Flybrian

Two-Mode Hybrid system is $10,000+

34 posts in this topic

GM may eat hybrid cost
Goal is to make technology affordable for consumers
Posted Image
Jamie LaReau - Link to Original Article @ Automotive News - July 9, 2007 - 12:01 am


DETROIT - General Motors might absorb some costs of a Two Mode hybrid transmission in its full-sized trucks to make the technology affordable to consumers, product chief Bob Lutz says.

The automaker plans to have at least three hybrid transmissions and offer as many as a dozen hybrid models in the next few years. The Two Mode system, which has two electric motors that assist the engine, would be the premium system, Lutz said.

The cost of that system is more than $10,000, sources close to the program say.

Nearly every Cadillac product could feature a hybrid variant as early as the next two years, Lutz, GM's vice chairman of global product development, said in an interview with Automotive News.

The program has not been approved. But, Lutz said, it's "very logical to assume" that a hybrid drivetrain would fit in nearly all Cadillac vehicles, starting with the Escalade SUV next year.

GM's hybrid plans do not include the Chevrolet Volt concept car, which the automaker classifies as an electric car with a range assist. The Volt would run on electric power, with a gasoline, diesel or fuel cell engine recharging batteries.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not knockin the hybrid scene but does the market really need a hybrid tahoe. i hate it when people around me that have large suvs of the tahoes caliber complain about the price at the pump... they baught a tahoe and they are single or its just them and their spouse.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not knockin the hybrid scene but does the market really need a hybrid tahoe. i hate it when people around me that have large suvs of the tahoes caliber complain about the price at the pump... they baught a tahoe and they are single or its just them and their spouse.

A Tahoe hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compaired to a non-hybrid Tahoe than a Prius saves compared to a Corolla.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how much this will help GM's image to make its products seem less like gas guzzlers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ABSOLUTELY a hybrid Tahoe is needed!!! More so than a hybrid cracker box such as the Prius.

Larger vehicles should be the largest market for hybrids simply because it yields the biggest savings, not to mention multiple other reaons. Just because people buy a large vehicle and then complain about the price of fuel doesn't mean they don't deserve a hybrid options.

For example: My parents daily drivers are an F-150 and a Silverado, both 4X4 with the respective V8 engines. The price of gas is really hurting their budget, but downsizing is not an option. My dad has to drive a truck for his job and most of the time works out of it and my mom drives her truck because we can't afford a 3rd primary vehicle, yet we own horses and a large camper so the truck is a nessecity. 4X4 is a nessecity because we live in the mountains. They both are looking forward to the day when they can buy either a hybrid or diesel in a light duty pick up.

See, that's what pisses me off so ba about Congress and all the eco-morons chanting the small car chant (this isn't pertaining to you cletus, it's just an overall comment) Not everyone lives in the city and not everyone works an office job They STEAL the blue collar workers jobs in the name of "cheaper goods/ cost savings/ globalization" then expect us to get "Service jobs" that require trucks and travel, YET they try to take the trucks and energy we need to survive away for the sake of an idiot like Al Gore's agenda to let a few more trees grow in a city park.

Edited by FUTURE_OF_GM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$10k is horrible, they better soak up about $7k of that to make it resonable.

BTW, get rid of those nasty looking wheels also.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everyone lives in the city and not everyone works an office job

yes. I'll one up that. not everyone is chaeffuerd to their cushy office in the capital.

people who concern themselves with dictating how everyone else leads their life don't care though. they have tunnel vision.

tell ME the people I know and grew up with in ND who live in the vast nothing but have tons of room and drive trucks really waste energy compared to urban bangers who consume a lot more resources than they think they do with their copious consumption.

Al gore is proud of his weed bearning offspring who does prius track testing while running dope.

Edited by regfootball
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if they take 3K that's prolly fine.. the tax incentive should cover that 3k or so for the consumer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cadillac hybrid should be full-priced. Luxury buyers will pay more for the Hybrid status symbol and the extra MPG.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Tahoe hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compaired to a non-hybrid Tahoe than a Prius saves compared to a Corolla.

honestly had no idea it was that effective of a system

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM needs to figure out the basics of engines before they get crazy with hybrids. If you can't make an Impala get close to 40 before you start there is a flaw in the design.

