Article on Volt in The Atlantic
#1
Article on Volt in The Atlantic
Check out the linked article. Very objective reporting of the progress of work being done on the Volt. Approached with imho journalistic balance and fairness. Not a rah-rah piece. Not a how can I invoke controversy piece.
For those who still believe that GM crushed all the EV1s and fired or exiled everybody involved, read closely the backgrounds of several of the people named in the article as being central to the Volt development.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/general-motors
Peace,
Martin
For those who still believe that GM crushed all the EV1s and fired or exiled everybody involved, read closely the backgrounds of several of the people named in the article as being central to the Volt development.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/general-motors
Peace,
Martin
#4
Re: Article on Volt in The Atlantic
I seriously doubt that it was doctored. Don't know who would doctor it or why.
Look at it this way.........
Nothing unusal about that photograph EXCEPT the emotion it drives among conspiracy theorists.
Peace,
Martin
Look at it this way.........
- I have several thousand of the same item.
- I only need a couple hundred of them.
- I don't want to sell any of them, for whatever good reasons I have or nefarious reasons that you can think of.
- What should I do with the couple thousand I have just laying around?
- Provide some to high schools, colleges and universities, provided that they agree to my terms for how they can use them (CHECK! Did that)
- Provide some to various automotive museums (CHECK! Did that)
- Set a few aside for additional product research and technology development (CHECK! Did that)
- Dispose of them
- Stick them in a warehouse or some other potentially usable real estate until........Gee, I don't know until WHAT?
Nothing unusal about that photograph EXCEPT the emotion it drives among conspiracy theorists.
Peace,
Martin
#5
Re: Article on Volt in The Atlantic
Peace,
Martin
#6
Re: Article on Volt in The Atlantic
Lest I give the wrong impression, I don't buy into the conspiracy thing either.
Big government mechanisms are extremely complex and involve many interests moving in many directions. From time to time these interests conflict. It does not necessarily follow that these independent interests are acting in concert with each other, and even if they did, it would be motivated by a desire to persue common objectives that are in the interest of both.
My beef is not that the EV-1 died, it is that the program was not modified to fit the available technology, and as a result, we lost ten plus years becasue the technology was shelved in favor of short-term gains. This is not entirely GM management's fault as it must be beholding to stockholders and react to the pressures they exhert. But because Mssrs Smith and Wagoner lacked the flexibility to amend and sell a long term, responsible vision that they knew was probably coming, the opportunity was lost.
As a result they lost the experienced engineers, the underlying technician base and specality culture, and the "unwritten" part of the technology base.. i.e. that common low level knowledge that you won't find in any manual because it is what doesn't work, not what does.
And as a result of that, the cost to develop the Volt will be much greater because the culture must be relearned and new resources trained and brought to bear.
Big government mechanisms are extremely complex and involve many interests moving in many directions. From time to time these interests conflict. It does not necessarily follow that these independent interests are acting in concert with each other, and even if they did, it would be motivated by a desire to persue common objectives that are in the interest of both.
My beef is not that the EV-1 died, it is that the program was not modified to fit the available technology, and as a result, we lost ten plus years becasue the technology was shelved in favor of short-term gains. This is not entirely GM management's fault as it must be beholding to stockholders and react to the pressures they exhert. But because Mssrs Smith and Wagoner lacked the flexibility to amend and sell a long term, responsible vision that they knew was probably coming, the opportunity was lost.
As a result they lost the experienced engineers, the underlying technician base and specality culture, and the "unwritten" part of the technology base.. i.e. that common low level knowledge that you won't find in any manual because it is what doesn't work, not what does.
And as a result of that, the cost to develop the Volt will be much greater because the culture must be relearned and new resources trained and brought to bear.
Last edited by FastMover; 06-11-2008 at 01:10 PM.
#7
Re: Article on Volt in The Atlantic
You can try to justify it all you want, but no one else besides GM is responsible for not letting the people that already had the ev-1's keep them. Period.
