SAmadei

A little carbon monoxide never hurt anybody. A lot put them to sleep permanently, but a little was reasonably harmless.

OCN, my GF has informed me that that was LAST year's new fad... though I never saw any last year and so far 3 sets this year.

I doubt Tippett thought that, as Eagle lost two models in '83... the coupe and the kammback... and remaining Eagle sales were already falling hard. Besides, at that point, the French were likely using Tippett as a puppet. AMC always knew they had their back to the wall. Please don't compare them to a bunch of arrogant folks trying to sell ice to Eskimos.

I feel the the NHTSA should urge the SAE to work on a standard. Unfortunately, the NHTSA will write heavy handed laws without consulting anyone that will probably come up with some absurd requirements that will push keyless ignition systems to extinction. Its like the FMVSS rules for sealed beam headlights. Due to the NHTSA taking WAY too long to react to modern technology, our headlight designs trailed the rest of the world's for 2 decades. Another heavy handed regulation concerning bumper height drove another company out of the states (Citroen). I agree on standardization... just that the NHTSA is the wrong place to do it.

I love the story of the woman who drives her husband to the airport in his Mercedes... he gets out, gets on the plane... and then gets a call from his wife after she gets home and discovers the only set of "keys" were in his pocket. Oops.

Actually, I think its about 4x the volume of your average dresser.

Our vans have slight curves to them... but they are obviously too subtle for the interior fanatics to pick up on. The Euro vans really are boxes... almost perfectly flat with 90 degree folds... except the fronts get some plasticy psuedo-aerodynamic things with a big fish mouth and/or headlights that stretch up onto the A-pillar. As for sporty, well, yeah, I think the E-series and Express look sporty compared to the Eurovans. Of course, the idea of 'sporty' in the eye of the common person has been watered down so far to every microcar, sedan, CUV and riding lawnmower that it no longer looks sporty to me... so to me, 'sporty' is a different look... a more in-your-face not-so-aerodynamic look. Yeah... I think a '86 Chevy/Grumman StepVan looks sportier that nearly everything on the road today (exceptions being the pony cars, Vette, CTS coupe, LX Chryslers).

DF basically summed it up... the car itself is well engineered for space efficiency and survivability at that threshold of size. A few years ago, I was quite impressed by the stripped down frame at NYIAS... I've been surprised by the space inside... as I find if one of the easiest cars on the market to get in and out of. However, Daimler really dropped the ball with the drivetrain... the engine is low power and the CVT programming is horrid... and in the end, is not very fuel economical... which is a surprise, as people in Europe have a drivetrain that has proven popular.

600 hp Smart ForTwo... for ease of parking and fending off NYC traffic.

I knew what you meant, but I also knew that at some point in this debacle, someone would bring up the flammability of gasoline versus the Volt battery pack... but that is an apples to oranges comparison I have an issue with.

Some lights would spend all day yellow.

That's not technically correct. Gasoline does not spontaneously combust... it requires heat and oxygen in the right proportions. Not only that, but gasoline needs to be a vapor to ignite. Granted, under the right circumstances, liquid gasoline quickly vaporizes. Now, its my understanding that mixing Kerosene and Gasoline in the right mixture will create a mix that will spontaneously ignite if exposed to air... but I've never tried. Gasoline in a tank is relatively safe, considering its energy density (47 megajoules/kg). Li Ion is 720 kilojoules/kg... about 1.5%. Even wood, at 16.2 megajoules/kg is considerably higher than Li-Ion, If you have a crash with wood, it does not spontaneously combust either. Ignoring oxygen, which is present everywhere, the Li Ion battery created it own heat, unlike gasoline or wood.

Haynes has some interesting titles...

The Chilton manuals were better back, pre-1985... most of what I've had since is Haynes, and I'm happy with it. Haynes books are written by documenting a complete tear down and rebuild of the car. The newer Chilton manuals are just not as good with photos or descriptions... but IMHO, if Haynes got a A-, Chilton gets about a B... so either way will work for what you need. OTOH, I would not recommend getting the FSM unless you are planning on fixing EVERYTHING that could possibly break. Unfortunately, once you get into wiring diagrams, connections, data codes... it all has a VERY high learning curve and the simple stuff you need is drowned out by way too much information. For example, the FSM will put 15 pages in discussing the M15 flavor of the 4T65, then will put in 15 pages discussing the MN3 version... and both sets of pages will be identical... because, externally, they ARE identical. Also, I find that the GM FSMs expect you to take more of the car apart when you do many jobs step-by-step. For example, the H-body FSM does not take into account that the half the H-body subframe can be removed to remove the transmission... the FSM expected me to drop the entire subframe. Haynes did the job by splitting the subframe and allowed one to leave several large parts on the car... PS pump, Starter and didn't require moving the steering rack. Plus FSMs are outrageously expensive until your car gets to be 10+ years old.