In the movie "Mr. Baseball" starring Tom Sellek, Tom was a baseball player in the States who was an amazing MLB batter that went to Japan to play. Over there, the Japanese quickly found out that he could not hit a pitch called a "shootow" because he had a "hole in his swing".

You have to be able to eliminate the hole in your design, if you want to succeed. Why is it that GM can't swallow their pride, and buy a couple of Japanese cars and study them, while asking the question, "Why does this get 5-10 mpg better than ours?"? Make sense? You can't beat what you don't understand.

Look at Saturn! They understood the concepts, and came further faster than a lot of entry level brands did. But they turned the reigns back over to GM and took a slight step back in fuel economy, just to make their product look better, and to have a chance financially to survive. Neccessary? I believe so...

Take it from me... On the ground level of sales... Most older people are scared of the Hybrid Technology. And the younger (people who would buy a hybrid) generation likely won't buy a Cadillac, if they can buy a Lexus at the same price...

So instead I suggest they give it to the Saturn Outlook, and let the "Opel Line" compete with the foreign brands!

Edited by dlight
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Tahoe hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compaired to a non-hybrid Tahoe than a Prius saves compared to a Corolla.

ADD TO THAT THE FACT THAT GM TRUCKS GET THE BEST MPG ALREADY.

I wonder how much this will help GM's image to make its products seem less like gas guzzlers.

GM HAS BEAN ADVERTISING THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE THE MOST CARS WITH A 30+MPG RATING FOR SOME TIME NOW BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN NOT SEE PAST THE FOG OF MISCONCEPTION.

GM needs to figure out the basics of engines before they get crazy with hybrids. If you can't make an Impala get close to 40 before you start there is a flaw in the design.

AN ACCORD HYBRID GETS 28/35 MPG

A CAMRY HYBRID GETS 40/38

A IMPALA GAS ONLY GETS 21/31 (very good)

YOU WANT GM TO DO WITH A GAS ENGINE WHAT TOYOTA AND HONDA CAN BARELY DO WITH A HYBRID???

:scratchchin::rolleyes:

Edited by eldiablobanshee
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM needs to figure out the basics of engines before they get crazy with hybrids. If you can't make an Impala get close to 40 before you start there is a flaw in the design.

Uhm... the Camry gets 33 highway, the Accord 34 highway... both with 4 cylinders < 170hp. The Impala gets 31mpg highway with 211hp and a lot more torque. If you really need that extra 3 - 4 mpg, get the 4 cylinder Malibu... but even the V6 Malibu gets 32mpg.

So where exactly is Chevy lagging... or do we just automatically hold domestics to a higher standard?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM needs to figure out the basics of engines before they get crazy with hybrids. If you can't make an Impala get close to 40 before you start there is a flaw in the design.!

Compared to the 31 mpg of the current Impala a 40 mpg version would save just only 3/4 of a gallon per 100 miles which is only 750 gallons over the course of 100,000 miles. If a Tahoe is currently getting 16 combined mpg under the new 08 standards and the hybrid Tahoe is supposed to get 22 combined mpg under new standards, you save that same 750 gallons over the course of 44,200 miles. To me that makes hybrids more important in terms of weening us off of foreign oil and a consumer could recoup their cost of buying a hybrid quicker then they could recoup the cost of going from a 31 mpg Impala to a 40 mpg Impala.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly had no idea it was that effective of a system

I don't think he does either.

I think he is basing his comments on another thread about how vehicles with worse fuel economy yield greater fuel savings from smaller gains in efficiency. That is true enough. But it is being extrapolated to support things that simply aren't correct.

i.e. "A Tahoe hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compaired to a non-hybrid Tahoe than a Prius saves compared to a Corolla."

1) How much more efficient is a hybrid Tahoe over a non-hybrid Tahoe? It this public information?

2) A Prius and a Corolla aren't in the same class. The comparison would be like me saying e.g. "A Camry hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compared to a non-hybrid Camry that a Tahoe saves over a Trailblazer."

It might be correct, but it isn't a fair comparison and I don't think we really know yet.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think he does either.

