Lutz Off Message: ‘The American Public Wants Sport Utilites And Large Pickup Trucks’
Lutz Off Message: ‘The American Public Wants Sport Utilites And Large Pickup Trucks’
When General Motors’ CEO Rick Wagoner submitted his company’s plan to Congress last week, it pledged “a dramatic shift in the company’s U.S. portfolio” toward “more fuel-efficient cars and crossovers” and “extensive investment in a wide array of advanced propulsion technologies.” Testifying before Congress, Wagoner said that one of GM’s “mistakes” had been “not moving fast enough to invest in smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles for the U.S. market.”
However, today GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz was singing a very different tune. On Fox and Friends this morning, Lutz insisted that Americans still want large SUVs and that small vehicles are a bad investment:
LUTZ: Let me just get one thing straight here: There’s a lot of talk about well, General Motors doesn’t make the right kind of cars or General Motors built trucks too long. At $1.50 per gallon, the American public wants sport utilities and large pickup trucks.
BRIAN KILMEADE: They did.
LUTZ: No, they do now. … Look at automotive news and see that the Honda Civic in may sold 57,000 units, in November it was down to 7,000. Same numbers for the Toyota Corolla. The small cars are not selling at $1.50 a gallon.
GRETCHEN CARLSON: And why this issue’s so complicated is that people want to buy trucks and SUVs potentially but they can’t get the credit.
LUTZ: That’s exactly right.
Watch it:
Wagoner pledged an “increased commitment” to alternative fuel-driven cars; the bailout money he requests requires that auto companies drop their lawsuits against states seeking tougher emissions standards. If Wagoner is sincere in believing that fuel-efficient cars are the way forward for GM — and if he wants the bailout money — then he should fire Lutz. After all, Lutz is a notorious global warming denier, calling climate change “a total crock of sh*t.” He publicly mocked GM’s new electric car as weak and unattractive, and joked that global warming was caused by toaster ovens.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Somebody is lying to Congress.
¶ AIO
December 9th, 2008 at 2:34 pm‘The American Public Wants Sport Utilites And Large Pickup Trucks’
Would you guys please pay attention to your spelling? We on the left are supposed to be the ones who enjoy reading and writing. This makes us look bad.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:35 pmseal it up for GM, prove you and the boss are criminals. You were “out of touch” a long time ago. It has crossed into crime now.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:38 pmgive the automakers nothing unless they fire the incompetents in charge.
sounds like dodd picked the wrong guy…
December 9th, 2008 at 2:38 pmThe car companies may deserve a bailout as much or as little as the banks, but at some point We The People are going to tell all these guys to stop peeing on us and telling us it’s raining.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:41 pmI have a better idea. Since we the people could buy every outstanding share of GM stock for somewhere around $3 billion, let’s just buy the company, fire Lutz, Wagoner and every other sh*t for brains in management who doesn’t realize that $1.50 gas won’t be around by the time people can afford their crappy SUVs again and hire someone to design and produce a competitive lineup.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:42 pmYou guys should be happy to hear that Maximum Bob is willing to fall on the sword for GM…
That being said, the Nissan 370Z looks awfully tempting right now…
December 9th, 2008 at 2:48 pmWayne A. Schneider Says: ‘The American Public Wants Sport Utilites And Large Pickup Trucks’
– - Maybe GM has a new category for SUVs on a diet.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:50 pmSo the “plan” provided to Congress was nothing more than a well-crafted justification for some free money.
I believe this should take GM permanently out of the running for any form of bailout. Their management clearly doesn’t have any desire to change, so whatever cast is provided will be a bandaid on future bankrupcy.
And agree that We the People should just phucking buy the shares of GM, and turn it over to a Green Team with vision. Private investors will line up, especially knowing that the full backing of the federal government will ensure success.
Raise the annual registration fee on any vehicle that doesn’t meet a new MPG benchmark, and apply that revenue to green technology.
PEACE
December 9th, 2008 at 2:55 pm“Honda Civic in may sold 57,000 units, in November it was down to 7,000. Same numbers for the Toyota Corolla. The small cars are not selling at $1.50 a gallon.”
Gee, maybe, just maybe it has something to do with the recession that very few people can afford a new car right now. The few fat cats that can no doubt want big gas guzzlers but the average person would have trouble affording or even obtaining a loan to buy a used car right now. Also, I don’t remember anyone mentioning Honda having the financial problems that plague GM Mr. Lutz.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:55 pmThis guy’s name is “Lutz” or “Yutz”???
