Will Green Cars Be Exciting To Drive And Enjoyable To Own?

ateixeira · May 2009

Let's see if this pans out, but this is the sort of break-through electrics need.

gagrice · May 2009

So far the only EV to break through the EPA/CARB roadblock is the Xebra. And it is getting a second look. It's really a motorcycle by definition. I think the powers will reject the EVs for whatever reason they can come up with. Safety will be the easiest to push. They do not like any vehicle that denies them tax revenues. They know that people can stick a solar cell up and recharge the thing for FREE. Not acceptable to the tax and spenders that we have elected in every seat of our government.

NEVs are sold everywhere that they are practical. Just not legal on most streets in CA.

iluvmysephia1 · June 2009

and more interesting with EESTOR and Zenn. EESTOR is not releasing the voltage range of it's new battery system, yet ZENN feels strongly enough about them to invest more cash. Voltage range or battery leakage problem possibilities. Wow, putting "potential" cash up says something to me about how ZENN feels about this new technology.

http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1021142_eestor-vp-says-eesus-to-be-delivered- - - - - - - -by-end-of-2009

By the end of 2009 EESTOR will have something built, not very long to wait, though that would mean another 9-12 months for ZENN to integrate the battery in to their citycar, too. Still, it is an interesting further development in the race the electric car to market deal that is intensifying right before our eyes.

It's all electric baby.

ateixeira · June 2009

That car looks a bit toy-like (tall, narrow, small wheels/tires), definitely gotta keep the price down, way down. That may attract Aveo shoppers but not anyone with mid-high teens kind of money.

larsb · June 2009

This looks promising at the outset:

Chinese-made Coda electric sedan looks to plug in to U.S. market

Looks like a nice car. Electric or not.

nortsr1 · June 2009

I wouldn't want to hit a POT HOLE with it.

nippononly · June 2009

Mitsubishi i MiEV electric vehicle priced at $45,660

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090605/CARNEWS/906059997

Looks like they plan to introduce it here in about 2 years, so I guess you have some time to save up. Me, I would think twice at this price range!

Some other little fun facts:

The small commuter car has a single-charge range of 99 miles, which Mitsubishi says is good enough for 90 percent of the average Japanese daily driving needs. It can recharge its battery in 14 hours on 100-volt power, in seven hours on 200 volts and in 30 minutes on a high-output quick charger. For a bit of futuristic flare, the i MiEV is the first car from Mitsubishi to have light-emitting diode headlamps and taillights.

I guess buyers will get the $7500 tax credit from our government, which brings the purchase price down to a "low low" $38,160. :-P

gagrice · June 2009

I think when the price is official on the Volt it will be in that range also. You cannot get around the high cost of batteries. I would not even consider one unless the batteries have a MANDATED 10 year warranty. I don't care about the mileage as I will never own a car with 100k miles on it. We are just now at 98k miles on our 20 year old Lexus.

With that price point on an EV it is highly unlikely I will ever own one. Part of that is the fact that our dollar has been diluted in relation to the Yen with all the spending programs.

I need to get off the dime and buy a diesel SUV as nothing else makes sense to me.

larsb · June 2009

WOW. That's "crazy high" rite thar....

hpmctorque · June 2009

Tata has announced it will import the Nano to the U.S., and, of course, it'll meet our emissions standards for this to happen. I don't know about you, but it sure seems to me that even though it may appeal to very different market segments than the Mitsu electric and Volt, the Nano could crush many of it's competitors and near-competitors. Sure, most Americans will probably snicker and say nah nah to the Nano, but a significant number might just say ya ya.

Hyundai, Toyota and Honda might also want to look over their shoulders too, so as not to repeat the mistakes Detroit made in the '50s, '60 and '70s.

lilengineerboy · June 2009

So far, I am still going with "NO".

We might ultimately find them enjoyable to "not drive," however. I think adding in front seat entertainment systems with video, massage features in the seats, wireless internet, satellite radio and TV would make it a fun place to sit while the computer drives you to work. That might be an overall vehicle trend, however, not just a BEV/HEV trend.

A bus or a train could probably do the same thing.

tomcatt630 · June 2009

Well, I remember after the last 1979 400 ci Trans Am was built, enthusiasts claimed there would be 'no more performance cars'. Look what was for sale years later, 5.0 Mustangs with 225 hp and Vettes/F bodies got more power, too.

Point is, car makers will have to learn how to make "hybrid hot rods". Just like EFI, computer controls and emissions equipment was adapted for high performance engines.

lilengineerboy · June 2009

Tata has announced it will import the Nano to the U.S., and, of course, it'll meet our emissions standards for this to happen. I don't know about you, but it sure seems to me that even though it may appeal to very different market segments than the Mitsu electric and Volt, the Nano could crush many of it's competitors and near-competitors. Sure, most Americans will probably snicker and say nah nah to the Nano, but a significant number might just say ya ya.

Lets see how much it costs when it gets HERE and who buys it...in low cost countries its replacing a moped (or mule), in the US, most people can't even drive a manual transmission let alone balance on a moped.

ateixeira · June 2009

Needs a bigger grille opening BADLY.

Learn from Infiniti's mistake - the original Q was a great car and died an agonizing death due to the lack of a grille (and some bad marketing).

ateixeira · June 2009

You have GOT to be kidding, Mitsubishi.

Enjoy Bankruptcy.

I called it first.

nippononly · June 2009

Don't forget, the Tata Nano Europa, the model that is projected to be sold here, is expected to cost $4995, not the $2500 that Indian ones do.