I think he is basing his comments on another thread about how vehicles with worse fuel economy yield greater fuel savings from smaller gains in efficiency. That is true enough. But it is being extrapolated to support things that simply aren't correct.

i.e. "A Tahoe hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compaired to a non-hybrid Tahoe than a Prius saves compared to a Corolla."

1) How much more efficient is a hybrid Tahoe over a non-hybrid Tahoe? It this public information?

2) A Prius and a Corolla aren't in the same class. The comparison would be like me saying e.g. "A Camry hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compared to a non-hybrid Camry that a Tahoe saves over a Trailblazer."

It might be correct, but it isn't a fair comparison and I don't think we really know yet.

1. The Vortec V-8 powered Tahoe Two-mode Hybrid is expected to deliver a composite fuel efficiency improvement of 25 percent when combined with Active Fuel Management™ cylinder deactivation technology.

2. Prius and Corolla are close enough in interior room as to be comparable.... The Prius having the same interior volume as the Camry only matters to the EPA and if you plan filling the interiors with sand.

You can run these numbers using Pruis v. Corolla or Camry v. Camry Hybrid and it still comes out the same.

Over the course of 100,000 miles, the Tahoe Hybrid will save 1,333 gallons of gasoline compared to a non-hybrid Tahoe.

Over the course of 100,000 miles, the Prius will save 856 gallons of gasoline compared to a Corolla. A Pruis would have to get 59mpg combined before it matched the volume of fuel savings of a Tahoe Hybrid.

Over the course of 100,000 miles, the Camry Hybrid will save 769 gallons of gasoline compared to a non-hybrid Camry. The Camry hybrid would have to get 50mpg combined before it matched the volume of fuel savings from a Tahoe Hybrid.

Bottom line... the Tahoe only has to increase it's combined fuel efficiency by 2mpg before it beats the fuel savings of a Camry Hybrid over a standard Camry. Current estimate <15mpg combined + 25% increase> puts the jump more at 3.75 mpg increase.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and from that article I linked:

Here's where it gets interesting: When you're running E85, you're only burning 15% petroleum (E85 is 85% ethanol, 15% gasoline). So, using our Chevy Tahoe as an example, you're only burning as much PETROLEUM as a vehicle that gets 91 MPG! And we haven't even added hybrid technology into the mix.

In the middle of next year, when Chevy releases the dual-mode hybrid version of the Tahoe, it'll get approximately 25% better mileage than the non-hybrid version. So the hybrid version, running E85, will get 17MPG, but use the equivalent amount of petroleum as a vehicle that gets 114 MPG!

none of Toyota's vehicles are E85 capable.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about the dude suing honda for getting 32 mpg in their civic hybrid.

my father in law can get that sometimes on his olds 88 on a trip.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my grandparents get 28-30 hwy on their annual trips to ohio in their 97 bonneville

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and from that article I linked:

Here's where it gets interesting: When you're running E85, you're only burning 15% petroleum (E85 is 85% ethanol, 15% gasoline). So, using our Chevy Tahoe as an example, you're only burning as much PETROLEUM as a vehicle that gets 91 MPG! And we haven't even added hybrid technology into the mix.

In the middle of next year, when Chevy releases the dual-mode hybrid version of the Tahoe, it'll get approximately 25% better mileage than the non-hybrid version. So the hybrid version, running E85, will get 17MPG, but use the equivalent amount of petroleum as a vehicle that gets 114 MPG!

none of Toyota's vehicles are E85 capable.

AFAIK, the Tahoe Hybrid will not be flex-fueled. It doesn't make much sense to increase the efficiency of a vehicle, only to have the increases eliminated by running E85. But then again, why not offer the choice, as it's not exactly expensive or difficult...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ABSOLUTELY a hybrid Tahoe is needed!!! More so than a hybrid cracker box such as the Prius.

Larger vehicles should be the largest market for hybrids simply because it yields the biggest savings, not to mention multiple other reaons. Just because people buy a large vehicle and then complain about the price of fuel doesn't mean they don't deserve a hybrid options.

