long trip" vehicle in the driveway?
    The Prius is ugly enough as it is, but what's with the race to produce the worlds first paper bagger car?

    1. Re:Uuuuuuglyyyy by tenaciousj · · Score: 1

      That's what I've never understood. Is there a pre-requisite that in order for something to be electric it has to be ugly as shit?

    2. Re:Uuuuuuglyyyy by janimal · · Score: 1

      This is actually a very serious marketing issue. My wife is willing to spend her life savings to drive a hip car, which does include electric, but will not be caught dead in an ugly car. How can these companies overlook the fact that people willing to put down dumb amounts of money for trendy niche products are the types that care about looks?

      Electric is not yet into the utilitarian buyer's niche. Folks who buy electric are currently doing it because of the social status and the need to strut the trendiest new gadget in front of their friends.

      The description of the CODA on their site seems to imply that it looks that way, because it isn't meant to be futuristic. Which suggests that someone thinks the Prius is "too futuristic". It's just Toyota's take on futurism. Toyota isn't known for pretty cars, and the Prius is no exception. That's why people think it's ugly - it's not the weirdness of it.

      Take the Opel Astra (Saturn Astra), which is a cute car. It's a little dated now, but it's a catchy design for a practical car. The CODA could've taken inspiration from that. Instead, it seems to be inspired by a cross between an older Kia (i.e. before they actually hired a designer) and an older Civic (not the original, when it was truly hip, but the middleaged boring variety for seniors).

      The Kia is a budget car, and the reason the Civic sells at all these days is because it's a Honda Civic, not because of it's hot shot looks. Have these CODA guys ever talked to a Honda Civic sedan owner and heard them rave about the looks of it? The owner will rave about the high RPMs on the Honda engine, and the sportiness, and that it "just works" and probably a whole bunch of other things before they get to the looks (which they never do).

      It's like taking design cues from Subaru. The guys who buy Subaru couldn't care less about the looks. The legendary WRC is what does it for them and they take the poor looks (better lately!) as a badge of honour. What is compelling about the CODA? Really! What? Looking at it, I'll take a Leaf any day for "hip car" on the block status; mileage be damned. It never counted to the hipsters anyway.

    3. Re:Uuuuuuglyyyy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't find it particularly ugly. It's definitely not exciting, for sure, but it's not eccentric either. It's bog-standard early 21st century sedan styling. They took no risks with the aesthetics, because aesthetics won't sell this car. They're targeting people like me, who drive frequently (but not terribly far), keep a car for a long time, and only care moderately about the appearance of the car. The math on this car works out for me. It's only bit more than I would normally spend on a new car (about $10k more), but taking gas and electricity prices into account, it works out very well for me. I'm seriously considering one of these.

    4. Re:Uuuuuuglyyyy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take the Opel Astra (Saturn Astra), which is a cute car. It's a little dated now, but it's a catchy design for a practical car.

      aka Vauxhall Astra.

    5. Re:Uuuuuuglyyyy by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      The Prius is ugly enough as it is, but what's with the race to produce the worlds first paper bagger car?
      They have to make it look ugly so that people who don't have one will appreciate what sacrifices the owners make for the sake of our planet and therefore how much better the owners are than non-owners.
      Like any religion, it's just guilt with different holidays.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  21. Supply and Demand by GoJays · · Score: 1

    Electric cars sound great now, but what happens when 60% of the cars out there are electric? We will see electricity prices skyrocket just like gasoline prices. And now not only will driving cost more, it will cost more to power everything else you use as well. In the long run, is it really cheaper to drive electric than gasoline? Also the only way it is cleaner, is if the electricty being generated is from sources like solar, wind or hydroelectric... but at this time that is highly doubtful especially if/when electric cars make up the majority of vehicles on the road.

    1. Re:Supply and Demand by Smidge204 · · Score: 2

      This makes a really, really bad assumption that the price of electricity will double in some unspecified time while the price of gasoline will somehow not. It assumes that no new additions to generating capacity or improvements to infrastructure will be made. It also asserts that an electric car is only cleaner than a gasoline powered one if the electricity source is renewable - which is false. Even a "coal powered" electric vehicle emits less carbon per mile than a decent (30MPG) gasoline automobile.

      I know of people who installed solar panels on their homes and produce more than enough electricity to offset the additional use of charging their electric car. It's entirely possible to power every car in the USA with renewable energy.
      =Smidge=

    2. Re:Supply and Demand by LandKurt · · Score: 1

      There is enough extra generating capacity off peak overnight to charge quite a large initial wave of electric cars. Selling more electricity overnight might even increase electric company profits and pay for some necessary upgrades to the grid. Undoubtedly some changes will need to be made before the majority are driving electric cars. One thing missing from large scale renewable energy is storage. It doesn't help so much if solar and wind supply great amounts of energy some of the time if you still need enough capacity of traditional power to meet 100% of the load the rest of the time. However, developing better batteries for cars may mean a reasonable storage system for utility power too, making cheap solar more practical.