There are Electric Ford Rangers and Electric rav-4's out there from the same CARB mandate.
Where oh where is the EV-1...
It's great that GM is making the Volt, but they also need to TAKE responsibility for their greedy, influenced, self serving and proffitable (so they thought) decision...
08feh
There are Electric Ford Rangers and Electric rav-4's out there from the same CARB mandate.
Where oh where is the EV-1...
It's great that GM is making the Volt, but they also need to TAKE responsibility for their greedy, influenced, self serving and proffitable (so they thought) decision...
08feh
#8
Re: Article on Volt in The Atlantic
Isn't this tiresome, the repetitive crying over spilled milk? Can people finally let the EV-1s go and turn their attention to what's here now and what's ahead?
I said it before and it needs repeating: This programme was for California only. All this fricken' drama is over something that only a small portion of Californians could ever experience.
Please, for the love of sincerity, can we try to avoid hijacking every single topic about GM and/or the Volt with what once was?
Martin, if you can get word up to head office (just kidding), I see one thing that plug-ins should require: Instead of using a conventional terminal that is latched or connected with friction, these should be the break-away kind with magnets. That way, if someone pulls a boner and drives-away with it still plugged in, it will just fall away without causing damage.
I said it before and it needs repeating: This programme was for California only. All this fricken' drama is over something that only a small portion of Californians could ever experience.
Please, for the love of sincerity, can we try to avoid hijacking every single topic about GM and/or the Volt with what once was?
Martin, if you can get word up to head office (just kidding), I see one thing that plug-ins should require: Instead of using a conventional terminal that is latched or connected with friction, these should be the break-away kind with magnets. That way, if someone pulls a boner and drives-away with it still plugged in, it will just fall away without causing damage.
#9
Re: Article on Volt in The Atlantic
....My beef is not that the EV-1 died, it is that the program was not modified to fit the available technology, and as a result, we lost ten plus years becasue the technology was shelved in favor of short-term gains. This is not entirely GM management's fault as it must be beholding to stockholders and react to the pressures they exhert......
In other words, they had people telling them that electric was the future, others saying hybrids were the future, others saying diesel was the future, others saying forget all that, place your bets on telematics, or safety technologies, or alternative fuels, or expansion in Russia. You get the point. For every topic, there were multiple positions, all forwarded by very intelligent people with reams and reams of data and analyses. So at the leadership level of the company, it sometimes come down to what you are able to comprehend and how convincing the arguments for or against something are delivered. Apparently those who felt strongly that the EV1 and/or hybrids were not a strong strategic play won out over those that believed they were.
Then you have somebody like Bob Lutz come along. Bob is interesting because from a tactical standpoint, he has the ability to see through the fluff, make a decision and move on with executing it. He's not above recognizing that correct decisions don't always arise from a strong business case. In the same sentence he will tell you that hybrids make no economic sense to the company making them or the customer buying them, but that they are a portfolio necessity.
And from that pov, he'll tell the teams "Go execute". Rick Wagoner trusts Bob Lutz' assessment of the strategy and supports Bob's "Go execute" directive.
As a result they lost the experienced engineers, the underlying technician base and specality culture, and the "unwritten" part of the technology base.. i.e. that common low level knowledge that you won't find in any manual because it is what doesn't work, not what does.
The Volt is a vehicle program. Just like Malibu is a vehicle program, just like Impala is a vehicle program, just like VUE is a vehicle program. Difference is, this one has some high powered parents (Bob Lutz, Jon Lauckner, Rick Wagoner) measuring its progress on a daily basis. That is the big cultural difference.
Peace,
Martin
#10
Re: Article on Volt in The Atlantic
.....Martin, if you can get word up to head office (just kidding), I see one thing that plug-ins should require: Instead of using a conventional terminal that is latched or connected with friction, these should be the break-away kind with magnets. That way, if someone pulls a boner and drives-away with it still plugged in, it will just fall away without causing damage.
Peace,
Martin