For example: My parents daily drivers are an F-150 and a Silverado, both 4X4 with the respective V8 engines. The price of gas is really hurting their budget, but downsizing is not an option. My dad has to drive a truck for his job and most of the time works out of it and my mom drives her truck because we can't afford a 3rd primary vehicle, yet we own horses and a large camper so the truck is a nessecity. 4X4 is a nessecity because we live in the mountains. They both are looking forward to the day when they can buy either a hybrid or diesel in a light duty pick up.

See, that's what pisses me off so ba about Congress and all the eco-morons chanting the small car chant (this isn't pertaining to you cletus, it's just an overall comment) Not everyone lives in the city and not everyone works an office job They STEAL the blue collar workers jobs in the name of "cheaper goods/ cost savings/ globalization" then expect us to get "Service jobs" that require trucks and travel, YET they try to take the trucks and energy we need to survive away for the sake of an idiot like Al Gore's agenda to let a few more trees grow in a city park.

The thing is, the sort of person who will pay $50K for a Tahoe Hybrid, is unlikely to be a blue-collar worker living in a rural area trying to save on fuel costs, but rather a suburban banger "who consumes a lot more resources than they think they do with their copious consumption" and doesn't need a full-sized, truck-based SUV in the first place.

The upcoming 4.5L V8 diesels will probably make the most difference among people who actually need large vehicles.

Edited by empowah
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Toyota charges various "hybrid premiums" depending on the model, but their strong-selling Camry Hybrid, which improves combined fuel economy over 41% relative to the conventional four cylinder (34 mpg vs. 24 mpg), yet according to truedelta.com, only costs about $1,500 more than a loaded Camry XLE four cylinder when taking equipment levels into account.

If GM takes the myopic approach (which unfortunately has been pretty typical for them over the years) and attempts to recoup their investment in this system quickly by charging too much for it, they'll never get sales volume up to a level that allows for economies of scale similar to what Toyota has for its Hybrid Synergy Drive, and allows it to only charge $1,500 more for the Camry Hybrid. The only people who will buy this system at $10,000 are environmentally-conscious full-size SUV buyers (is there such a person?) or bleeding-edge early adopters who need to have the latest and greatest of everything.

GM also expects to install a variant of the two-mode hybrid system into front wheel drive-based applications, such as the Saturn Vue, in coming years. It's hard enough for me to envision buyers of $50,000 SUVs anteing up an extra $10,000 (20%) for a hybrid drivetrain, but even harder for me to imagine a $25,000 Saturn Vue buyer paying an extra $10,000 for the advanced hybrid drivetrain (40% more expensive). With premiums like that, the timeframe for the upfront payment for the hybrid drivetrain paid for by gas savings alone would extend into the decades and not years."

more:

http://www.autosavant.net/2007/07/gm-may-e...ybrid-cost.html

GM has been late to the hybrid game. Their current hybrids offer VERY small fuel efficiency gains over their competitor's regular 4 cyl models. In the past they have distracted from this worry by talking up the future two-mode hybrids. While they very well might have made GM's hybrids competitive, at $10,000 GM cannot put them into a mainstream car at a profit. I guess that was the danger in partnering up with the likes of BMW and Mercedes! Unless they can get the price way down without hurting the efficiency gains, GM has no foreseeable completive mainstream hybrid car.

(Even if they do deliver the Volt at their stated price point of $30K, they still won't have a competitive mainstream hybrid car.)

Perhaps another lesson to learn from this is to take GM’s promises regarding the Volt with a grain of salt. Pie-in-the-sky is great for PR but eventually you have to deal with realty.

GM is potentially in a very bad situation here. Quick, someone put out a Volt press release!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While they very well might have made GM's hybrids competitive, at $10,000 GM cannot put them into a mainstream car at a profit.

The hybrids don't go into any other cars at a profit either.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2) A Prius and a Corolla aren't in the same class. The comparison would be like me saying e.g. "A Camry hybrid saves more fuel over it's life compared to a non-hybrid Camry that a Tahoe saves over a Trailblazer."

The only reason that the Prius and Corolla aren't in the same class is because of that hatch and maybe an inch or two in width. Without looking at numbers (I do work at a Toyota dealership though), the Prius is waaaay closer to the Corolla in size than the Camry. I even think that the Prius is on the same basic platform as the 'Rolla.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor