Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    GM To Face Civil Trial Over A Faulty Ignition Switch On January 11th

      GM Heads To Trial Over A Faulty Ignition Switch Next Month

    General Motors will be heading to court on January 11th to face the first of several planned 'bellwether' cases over its defective ignition switch.

     

    On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan rejected GM's claims to dismiss the case as the plaintiff provided sufficient evidence to justify letting a jury hear whether or not the switch caused or enhanced injuries in a crash.

     

    The case in question was brought to court by Robert Scheuer who crashed into two trees in Oklahoma on May 28, 2014. The Saturn Ion he was driving did not deploy the front airbags, which he says is a result of a defective ignition switch.

     

    Furman's decision "paves the way for the jury to have an unfettered and full view of GM's behavior in covering up this defect," said Bob Hilliard, lawyer for Scheuer in a statement.

     

    "We are fully prepared to go to trial, and introduce evidence showing that the ignition switch issue did not cause the injuries in this accident, or cause the airbags not to deploy," said GM spokesman James Cain in a phone interview with Reuters.

     

    This case is important as it is the first of six 'bellweather' cases being brought to trial. These cases are sometimes used in product liability litigation where hundreds or thousands of people have a similar case. The results of the six cases will help those decide whether or not to continue with their case or settle.

     

    Source: Reuters

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Last year I purchased a 2008 Grand Prix for my teenager as a second hand purchase from an older guy for a dam good price.  I really like the car and so does he.  We took it in this week finally for an ignition switch recall, and after having it at the dealer for most of the day, I observed the fix.  The keys were originally made with slots for ring holders.  They plugged them with inserts that convert it to a simple round hole instead.  When I asked the service tech as to why exactly, he did not know.  My guess, it prevents the potential for a slight cantilever moment at one end of the slot, that could rotate the ignition.

     

    Wow.  

     

    s-l300.jpg

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Last year I purchased a 2008 Grand Prix for my teenager as a second hand purchase from an older guy for a dam good price.  I really like the car and so does he.  We took it in this week finally for an ignition switch recall, and after having it at the dealer for most of the day, I observed the fix.  The keys were originally made with slots for ring holders.  They plugged them with inserts that convert it to a simple round hole instead.  When I asked the service tech as to why exactly, he did not know.  My guess, it prevents the potential for a slight cantilever moment at one end of the slot, that could rotate the ignition.

     

    Wow.  

     

    s-l300.jpg

     

    Only some of the vehicles get that fix, other replace the entire lock cylinder.  It depends on which vehicle you get. 

     

    The reason for the insert is this:

     

     

    A GM spokesman, Alan Adler, said a combination of excessive weight on the key and a jarring event could pull the key into “accessory” mode. If that happens, the engine cuts off and airbags are disabled.

    “The ignition switch is slightly out of spec; however, the whole system is in spec,” Adler said. “We don’t have a bad part that we’re replacing. The issue is more external.”

     

    So I'm guessing you're right in that putting the insert into the key prevents leverage from switching the key position to Acc. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1. If he feels it aint safe for his offspring....he could sell said GM product.

     

    2. Id he decides to keep said GM car...its because he feels it safe...therefore there is no WOW at the end of his "comment"

     

    3. .....

     

    4. He finally took it in during holiday season? How convenient it is for him...

     

    5. ....

     

    .

     

    MAybe its a nice engineering fix....but there is no WOW at the end of that!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It is a wow in that it is a simple fix.   The GP is one of the GM cars with the ignition on the dash, a key with a slot in it rather than a single hole would be at an angle when in the run position.  If the driver has a lot of heavy weight on it tugging down, that weight could notch the key vertical (to Acc.) when hitting a bump.  The insert into the key would prevent that movement from happening.