  22. Nissan LEAF *is* made in the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Nissan LEAF is produced in Smyrna, Tennessee (just outside of Nashville). It may not be "good" or "old", but I'm pretty sure it's still part of the USA.

  23. Chassis Manufacturer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to the nice young woman manning the CODA booth at the auto show in Detroit, the chassis a tweaked design from a Mitsubishi model not previously sold in the United States. The modifications performed were for the purposes of accommodating the battery packs.

    That is all.

  24. Why would i buy this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When i could have a Mitsubishi Lancer EVO GSR for that price? (This is my current Dream car. It can out run a Porsche 911 and give a lotus Elise a run for its money and it costs about the same as a mustang which is my current #2)
    Chinese Electric car that still uses energy from power plants, and has no personality ...or Drive a Car that is comfortable, fast, looks damn good, gets decent MPG (for a sports car there is a non sports version for way less that gets really good gas millage), thinks that 100 MPH on dirt is a GOOD idea....and is cheaper?
    Personally I actually want the slower Lancer GT because it has a Real Manual transmission. With a real stick, not a fake manual or a damn dial. Seriously? A dial? WTF, are we driving ovens now?

    Ok Perhaps that’s unfair. Let’s use the Ford Fusion 2011 stock (consumer reports recommended).
    Half the price.
    Way better styling (and it’s meant as a daily commuter).
    Decent gas mileage.
    A real trunk.
    The interior is real spacious, As a 6ft tall person with long legs being able to sit in the back, while another 6ft person can sit in the front WITH OUT adjusting the seat is really important to me.

    Ok it was compared to a KIA.
    There’s the Kia Optima (also Consumer Reports recommended).
    Belter Styling.
    Decent gas millage.
    The fully loaded version comes with heated and cooled front seats, Carbon fiber insets, leather seats, navigation, etc
    A spacious interior (the panoramic roof does cut into that.
    Fully loaded, it starts at $29,000

    The Coda has no specs on there website.
    Styling; not really.
    Price $39,000.
    There are BMW’s you can get new for cheaper.

    Hell even a Camery is more exciting. And that car is the detention of non-descript boredom on 4 wheels. I will wait for the Model S if I’m going to get an electric at all.

    1. Re:Why would i buy this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      edit: I found there specks on the website. My bad.

      Lancer Paasenger space:
      Passenger Volume (cu. ft.) [w/sunroof] 93.5 [92]

      Fusion Passenger Space:
      100 cu.ft. passenger volume Passenger Volume

      Kia Optima:
      102.17 cu. ft

      Coda Passenger space:
      82 cubic ft
      top speed 85mph

      Less car. More money.

      Less car

  25. More car by dainbug · · Score: 1

    I'd have liked to see more of the cars, little bit less of Tim.

  26. Installing a dryer plug & is pretty butt-simpl by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    Honestly, it's not really a big deal to install some romex and a 240VAC outlet.

    There are youtube videos and other resources on the web that will teach any able-bodied person with an IQ above that of breadfruit how to do it without being harmed or endangered. No electrician required.

  27. Did you even read your link? by CrAlt · · Score: 1

    The "big 3" have 29 models with over 75% US made.
    The "imports" have 13.

    if 75 percent (by value) or more of a car's parts come from the U.S. or Canada, it's considered a domestic product;

    The highest US content is a FORD with 90%.
    So how is that "last in USA Made"?

    --
    I have to return some videotapes...
  28. many of these auto startups around by peter303 · · Score: 1

    I see a couple every show advocating some high tech or fancy design. It is challenging to come up with enough capital to put these into production even on a custom basis. Telsa had dot-com billionaire seed money, alliances with established companies and a successful IPO.

  29. Looks like a Kia? They wish by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    This car doesn't look like a Kia, that's an insult to Kia which currently makes cars with really good styling, that would be REALLY good looking if they weren't so big and bloated as all modern cars are.

    No, this looks more like an early/mid-2000s Chevy. Bland, boring, uninspired, with a little hint of "ugly" thrown in that makes it look even worse than Toyotas of the time.

    (Toyota almost made a really good looking car recently - look at the Scion FRS-2 concept. Unfortunately it was given a sound beating with the bland stick before it hit production).

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  30. In music... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In music, the coda is the end. Fitting really as EVs are a worse environmental disaster than petroleum powered ones. At least it could be possible to fuel conventional vehicles with farm waste derived biofuels. EVs just suck harder on the nipple of non-renewable resources, with no practical sustainability alternatives.

  31. LEAF Made in TN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Unlike the LEAF made in the USA"??? Last time I checked Tennessee was STILL part of the USA. Last time I checked that is where United States LEAFs are made.