No it WON'T. Unless their is a MAJOR development which reduces the need for lithium, or we discover Greenland is a huge lithium deposit, lithium will remain expensive. We only recently learned of a large deposit, and its in Afghanistan... so we're going to be making a new group of tin-pot dictators into a major player and battery prices will fluctuate depending on their mood. Saying that advances will make the batteries cheaper is like saying in 1974 that advances will make catalytic converters cheaper. Well, aside from one advancement (going from pellet to mesh), cats have gotten more expensive... because platinum is still very rare. Luckily, lithium is not nearly as rare as platinum... but it also has more competition for its use. Only 23% becomes batteries. Plus there is mounting evidence that increasing lithium production is not ecologically sound. Granted, this chart does not cover 2009-2011, but I assure you, the prices have not plummeted. My statment was not just batteries but motors and all other parts in the system that are expensive today due to start up cost and low volume. With higher volumes the price will drop on these parts with compitition and voulume.; Yes the Battery is the most expensive part and who's is to say future power will be Lithium 10 years from now? The motors are relatively cheap, already... However, they also depend on a fairly expensive metal... copper. Not long ago, I was reading how the copper supply was scheduled to run out in 5 years... which has had the result of convincing people to start removing long abandoned (for fiber) wiring and upgrade plumbing to PEX/CPVC and selling their old pipes as if it was jewelry. I still maintain that generator/motor tech is nothing radically new... and either is the controller systems. In general these are similar to forklifts... but the motors are somewhat repackaged. The only thing 'new' to this stuff are the fact that they have GM part numbers... and need to go through the typical GM part inverted bell curve for pricing. Who says the future is Lithium? Well, most electric engineers would. It took Li Ion cells from 1979 to 1996 to come to market... and until 2003 to become mainstream... over 20 years. If you read about tech on a regular basis, you will see techs in the news for years before they are ready for the consumer. Where are the flexible solar panels? Foldable/rollable LCD screens? Flying cars? These have been around for roughly 10, 6 and 35 years, respectfully... and are still not here. There is nothing on the horizon that appears to be supplanting Li Ion in the next decade. Even if we invent Mr. Fusion TOMORROW, it would take 10 years of testing and fireproofing before the lawyers let it hit the streets. Demand is high for gold, as well. But you still can't turn lead into gold, regardless of the alchemists that claim that "there is a lot of interesting work going on right now in this area and many are showing great promise." Companies developing any new technology are out to claim being first (to get patents) and to draw in additional investment... and love to spout off lots of promises that don't really pan out. Sure, advances are coming... the laws of physics are putting a brake on the rate of advancements... regardless of demand. I'm not discounting the possibility that something earth-shattering will develop tomorrow (like Mr. Fusion)... but when you pinpoint the most earth-shattering developments, most occurred long ago... and we live in a time of slower incremental improvement. The only exception to this is Moore's law... but even that is coming apart. Battery development severely trails even the currently busted Moore's law.

Tesla and Fisker seem to believe this is the way forward for premium electrics. Most people here will agree that RWD has premium driving dynamics that FWD can't deliver. I can't predict how many would sell... but I have a pretty good idea of cost. Drop a Volt off at my house and a check for about $40K for R&D and I'll convert it to RWD. I am confidant subsequent examples will cost about $3K to build, to cover the price of the second gen/motor unit, various custom mounts, new rear knuckles CNC'd. What parts I can't source from the Volt would come from the G8/Caprice PPV. Worst case scenario I would use Protean Drive PD-18 in-wheel motors, but the price for those will not be announced until next year. However, these are being targeted to fleets which would retrofit older non-electric vehicles, so they are most likely going to be quite affordable. I'd guess worst case being $1000-$1500 per wheel. GM has better engineers than me and better buying power, so should be able to outdo a guy working in a garage by at least a factor of 2... but GM has to provide a warranty... so that will likely bring GM's cost back to my cost. To slightly paraphrase what Camino posted elsewhere, 'GM, I'm tired of seeing where you think the market is, why don't you show me where you want to take it?'

Still have the BB Storm and G1. The BB Storm is the hardest BB to love. I love the BB + touchscreen... hate the abysmal memory and that RIM refused to allow Storms to upgrade to 6.0+... leaving us with a ton of bugs. If I was working again, I'd swap the G1 for a BB Torch (on T-mob) and the BB Storm for a Droid RAZR (on VZW). Since I do some app tinkering, I would like to keep at least two platforms at my fingertips... though I will admit BB appears to be on the outs. I'm not a Iphone fan. In fact, it looks downright retro compared to the Droid RAZR. The RAZR is the sweetest toy I've played with in a while. My GF got it, and I am so jealous I'm thinking of selling a kidney to get one. Keep in mind, while a techie, I have rarely had tech envy for ANY product, let alone a smartphone.

Costly to engineer? Like how Kugel Komponents made a bolt-in RWD, V8 Focus? Honestly, I think doing a IRS rear is easier than a straight, considering that the IRS rear is already set up. Recast new knuckles, relocate the springs (if needed) and make a mount for the transaxle. Add CV joints. You're right. GM can't engineer themselves out of a wet paper bag. I don't know what we were thinking, expecting too much from the company that made the GTO, the GNX, the Corvette... then made the Solstice mostly out of the spare parts bin. A small battery bump would be nice, but many AWD vehicles don't get bigger engines. The same power is being used, its just being sent to the wheel that is currently getting traction. I only think a small battery bump would be nice to negate the increased weight.

No it WON'T. Unless their is a MAJOR development which reduces the need for lithium, or we discover Greenland is a huge lithium deposit, lithium will remain expensive. We only recently learned of a large deposit, and its in Afghanistan... so we're going to be making a new group of tin-pot dictators into a major player and battery prices will fluctuate depending on their mood. Saying that advances will make the batteries cheaper is like saying in 1974 that advances will make catalytic converters cheaper. Well, aside from one advancement (going from pellet to mesh), cats have gotten more expensive... because platinum is still very rare. Luckily, lithium is not nearly as rare as platinum... but it also has more competition for its use. Only 23% becomes batteries. Plus there is mounting evidence that increasing lithium production is not ecologically sound. Granted, this chart does not cover 2009-2011, but I assure you, the prices have not plummeted.

There has been talk of systems like this... but I doubt the manufacturers would ever agree on a standard... even if they could, considering that different cars may have different battery needs. Lets say was use the sizes analogous to common alkaline batteries... A Smart might need 2 AAAs, whereas the Volt uses 2 AA... maybe the Volt CUV 3 AA... but a fullsize SUV needs a C and a tractor trailer gets a monster load of 8 Ds. ;-) That said, its true the electric is cheap... but the lithium is not. Even a dead battery pack has a lot of value... so either the price of eventual recycling is built into the electric refill cost, or the manufacturers get involve to eat some recycling cost in order to build more electric cars... in which case the cost is piggybacked onto the vehicle cost.

Chrysler is way ahead of you: Just a heads up, the truck in that photo has a roof with a healthy chop job, and is not stock. The standard Dodge Rampage/Plymouth Scamp had a much higher roof and standard early '80s trim. That said, you can add the VW Caddy to the FWD pickup list.

You guys might have missed these, as I only saw them recently in the cereal aisle. There are 9 cars available, each branded with a General Mills cereal... making these something of a collectors item years from now. I picked up the Cocoa Puffs '57 Buick hardtop station wagon and the Count Chocula '70 Chevelle sedan delivery. There are also... '51 GMC C.O.E. - Honey Nut Cheerios '40 Ford C.O.E. - Cinnamon Toast Crunch '29 Ford Pickup - Boo Berry Hiway Hauler - Lucky Charms Custom '77 Dodge Van - Franken Berry Deco Delivery - Trix '70s Van - Wheaties There is a video someone made that really shows them off pretty good... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwCizlnlAF4 Have fun!

If the Volt was hopped up with more powerful electric motor/generator for racing duty, as a Camaro might need, you may very well need the V8 to keep a charge in the system while racing. Engine stays where it is... transverse and all. Instead of a generator/motor, you use a specialized generator between the engine and battery and specialized motor/transaxle at the rear. I'm sure that a gen/motor is not able to do both as well as separate generators and motors can. Heres the Volt top-down layout... Now put a electric motor and transaxle in the space between the rear tires. I could likely do it in my garage. _OR_ use two 160bhp electric-motor-in-a-wheel units that the Mini QED used back in 2006. The Mini QED was 640 bhp total, as it was AWD... I would be happy with 320 RWD HP.

Disconnecting the Volt power supply in an accident is not real difficult. It has the MSD... manual service disconnect. I suppose it could be modified to automagically disconnect service if, say, the air bags were triggered... but the problems with fires will not be solved by this problem because the battery pack is still live. Removing this charge from inside the battery pack is not a trivial task. You can't just short the battery... and whatever you use to provide a load needs to discharge the battery at a rate which does not overheat the battery... and the load itself needs to be robust enough to dissipate the energy that is in the battery, which is quite a lot in a fully charged Volt battery pack. I imagine building something like this into the battery pack would easily add a hundred pounds of weight and would eat more space in the battery pack that would do better with more lithium cells. Many forget that in order to fit the energy in Li Ion cells that would fit in a traditional gasoline tank, you are starting to play with chemistry that is highly reactive. The lithium metal is reactive to water, so the electrolyte or coolant cannot be water based... and you can't even let the lithium metal be exposed to air, as there is water vapor in it. Not only is the lithium dangerous, but the electrolyte is highly reactive... and in the case of the Volt, very flammable. If it wasn't flammable, it would still be nasty stuff. It all suddenly makes gasoline look quite safe. And while many people think that batteries will get safer and more powerful, I see this as a inverse relationship. More powerful batteries will use more reactive chemistry and will be nastier when damaged... and will have higher electrocution risks due to the massive energy stored and the rate at which it can be discharged. The batteries in your cell phone, laptop and car will be rated as munitions. Luckily, we never had to figure out how to power cars with C4. ;-) That said, I still look forward to new battery technology... as I want an all electric '68 Bonneville that can do the 1/4 in 9 flat and a Droid that can remote control it all day while streaming Slacker radio without dropping into the yellow battery zone.

Why? It can still have a V8 as the charging engine.