     

    post-51-0-09557700-1451596740_thumb.jpg

     

     

    Edit:  And I have been mostly off from work in December 12th.  I've had two recalls done on my Honda, inspection, ball join repair, and had the Oldsmobile inspected and some repairs, plus re-doing an apartment that I plan to offer for lease next month..... lots of us use this time of year to catch up on things.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yup, the 'wow' was that it was such a simple fix.  I figured there was an inspection done as well, but seeing as how the car has over 100K miles on it now, I bet that was considered into the decision.

     

    By the way, the Grand Prix is an excellent used vehicle to consider for family who are shopping for used and affordable.  The market is flooded with them, and although the car had it's faults, I recall shopping around and there were many with nearly 300K miles on that trusty Series III 3.8L.  The engine is rough when pushed, but it's torque down low makes up for most of that.  Ours was spotless from original retired owner, and I swear, nobody ever even sat in the back seat. 

     

    And the reason I purchased used is simple.  Insurance costs.  If you have a teen, you know what I mean.  

     

    And olds......really?

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I forgot...I have access to cute little emoticons. So Ill just start using them, like I did when I first joined up here.

     

     

    Last year I purchased a 2008 Grand Prix for my teenager as a second hand purchase from an older guy for a dam good price.  I really like the car and so does he.  We took it in this week finally for an ignition switch recall, and after having it at the dealer for most of the day, I observed the fix.  The keys were originally made with slots for ring holders.  They plugged them with inserts that convert it to a simple round hole instead.  When I asked the service tech as to why exactly, he did not know.  My guess, it prevents the potential for a slight cantilever moment at one end of the slot, that could rotate the ignition.

     

    Wow.  

     

    s-l300.jpg

    :bs:

     

    Yup, the 'wow' was that it was such a simple fix.  I figured there was an inspection done as well, but seeing as how the car has over 100K miles on it now, I bet that was considered into the decision.

     

    By the way, the Grand Prix is an excellent used vehicle to consider for family who are shopping for used and affordable.  The market is flooded with them, and although the car had it's faults, I recall shopping around and there were many with nearly 300K miles on that trusty Series III 3.8L.  The engine is rough when pushed, but it's torque down low makes up for most of that.  Ours was spotless from original retired owner, and I swear, nobody ever even sat in the back seat. 

     

    And the reason I purchased used is simple.  Insurance costs.  If you have a teen, you know what I mean.  

     

    And olds......really?

    :bs:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I currently have 2 GM products with my name on the title, and one mopar.  I have personally owned / leased over a dozen GM products in my days, and I was raised in GM products.....and I still qualify for GM discounts through my retired GM father.  I have also owned several Honda's, Subaru and even Nissan.  

     

    Olds, are you suggesting I would never own GM as a Ford employee?  Actually, never mind.  I don't know what you are suggesting, and honestly don't care.

     

    Happy New Year anyway, you crazy Greek you.

    Edited by Wings4Life
    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Happy New Year to you to, Wings...

     

    Hopefully after decades of the same 'ol same 'ol routine of yours on the internet of being less than truthful of your intentions....you will change your ways...

     

    Like I said, I see right through you!

    Im like the oracle of Delphi.

     

     

    PS: Im not the one who followed a handful of MT posters in this website just to continue the less than truthful intentions, Wings.

    Id look in the mirror before Id start calling someone else twisted...

    The Greek part.

    Well, the part of Greece my mom comes from, yeah, they are a tad twisted, so no harm in you saying that, its the truth...

    However, If I was you, Id seriously take a reflection of what it is you do for the past 2 decades in internet forums and Id change it...

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Cobalt ignition switch was really the only ignition that was significantly substandard, because it was not only designed on the cheap to start with, but the 3rd party manufacturer built the design to an even lower standard, but the price was right and GM accepted it without scrutiny.

     

    GM recalling a few million w-bodies and gen 5 Camaros over zero deaths and just a dozen or so shutoff complaints was more about saving face with the public.

     

    The modified key with the hole in the middle is a very practical fix, it's logically sound to remove twisting leverage from the load of the keychain, since people can't be held responsible for keeping two pounds of keychains hanging on their fob. Ask any mechanic the sort of keychains they get from customers, especially ones with ignition problems.

     

    These ongoing trials are now a sh*t show for money grubbing lawyers.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Cobalt ignition switch was really the only ignition that was significantly substandard, because it was not only designed on the cheap to start with, but the 3rd party manufacturer built the design to an even lower standard, but the price was right and GM accepted it without scrutiny.

     

    GM recalling a few million w-bodies and gen 5 Camaros over zero deaths and just a dozen or so shutoff complaints was more about saving face with the public.

     

    The modified key with the hole in the middle is a very practical fix, it's logically sound to remove twisting leverage from the load of the keychain, since people can't be held responsible for keeping two pounds of keychains hanging on their fob. Ask any mechanic the sort of keychains they get from customers, especially ones with ignition problems.

     

    These ongoing trials are now a sh*t show for money grubbing lawyers.

     

    Are you suggesting of the 169 deaths and hundreds more injured, that it only involved Cobalt?  I did not know.  I mean, I know there were many vehicles recalled, but if that is true, that is a bit surprising to go to such lengths to save face.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    The Cobalt ignition switch was really the only ignition that was significantly substandard, because it was not only designed on the cheap to start with, but the 3rd party manufacturer built the design to an even lower standard, but the price was right and GM accepted it without scrutiny.

     

    GM recalling a few million w-bodies and gen 5 Camaros over zero deaths and just a dozen or so shutoff complaints was more about saving face with the public.

     

    The modified key with the hole in the middle is a very practical fix, it's logically sound to remove twisting leverage from the load of the keychain, since people can't be held responsible for keeping two pounds of keychains h anging on their fob. Ask any mechanic the sort of keychains they get from customers, especially ones with ignition problems.

     

    These ongoing trials are now a sh*t show for money grubbing lawyers.

     

    Are you suggesting of the 169 deaths and hundreds more injured, that it only involved Cobalt?  I did not know.  I mean, I know there were many vehicles recalled, but if that is true, that is a bit surprising to go to such lengths to save face.

     

     

    There are two primary recalls over the ignition switch problem.  The "main" one where the entire switch itself is replaced only involves the Chevy Cobalt and HHR, Pontiac G5 and Solstice, and Saturn Ion and Sky.  Those are the only ones with a part number specifically linked to any injuries or fatalities.   

     

    There is a second group of recalls that involve the fix you got Wings, where just the keys are modified. This recall involves a different part number and no injuries or fatalities.  This is the "saving face" recall where GM is extending an extreme level of caution just to be on the safe side.  This recall involves the final generation W-Body cars (Lacrosse, Intrigue, Impala, Monte Carlo, Grand Prix), the N-Body cars (Early Malibu, Grand Am, Alero), the G-Body (Lucerne, Deville, DTS), and some of the early Sigma cars (CTS, Early SRX, but NOT STS), and the Camaro. 

     

    The total number of vehicles recalled around 6 million in this country.   Another point to be made is that the percentage of crashes where the airbags did not deploy due to this issue is well below the rate of non-deployment industry wide.  Even the Department of Transportation states that the airbags fail to deploy in up to 2% of crashes.    Even if 0.5% of the total of the recalled GM vehicles (30,000) were involved in a crash where the airbags should deploy, 169 vehicles where the airbags didn't deploy would be just 0.56%.... there would have to be 3.5 times as many instances of this situation happening just to meet industry average.

     

    Naturally, GM should be making sure that their vehicles are as safe as can be engineered for, but at the same time this is a very large mountain built from mole hills, and it doesn't surprise me at all that GM will defend itself where it can. 

     

    Edit:  Actually, I made an error above.  The total number of vehicles recalled for the ignition is 17.3 million, not 6 million (which seemed too low and why I went and checked more).  I'm not going to redo all of my percentages, even at 6 million, my point has been more than made. 

    • Upvote 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thank you for that clarifying post, Drew. The Cobalt's sales volume and publicity dwarfed the other related models involved in the primary ignition case, so I tend to gloss over them.

     

    @wings - I hope his post answered your question.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    [...] Even if 0.5% of the total of the recalled GM vehicles (30,000) were involved in a crash where the airbags should deploy, 169 vehicles where the airbags didn't deploy would be just 0.56%.... there would have to be 3.5 times as many instances of this situation happening just to meet industry average.

    Naturally, GM should be making sure that their vehicles are as safe as can be engineered for, but at the same time this is a very large mountain built from mole hills, and it doesn't surprise me at all that GM will defend itself where it can. [...]

     

    As mentioned, not all "ignition switch" recalls are the same. Most of them involved the design of the key and were made out of extra-caution.

    The "real" faulty ignition switch recall actually involve 2,6 million vehicles.

    The 2% from the study is not the % of cars with non deploying airbags in the market, but the % of fatalities where the airbags didn't work.

     

    So

    a) You can't compare this 2% vs "0.56% of GM vehicles". It's rather 2% (market) vs 100% (GM faulty switch) of fatalities where the airbags didn't work.

    b) The 2% involve unknown causes which might include defect, but mostly design vs certain types of accident (the purpose of the study being to improve design and efficiency, as shown by improvement noticed between first, second and third gen airbags). GM where third gen rendered inoperative by a known mechanical design flaw. It's hardly "mountain built from mole hills" and, commendably, GM recognized it.

     

    Where GM has to defend itself in three areas :

    a) Trials from some of the 91% complaints GM deemed as not related to the ignition switch but as part of this "2%" the whole industry has to work on.

    b) Cases other than airbag related fatalities, going from annoying situations (car switching off without further consequences) to "who knew and how could this have happen".

    c) Some always willing to sue whatever...

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't follow your reasoning for your first item a.  In that study, 2% of fatalities happened when the airbags didn't deploy, but were expected to have deployed. You cannot compare that to just the ignition related fatalities and not take into account the number of airbag deployments that did happen.  It's not 2% vs 100%.  

     

    If you want to look at just the main ignition recall numbers, that's fine too.  Assuming a rate of 0.5% of the 2,600,000 recalled vehicles have a crash that deploy the airbags, 169 where the airbags didn't deploy is still less than 2% ringing in at 1.3%.  What makes it hard is that both this study, and the 169 fatalities only count fatalities and not crashes that happened where no one died, but the airbags still did not properly deploy.   If you start to compare all injury claims on GM from this issue, you cannot then compare it to the 2% number from the DOT because that only counts fatalities. 

     

    In your first item b, you make an incorrect assumption.  The study was specifically looking at fatalities in frontal crashes. 

     

    From the study:

     

    The study examined only front seat occupants involved in frontal collisions, the type of crash in which front airbags are designed to provide protection. Each database had a different method of coding crash type. In FARS, frontal crashes were defined as having a principal impact of 11, 12, or 1 o’clock;

     

     

    Yes, it is a design flaw. Yes GM must fix it.  However, the "mountain made from mole hills" comment refers specifically to the rate of occurrence of this issue compared to airbag non-deployments industry wide.  Further, 169 fatalities is a drop in the bucket in relation to the over 30,000 fatal car crashes each year.   I don't want to sound like I am minimizing the 169 deaths that might have been prevented, but that number over 13 years when over 30,000 a year are dying in traffic accidents, one has to keep things in perspective.

     

    18 times as many people die just from not using seat belts each year (3,353 - 2010 : 3,394 - 2011 : 3,031 - 2012) than died from the total 13 years of this ignition switch issue. 4.5 times as many people die each year from not wearing a motorcycle helmet. (708 - 2010 : 706 - 2011 : 781 - 2012)

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Drew, I agree with your remarks, except for your minimization of the 169 deaths and nearly 300 injuries.