December 9th, 2008 at 2:55 pmLUTZ: “No, they do now. … Look at automotive news and see that the Honda Civic in May sold 57,000 units, in November it was down to 7,000. Same numbers for the Toyota Corolla. The small cars are not selling at $1.50 a gallon.”
Corollas and Civics aren’t TRUCKS, so that’s a false comparison. Trucks/SUVs have a guaranteed market as official vehicles, so that’s another false comparison.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:04 pmGM motto c.1950; What’s good for General Motors is good for America, and what’s good for America, is good for the world.
50 years later, nothing’s changed.
I know for a fact that it reflects GM’s attitude, then and now. My father WORKED for GM.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:05 pmGreat Job – he’s just provided the best argument yet for increased CAFE standards and a repeal of a dumb tax credit.
Just because stupid Americans will think short term and buy worthless vehicles for a tax credit doesn’t mean they should or that a company should bet its existence on that tax credit. That’s why so many Americans and his company are in the mess they are in.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:10 pmI don’t suppose the drop in Civic sales since May has anything to do with unemployment and the reluctance of the people who are the market for that vehicle to spend money.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:10 pmQuality design, fit and finish, and durabilty. These qualities are sorely lacking in the products made by the big three.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:12 pmAs if there is a mystery as to why the Germans and the Japanesse are kicking their asses.
Nationalize them.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:13 pmOh man.
Got stupid??
December 9th, 2008 at 3:13 pmspencers mom Says:
So the “plan” provided to Congress was nothing more than a well-crafted justification for some free money.
I believe this should take GM permanently out of the running for any form of bailout. Their management clearly doesn’t have any desire to change, so whatever cast is provided will be a bandaid on future bankrupcy.
But, again, if we punish the fat cats at GM we are also punishing the workers who will be out of a job.
I believe that the government should loan them the money based on the requirement that all management be fired and that they start making fuel efficient cars. If they refuse, nationalize them.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:15 pm“The substantial growth in sales for hybrid cars in the United States has been chronicled by the Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA). This organization notes that hybrid car sales figures have risen from 9,367 in 2000 and 47,525 in 2004 to 324,318 in 2007.”
http://www.hybridmile.com/alternative-fuel/analyzing-hybrid-sales/
Dec. 2 (Bloomberg) — U.S. auto sales plunged 37 percent in November to the lowest annual rate in 26 years as the recession and Detroit automakers’ aid pleas kept buyers out of showrooms. Toyota fell 34 percent, the most since at least 1980, while Chrysler LLC’s 47 percent slide was the worst since at least 1981, according to research firm Autodata Corp. Deliveries fell for all major automakers.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a91kPEWlcOos&refer=home
GM U.S. sales plunged 45% in the month, worse than the forecast of a 41% drop from Edmunds.com. Unlike some of its rivals, its sales even fell from what were weak levels in September.
It was the lowest sales total at GM since December 1970, a month that followed a strike that shut production at the nation’s largest automaker.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/03/news/companies/auto_sales/
Are Kilmeade and Carlson looking for a free car for their support of Lutz’s lying?
December 9th, 2008 at 3:17 pmGM started building tanks for WWII in the ’40’s under Federal request.
65 years later, GM continues to build tanks…
December 9th, 2008 at 3:17 pmWhich countries in America. Folks I know in the United States are all for smaller and more efficient. The main reason for the Big threes problems is they refused to take the lead on efficiency. Personally I would switch back to “American” cars if they would give me a fuel conservation. They haven’t really tried, which is why foreign carmakers continually increase their markets here.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:23 pmLook at how gas prices have crashed. People need to realize that they can get to 50 cents per gallon, 40 cents per gallon or better if they will just buy more efficient vehicles and ride a bike now and then. Consumers have tremendous power .. why the hell aren’t they using it?? And why is it that GM is so happy to subsidize the oil behemoths even to the detriment of it’s customers??
December 9th, 2008 at 3:26 pmIf this assclown knew what americans wanted, the big three wouldn’t be on their hands and knees in front of congress BEGGING to be bailed out, now would they?