    You simply can't do that.  That would be analogous to excusing a mass shooting because a person might have gone insane combined with the fact there are already many deaths and shootings in a given time frame anyway.  The victim's families could care less about numbers or relativity, they just want justice.  GM is not innocent here, of course, but regardless of how willing and honest and forthright they are now to make this go away, a lot of suffering has taken place.   

     

    And I know it is in the country's best interest to have GM move forward from this, and I think Mary B. has handled this exceptionally well, but the past mistakes do exist, and it is those mistakes and the ensuing justice that needs to be managed through all this.  And I also know that I was harsh in my remarks in the past toward GM on this, but credit where it is due.  GM is a great company, and that greatness is rising up from this terrible point in their history,  That's all one can do.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Drew, I agree with your remarks, except for your minimization of the 169 deaths and nearly 300 injuries.

    You simply can't do that.  That would be analogous to excusing a mass shooting because a person might have gone insane combined with the fact there are already many deaths and shootings in a given time frame anyway.  The victim's families could care less about numbers or relativity, they just want justice.  GM is not innocent here, of course, but regardless of how willing and honest and forthright they are now to make this go away, a lot of suffering has taken place.   

     

    And I know it is in the country's best interest to have GM move forward from this, and I think Mary B. has handled this exceptionally well, but the past mistakes do exist, and it is those mistakes and the ensuing justice that needs to be managed through all this.  And I also know that I was harsh in my remarks in the past toward GM on this, but credit where it is due.  GM is a great company, and that greatness is rising up from this terrible point in their history,  That's all one can do.

     

    I don't think I minimized anything regarding their death nor is it my intention to.   I am minimizing the hysteria that exists around the issue. 

    • Upvote 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    By bringing up volumes of auto related deaths as 'perspective' and relating it as a 'drop in the bucket' you actually are.

    The huge percentage of those deaths are driver error, or weather related or involve alcohol, etc.  A small percentage are mechanical failures, and a tiny, tiny fraction are caused from manufacturing defects.  That is the percentage you should probably compare.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I agree with the gist of what you're saying but not with your statistical comparison which is apples and oranges.

    Your 0.56% or 1,3% would be the % of fatalities vs number of cars with non-deploying airbags.

    The 2% in the study is about the % of fatalities vs total fatalities (not cars) related to non-deploying airbags.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I agree with the gist of what you're saying but not with your statistical comparison which is apples and oranges.

    Your 0.56% or 1,3% would be the % of fatalities vs number of cars with non-deploying airbags.

    The 2% in the study is about the % of fatalities vs total fatalities (not cars) related to non-deploying airbags.

     

    Well.. no... my 0.56% or 1.3% is the percent of airbag non-deployment fatalities vs number of all recall affected cars involved in a crash.

     

    We simply don't have enough statistical data from a control group and the recall group to get much closer than this. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By David
      Love this new marketing from GM!
      Are you willing to join the future? Are you willing to join Generation E?
      GM-Generation-E.mp4
    • By David
      GM announced today their new family of EV motors, The Ultium Drive family.

      The Ultium Drive family is made up of five interchangeable drive units and three motors. This will help transition the current portfolio of auto's to fully electric lineup. Performance, scale, speed to market and manufacturing efficiencies will provide GM significant advantages over past EV auto's. GM is leading the way with industry class leading drive units that use an electric motor and single-speed transmissions to apply power best in class horsepower and torque. Ultium Drives will be more responsive than internal combustion motors with precision torque control of the motors and smooth performance. The design and development of the Ultium Drive modular architecture allows us to offer industry-leading torque with power density across a wide spectrum of different vehicles types.
      GM has applied their 25 years of EV experience in creating the Ultium Drive family with lighter and more efficient designs. The Ultium Drive family integrates the power electronics into the drive units assemblies allowing for a 50% reduction in electronics over previous auto's thus saving cost and packaging space while increasing capability by 25 percent.

      To Quote GM press release:
      “As with other propulsion systems that are complex, capital intensive and contain a great deal of intellectual property, we’re always better off making them ourselves,” said Adam Kwiatkowski, GM executive chief engineer, Global Electrical Propulsion. “GM’s full lineup of EVs should benefit from the simultaneous engineering of Ultium Drive. Our commitment to increased vertical integration is expected to bring additional cost efficiency to the performance equation.”
      Ultium-Drive-to-Help-Power-GMs-All-Electric-Future.mp4


      https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2020/sep/0916-ultium-drive.html
    • By David
      Detroit Free Press covered the annual GM Analysts call this week and with the second quarter results it showed that GM has lost $800 million in the quarter but over all North American Earnings were breakeven and this was with 8 weeks of shutdown. Over all the Stock beat wall streets estimates and yet still sold off in large numbers during the pandemic closure.
      Analysts had plenty of questions for GM with a major question of will GM consider spinning off their technology arm which would include electric vehicles operations into a stand alone company?
      The idea of a stand alone GM Tech company is to recognize the advanced tech GM has over other auto companies and to unlock what Analysts see as considerable shareholder value. This new entity would allow access to cheap new capital to keep the old GM going till the new GM would replace it as a cutting edge tech auto company with what is seen as future strong growth.
      GM has reinforced it's future of all electric auto's, self driving auto's and what it expects to become a zero emission company with 20 new EV auto's on the market by 2023, the first being out in Q1 of 2021.
      The group of Analysts has suggested the new company be called Ultium based on GM's new battery tech.
      The CEO responded that GM is evaluating many scenarios for the future of GM. She had nothing further to say other than the board and executive team will consider all options for what is best for driving long-term shareholder value. Quote: "Nothing is off the table."
      Analysts have since added notes to their research suggesting that GM could already be considering this since so many start ups are valued more than GM such as Tesla, Nikola, Rivian, etc. The Billions of cheap dollars that could help drive GM long term into the future is hard to ignore.
      Some analysts say that to split the company would kill off the baby, meaning the EV side would die after the money was harvested from the stock sale as you only have the Chevrolet Bolt and the new company would have to follow Tesla in going back to the market for more and more money. This is based on what some analysts see as only a US/Canada interest in EVs compared to the rest of the world needing ICE.
      That being said it does show a clear line between those Analysts that see Europe and China leading in new tech with a change to EV's versus those Analysts that are more inline with the oil industry and imply that there is little to no interest in EV's.
      End result is WHAT WILL GM DO?
      I suspect GM will stay the course of using ICE auto's to fund the change to an all EV world. 50 years from now, people will be wondering why it took so long to dump ICE auto's in favor of EV's.
      What are your thoughts on this?
      https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/general-motors/2020/08/01/gm-electric-vehicles-mary-barra/5549426002/
       
       
    • By David
      Today July 31st 2020 GM and EVgo anounced their partnership to grow the EVgo fast charging network in growing nationally fast chargers. 2,700 fast chargers will be paid for and added to the EVgo network of fast chargers nationally by 2025.
      EVgo currently has 800 fast chargers that allows EV's to fully charge battery packs from 15 to 30 mins. In support of GM's drive to be 100% renewable power, all EVgo chargers use renewable energy now and will continue for the additional 2,700 stations that are to be added to the network.
      To Quote the News Release:
      This EV charging announcement continues GM’s commitment to an all-electric future.
      The heart of GM’s strategy is a modular propulsion system and a highly flexible global EV platform powered by proprietary Ultium batteries, allowing the company to compete for nearly every customer in the market today, whether they are looking for affordable transportation, a luxury experience, work trucks or a high-performance machine. On Thursday, Aug. 6, 2020, Cadillac will reveal the luxury brand’s first fully electric vehicle, the Cadillac LYRIQ. Earlier this year, GM announced that the Detroit-Hamtramck assembly plant will be GM’s first plant that is 100 percent devoted to electric vehicles and in fall 2021, will start building the new GMC HUMMER EV. GM was the first automaker to launch a long-range, affordable EV in 2017 with the Chevrolet Bolt EV and will expand on the Bolt EV’s foundation with the introduction of the Bolt EUV in 2021.  In March 2020, GM announced plans to greatly expand employee workplace charging with the addition of 3,500 new plugs at GM facilities in the U.S. and Canada. In 2019, GM announced the creation of Ultium Cells LLC, a joint venture with LG Chem to mass-produce battery cells in Ohio for future battery-electric vehicles, and that GM is working with Qmerit to create a more accessible at-home charging solution. 1 Actual charge times will vary based on battery condition, output of charger, vehicle settings and outside temperature.
      https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2020/jul/0731-evgo.html
    • By William Maley
      While the focus on the electric vehicles have been on the ultra plush and quick models from the likes of Tesla, Audi, and Jaguar, there is a lot of work being done for electric delivery vans. The combination of reduced maintenance, low fuel costs, and an abundance of torque to deal with heavy loads make them a perfect to do deliveries in urban areas. Rivian is the most-well known player here with plans to build out a fleet of electric vans for Amazon. Another player is ready to join the fight.
      Reuters reported yesterday that General Motors is working on a electric van for the commercial market. Five sources reveal that the van - codenamed BV1 - is expected to go into production late next year. It is expected to use Ultium battery technology that GM first talked about back in March. Utilizing this could solve one of the big issues with EVs, price. By switching Cobalt (expensive) for Aluminum (less expensive), GM says it will drop the cost of a battery to $100 per kilowatt-hour - making it around the same cost as regular gas powered van. Analysis done last year put the kilowatt-hour cost of a battery at $159. 
      One item still being debated internally is whether the van will be sold as Chevrolet, GMC, or a new brand. 
      When asked by Reuters, GM said it is “committed to an all-electric future and is implementing a multi-segment, scalable EV strategy to get there. At this time, we do not have any announcements to make regarding electric commercial vehicles.”
      GM isn't the only company getting on the electric van train. Ford has announced plans for an electric version of the Transit to launch in 2022, and British startup Arrival which has the backing of Hyundai, currently has an order of 10,000 vans from UPS.
      Source: Reuters

      View full article
  • Posts

    • It's an impressive beast.    Visually, I find it quite attractive. BMW bikes just kind of do it for me.  right now....falling off the wagon buying things myself. Setting up a home stereo with decent used components, and negotiating on antoher large heavy woodworking tool I have no bisness owning. 
    • Only have ridden it 3 times so far because of the weather here, but I'm getting more comfortable with it. The clutch is heavy, I'm going to need to do hand exercises or just ride it a heck of a lot more to work up the muscles in my left hand.  I brought it to work this morning so I can drop it off for state inspection. Thinking back, this is the biggest bike I think I've ridden, maybe not the heaviest, but certainly the largest engine and most powerful.  It's a lot of bike and I'm still getting used to it. One of the nicest things that makes me glad I bought it is that once I'm rolling, it doesn't really matter what gear I'm in, I can just roll on the throttle and go without having to downshift. Love the torque.
    • The only reason ICE vehicles considerably increased in costs is because now active safety systems became standard.  That alone increased costs of all vehicles by at least $3-5k.  Before active safety systems came into play the yearly increase in vehicle cost was only few hundreds at most to compensate for the inflation. The price disparity between comparable  ICE and BE vehicle is still significant and so far doesn't seem to decrease.  It might change in the future, but as of right now it is a valid argument.  It is a dead horse argument already but so is getting daily bombarded about other side of the argument which you seems to ignore.  
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. F&K
      F&K
      (57 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...