December 9th, 2008 at 3:32 pmFirst of all, Lutz has to go. This guy has been working, since 1963, for either GM, Chrysler or Ford, except for three years with BMW (in the 70’s) and 4 years working for a company that makes car batteries. Forty-five years. You might think he was smarter than to claim that $1.50 gasoline is somehow going to be with us now through the end of time. His full compensation in 2008 from GM will be about $6.9 million. He can just donate it to GM and get the hell out.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:32 pma GM PR drone lives in my neighborhood. i asked for an explanation of how the US automotive industry failed to miss the fuel-efficiency cue… did more dinosaurs suddenly die and create excess petroleum reserves between the gas crunch of the 70s and the hit we’re feeling now?
the answer i received: it costs less money to build big automobiles… less welds, faster/easier to navigate robots in/out during the production phases.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:33 pmAs a matter of general interest:
The UK was in hellish straits after WWII. It was broke, and it owed the US a lot of money (finally paid-off a couple of years). Rationing didn’t end until 1954 . Many of the cars in Britain were from the 1930s, few could afford even the cheapest of new cars and petrol had increased due to the Suez crisis.
In 1959 Austin/Morris came out with the Mini–a “people’s car” that was actually high-tech but sold at a bargain price of 497 pounds.
Austin/Morris was later folded into the nationalized British Motor Corporation, which then became British Leyland, before being sold-off and split into private companies again. Throughout the Mini was produced and was essentially sold at cost.
The car itself didn’t make any money, but it made Britain mobile and productive–it served as infrastructure for the larger, longer term good.
The US could do something similar, but could actually make a profit after a few years of loss-leading. There’s is an obvious candidate in the European Ford Fiesta–the deisle version of which gets 60 mpg but which is in all other respects not an ‘economy’ car.
However fat chance of anything like that ever happening.
December 9th, 2008 at 3:49 pmFrom ClimateProgress:
This quote alone should put both of them into the unemployment line. I’m frankly not sure which is worse, their monolithically sucky cars or the clueless boobs calling the shots. One certainly explains the other.
Heckuva job, Lutzi!
December 9th, 2008 at 3:51 pmA lot of the people I talk to say they like their SUVs and mini-vans because they need them to transport their kids around.
Do they make a fuel-efficient, sturdy car that can safely fit a family of six? They tell me that once you have more than a couple of kids you’re stuck with the larger vehicles because of seat belt/car seat laws.
Other people say that they like riding high and they feel safer in SUVs.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:08 pmDon’t get me wrong – I hate SUVs and consider them a symbol of waste and selfishness.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:16 pmWhy not build some cars that are competitive with the imports? I think if America built a competitive car then a lot of people would choose to buy them. There are only so many people who are willing to buy crap just because it was made here.
If you want an SUV then buy a freaking SUV. If you drive in it alone every day then you are an idiot. It isn’t that hard to understand.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:17 pmmary Says: Other people say that they like riding high and they feel safer in SUVs.
I like riding high, too, but everytime I meet a big SUV on an icy road, it scares the hell out of me.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:19 pmWhen Lutz gets booted from GM he’ll have a nice cushy landing on an air bag courtesy of the oil companies.
I’m reposting this from this morning’s Think Fast thread, more people need to understand this:
Briseadh na Faire Says:
Lest we forget, it was the huge spike in gas prices that triggered this economic collapse. Oil companies sucked tens of BILLIONS out of the economy. Their profits soared, their CEOs were handsomely rewarded.
Meanwhile, people were forced to cut back on spending, just to put gas in the car and food on the table. That reduced demand for consumer products, which, in turn caused production cutbacks, i.e. layoffs, which in turn started the foreclosure buildup, which drove down house prices, which left many people with mortgages higher than the value of their house, which eliminated refinancing, which further slowed consumer spending, leading to more production cuts, more layoffs, more foreclosures, with no end in sight.
For Bush, Cheney and Big Oil, it’s Mission Accomplished. The “haves and the have mores” got what they paid for when they annointed BushCo.
December 9th, 2008 at 9:29 am Add Karma Recommend (11) |
Thanks Briseadh na Faire.
Lutz is touting $1.50 a gallon gas as a reason to keep buying the gas guzzlers. They have a huge inventory to get rid of, and it could take years to re-tool.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:26 pmGas won’t remain at $1.50 for long, maybe a year at best.
Someone needs to amend one of the key lines from the theme song from “The Jeffersons” for these idiots:
“…CEO’s do fry in the committee seats, everything they say burns on the blogs…”
December 9th, 2008 at 4:28 pmLet me start with his argument that at $ 1.50 a gallon, Americans like their cars to be bigger and badder than everyone else’s cars.
But does that mean that he expects gas to stay at $ 1.50 a gallon ? And what about when it rises again?
A car is a multi-year investment. So what is gas gonna do over the next 5 to 10 years ?
December 9th, 2008 at 4:37 pmWow, it sure is nice to see so many people on this site who know everything about the automotive business, and what Americans really want to drive. Why don’t you fools pool your resources and start a car company. Since you have it all figured out you should start building cars and not only put GM, Ford, and Chrysler out of business, but every other car maker around the world as well. Think of all the jobs you could create with your great cars that everyone will be falling all over themselves trying to buy. Plus you can save the Earth, the moon, Mars, whales, bears, Britney, and probably the whole Universe.
Ford, GM, and Chrysler have all been producing hybrid cars for years. Guess what? They don’t sell (even with government bribes of $7500 to buy them) as well as the other cars and trucks they make which by the way get as good or better mileage as any Japanese car in the same class, and cost the same. If some of you don’t like the styling of these cars that’s fine but don’t use that as a reason to lie and say American car company’s don’t make fuel efficient cars. American cars are some of the safest cars on the road. As good or better than any other manufacturer. Look at all the small fuel efficient cars that are driven in Europe. Their made by Ford, GM, Fiat, Tata, Honda, Toyota, Renault, Citron and many others. If Americans are dying to drive these tiny cars that get anywhere from 40-64 mpg have 90-120 bhp, run on gasoline or diesel and cost 9k-20k then why aren’t they being sold in America? Why haven’t Americans been buying these cars at the same rate or more than the Europeans? Ford makes small, high mileage cars in Europe and because of the Union, and Government rules can’t sell them here.
That facts are that America isn’t Europe (thank God) and what they want is not what we want. Gas prices are much lower here, we have much more open land room to drive and that makes driving larger vehicles (hybrid SUV’s included) more in line to what Americans want. Most Americans don’t want to drive dinky under-powered cars, and that’s not going to change no matter how much the crazy environmental suckers in this country wail. As I said before, Instead of running to the government all the time why don’t you know it all environmentalist start your own car companies and prove everyone wrong.
Lutz is wrong about gobal warming, but he knows the car business better than any of you do. GM still sells more cars world wide than any other manufacturer. Ford is still the third largest seller of cars in the world. They make good products in this country and in Europe. The had record profits through the 90’s by selling large vehicles in America and smaller ones in Europe. So much success in fact the every other manufacturer around the world started selling large trucks, and SUV’s in America as well. But then the government had to start regulating and started screwing things up for all car makers. The U.S. manufactures where a little behind with the new regulations but they have been building competitive vehicles since.
By the way. Try giving the Japanese car makers the same legacy cost’s as GM, Ford, and Chrysler and watch their profitability go right down the drain.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:45 pmSorry Dr. Hussein Matt, but I’m a Dem, voted for Obama and you better be able to come up with a actual argument to support any positions you have. So please try again.
December 9th, 2008 at 4:51 pmWas KLutz the designer of Homer’s Canyonero?
December 9th, 2008 at 4:56 pmBlame Canada Says:
Most Americans don’t want to drive dinky under-powered cars, and that’s not going to change no matter how much the crazy environmental suckers in this country wail.
So, now you speak for “Most Americans” and even erect a strawman argument for them too? Odd how “Most Americans” aren’t buying the big 3’s products, and there is something to the position of being marketed to: case on point-the popularity of the Mini after the film “The Italian Job” came out. (Hardly under-powered, it leaves other cars in the dust with its pickup.) The big 3 just pushed big hogs.
You may think “Most Americans” don’t want “dinky under-powered cars,” but watching their bug-eyed shock while filling up their gas-sucking manatees to the tune of $80-$100 a pop was enough to call bullsh#t on your claim.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:02 pmThis sums it up perfectly! (t-h to boingboing.net)
http://buffalobeast.com/133/bigthree.jpg
December 9th, 2008 at 5:05 pmLooks like Bobby Lutz thinks the big ugly gas guzzlers are the way of the future.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:35 pmGee, I wonder why the oil companies are not jumping in with lots of cash to support the dead horses of the environmentally and ethically challenged industry.
I’m a pedestrian and the shrinking in the size of cars is very visible and palpable in this town. I no longer stretch my neck at intersections to catch the driver’s eye before I cross the street.
December 9th, 2008 at 5:47 pmI happen to think that Lutz is correct when he says that the car-buying public wants big cars. People mistakenly associate brands like Toyota with small cars, but their lineup in fact as just as many large SUV and pickup trucks as the Detroit group. If you need any convincing, simply examine the makeup of the traffic around you on the highway to work.
Someone says “what’s wrong with people” that they don’t exercise the power of the purse to drive the market to smaller, fuel-efficient cars. And the answer is that they are using that power — to buy big, boxy cars and trucks.
We aren’t going to see a real swing to fuel-efficient small cars until gasoline prices go to $4 or higher and stay there for years. And it probably will take 2 years at that level to really affect the purchasing patterns.
Thanks.
mp
December 9th, 2008 at 6:13 pmIf that’s the best you can do then please stop now before you make yourself look more the fool. Your going to base a false argument on a movie your a fan boy of? A mini Cooper S as you claim “leaves other cars in the dust with it’s pickup”. Copmared to what? Have you been doing comparisons? Do you have data proving your claims? Or are you making a point based on what you saw in a movie? The mini Cooper S is a fine car. Fun to drive, even take to the track for some racing. But it is not what the average American is going to buy and that’s backed up by fact.
Fact:
Mini Cooper S, $22,600 for base model
29 mph manual (which only about 8% of americans drive.)
26 mph auto.
422 miles per tank
4545 sold in America this year. Hardly the kind of numbers that would say America is Mini crazy.
Ford Escape Hybrid, $29,305 base model
32 mpg auto
500 miles per tank
Ford Escape, $20,100 base model
25 mpg auto
404 miles per tank.
Both Ford models sell well more than the 4500 total of the mini. The Hybrid is about 6k more but with tax credit makes it about even with the mini. It gets better mileage and offers more options that Americans are looking for (more room, bigger, more cup holders, ect.)
The standard Escape costs less and averages 1 mpg less yet, sells much better for the reasons stated above.
Please explain why Fiat hasn’t brought over their small cars years ago so they could sell millions of them to Americans you think are secretly pinning for them. With all it’s great marketing (according to you) why hasn’t the mini sold millions in Europe? You probably didn’t know that America is the mini’s biggest market by far and it only sells 4500 cars for the year.
If your argument is that Americans like big cars when gas is cheap and will abandon them for smaller cars if gas prices go up, Ford and GM have your answer. You don’t have to give them up. Both companies make Hybrid SUV’s that get good mileage (better than a mini) and still give Americans what they want. BIG SUV’s!
It’s not Ford, GM, or Chrysler’s job to create a energy policy for America. If the self appointed do gooder’s in this country want a different car then start a company, put people to work, and build the cars you think people will by. That is the American way. If you think you can do it better then do so. Don’t run to the government and try and force others to conform to what you want.
December 9th, 2008 at 6:34 pmBlame Canada Says:
Don’t run to the government and try and force others to conform to what you want.
Funny you should say that, because it is exactly what the Big 3 are doing: Running to the government to force taxpayers to subsidize their inefficient, gas-guzzling ways.
Ironic, ain’t it?
December 9th, 2008 at 6:50 pmBlame Canada,
December 9th, 2008 at 6:53 pmFord is the sole domestic manufacturer to produce a hybrid vehicle. It was extremely unreliable and gas mileage sucked. My brother and sister-in-laws had one and spent as much time in the shop as on the road. European manufacturers have problems producing their mini-vehicles for the US market because of the side impact requirements. Still, on a statistical basis, they are safer. In frontal collisions, front seat passengers in an Asian designed car are more likely to survive a front-ender then any driver or suicide position passenger in an American vehicle.
An additional point, Big Three vehicles are on the road for an average span of 8 years – Asian designs last an average of 14 years.
I don’t want either but I would like some clean and efficient mass transit
December 9th, 2008 at 6:55 pmBlame Canada Says:
The mini Cooper S is a fine car. Fun to drive, even take to the track for some racing. But it is not what the average American is going to buy and that’s backed up by fact.
Funny you should say this too, because one of the problems that the Big 3 are currently experiencing is a shrinking market share: Most Americans are now purchasing smaller, efficient cars, most are from Japanese makers -like Toyota, with the Camry being the best-selling car in the US.
This is, by no means, a secret. It’s been talked about in the news for quite some time now.
December 9th, 2008 at 7:03 pmBlame Canada,
December 9th, 2008 at 7:09 pmI get 42-57 MPG on my Prius and the base price is $7000 less then the Ford Escape Hybrid.
51. Blame Canada Says: If that’s the best you can do then please stop now before you make yourself look more the fool. Your going to base a false argument on a movie your a fan boy of?
Boy, you sure told me…wait, no, you didn’t. Beatdown in 3…2..1..
Fact:
Mini Cooper S, $22,600 for base model
29 mph manual (which only about 8% of americans drive.)
26 mph auto.
422 miles per tank
4545 sold in America this year. Hardly the kind of numbers that would say America is Mini crazy.
Wow, stupid & illiterate. Let’s review…the point I was making, which you managed to miss completely, was the marketing aspect. You cited the sales of Minis THIS year, when I, QUITE CLEARLY made the example of Mini sales after the “Italian Job” came out (2003):
Marketing. (I’ll type it slowly for you, bung: “The big 3 just pushed big hogs.” That was their main source of revenue, and even insiders stated that they were easier to build. (Don’t make me get the quote and spank you even more.)
In other words, buttcake, the American public has been deluged with image over substance, like buying crap skunk-beer instead of the authentic real McCoy…Budwater comes with bikini-clap bimbos. Advertising is effective and the big 3 know this, but real market forces and a poor product have scuttled their campaign, hence, their brand is now associated with tin crap that breaks all the time.
And Ford continues their tradition of trying to fry their consumers:
The NHTSB, you remember, was the result of our vaunted auto industry’s caring and concern for their customers. I believe you can thank Iacocca and his flaming Pinto for that little chapter in history.
A mini Cooper S as you claim “leaves other cars in the dust with it’s pickup”. Copmared to what? Have you been doing comparisons? Do you have data proving your claims? Or are you making a point based on what you saw in a movie?
Better than that, nosebleed, I drive one. And it rocks. I wouldn’t buy an American (big 3) car if they gave away a blowjob and free pizzas for life. I’d rather not spend my life driving back and forth to the mechanic.
December 9th, 2008 at 7:43 pmThe worst part is that Lutz is completely full of it. He’s making up numbers. The Civic sold 53k in May, 18k in November.
But that’s not the worst part. Lutz claims SUV sales are picking back up. Let’s look at Nov. 2008 vs Nov 2007 numbers. All data is from Automotive News, per Lutz:
Civic: Down 30%
Corolla/Matrix: Down 13%
Chevy Tahoe: Down 55%
GMC Yukon: Down 48%
Trailblazer: Down 67%
Only a relatively small drop for the Silverado pickup (-23%) kept GM’s truck numbers completely out of the crapper.
December 9th, 2008 at 8:27 pmDont give a phuck if they paid me to buy a GM and paid my kids college tuition too boot.
Owned, BMW, Nissan, GMC, Honda, Ford, VW and Toyota.
Hands down, based on value, economy, reliability and integrity, I am and will always be a Honda customer.
One VFR800 moto and one Odyssey van and I’m sold, 100%.
Everything else, dollar-for-dollar, is total shit, ESPECIALLY GM PRODUCTS!!!!
December 9th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
It’s not Ford, GM, or Chrysler’s job to create a energy policy for America. If the self appointed do gooder’s in this country want a different car then start a company, put people to work, and build the cars you think people will by.
Well shit-fer-brains, whaddayathinkofit????
http://www.teslamotors.com/
Acceleration 0 to 60 mph in under 4 seconds
Top Speed 125 mph (electronically limited)
Range About 220 miles
(based on EPA combined city/highway cycle)
Battery Life Five years or 100,000 miles
THE “BIG 3″ CAN GO COLLECTIVELY FCUK THEMSELVES, THANK YOU.
December 9th, 2008 at 10:40 pmAnd don’t leave out the Japanese when it comes to designing exciting electric vehicles.
The car runs on a lithium-ion battery and can accelerate from 0-100 km/h (60 mph) in four seconds. In 2004, the Eliica reached a speed of 370 km/h (230 mph) on Italy’s Nardo High Speed Track.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/28/eliica-8-wheeler-ev-blows-away-mitsu-evo-in-drag-race/
The “Eliica” is unique in that it utilizes individual motors in each wheel, something Mitsubishi has recently abandoned in their electric car development.
December 10th, 2008 at 12:07 am#60, Tesla has their own problems too.
December 10th, 2008 at 12:33 amSo, the only problem with this guy’s buisness plan is that we, the consumers, aren’t able to secure enough debt to keep him afloat.
December 10th, 2008 at 8:19 am