It will be a tall-sided car with 12" rims, not much fun to drive. And who knows what the warranty or reliability will be.

I think the i-MIEV is priced VERY high, don't get me wrong, but comparing the $5000 Tata to it is sort of apples and oranges.

IMO, your best bet still is a $10,000 Accent or Versa, if you are just looking for lowest TCO. But we will see how tata does against those competitors.

The i-MIEV may get a few early adopters, but not anyone looking for cheap transportation.

charlesb · June 2009

That EV RAV4 existed for one reason, the California Air Resources Board requirement that manufacturers produce zero emissions vehicles for public consumption. These EV vehicles cost upward of forty-thousand dollars new (when a loaded RAV4 cost right around twenty thousand bucks), they took twice as long to reach sixty miles per hour as the gas version and, here is the big one, Toyota lost money on every single one they produced. So the RAV4 was a product of government mandating that a manufacturer squander corporate treasure to produce a toy for the wealthy that was in fact subsidized by the gas hogs that the general public could actually afford. Also note that the cost to produce the RAV4 EV would have been much higher if the petrol versions didn't exist to use as a basis for the plug in.

Cars actually aren't "green", in any form, so this thread's rhetorical question of can they be green AND exciting is moot. I would guess that the Tesla sports car is "exciting" but at over $110,000 base MSRP and with a two hundred mile range it is about as practical as lead track shoes. Also note that the Tesla uses the Lotus platform and it would cost much more if it were a clean sheet design.

hpmctorque · June 2009

"Don't forget, the Tata Nano Europa, the model that is projected to be sold here, is expected to cost $4995, not the $2500 that Indian ones do."

The Automotive News article says the following: "Don't forget, the Tata Nano Europa, the model that is projected to be sold here, is expected to cost $4995, not the $2500 that Indian ones do." Now, whether they can land it States side for that ultra low price is questionable, but, then, there were many doubters regarding Tata's ability to price the Nano at $2,500 in India. Will the economies of scale from exports to Europe and the U.S. offset the incremental cost required to meet European and American Safety and emissions standards? I doubt it, but that's just my perception.

euphonium · June 2009

Monday morning there was a breakfast meeting where the speaker/guest was David E. Cole, Chairman Center for Automotive Research (CAR). You have all likely heard CAR quoted, or referred to in the auto industry news lately.

Mr. Cole, who is an engineer by training, told many stories of the difficulty of working with the folks that the Obama administration has sent to save the auto industry. There have been many meetings where a 30+ year experience automotive expert has to listen to a newcomer to the industry, someone with zero manufacturing experience, zero auto industry experience, zero business experience, zero finance experience, and zero engineering experience, tell them how to run their business.

A favorite story is as follows:

There was a team of Obama people speaking to Mr Cole (Engineer, automotive experience 40+ years, Chairman of CAR). They were explaining to Mr. Cole that the auto companies needed to make a car that was electric and lquid natural gas (LNG) with enough combined fuel to go 500 miles so we wouldn't "need" so many gas stations (A whole other topic). They were quoting BTU's of LNG and battery life that they had looked up on some website.

Mr. Cole explained that to do this you would need a trunk FULL of batteries and a LNG tank at big as a car to make that happen and that there were problems related to the laws of physics that prevented them from...

The Obama person interrupted and said (and I am quoting here) "These laws of physics? Who's rules are those, we need to change that. (Some of the others wrote down the law name so they could look it up) We have the congress and the administration. We can repeal that law, amend it, or use an executive order to get rid of that problem. That's why we are here, to fix these sort of issues". :confuse:

charlesb · June 2009

Maybe in ten years somebody else will be able to marvel at another vehicle that produced "zero emissions" during its lifetime....
http://www.leftlanenews.com/californias-zero-emission-law-could-cost-toyota-1b.h- tml
Californias zero-emission law could cost Toyota $1b
06/05/2009, 3:40 PM
By Drew Johnson

Toyota may be heralded as one of the greenest car makers on the planet, but the Japanese automaker could be facing a $1 billion investment to bring its lineup up to code with Californias forthcoming zero-emission requirement.

Californias new rule  which is will go into effect in 2012  requires three percent of an automakers total California sales, over a three year period, to be zero-emission vehicles. Since Toyota is by far Californias sales volume leader  Toyota captured more than 24 percent of the market there during the first quarter  the Japanese automaker will have to produce more zero-emission vehicles than any other automaker.

Although Toyota spokesman John Hanson wouldnt confirm the $1 billion price estimate, he did acknowledge compliance will be costly. Theres going to be a large cost premium for this technology, he told Bloomberg. We dont know yet how many consumers are going to be willing to pay the added cost plug-in vehicles carry.

Early estimates suggest Toyota will have to sell 16,000 plug-in and electric vehicles over that three year span. However, Toyota has warned demand for early zero-emission vehicle will total just 3,500 units per year.

Ironically, bankruptcies by Chrysler and General Motors could actually help the Michigan automakers sidestep the high costs of Californias requirements. Chrysler and GM have historically never sold very well in California  GM is currently only the fifth-best selling automaker there  but the companies bankruptcies have dropped sales even further. Since the zero-emission regulation is based on sales volume, Chrysler and GM will have to produce fewer zero-emission vehicles, thereby saving millions.

Californias zero-emission law excludes automakers that sell fewer than 60,000 vehicles per year there.

charlesb · June 2009

The only problem with that reasoning is that the horse and buggy was the alternative when automobiles were introduced. I suspect that getting twenty-five percent of Toyota customers to step up for the purchase of $50,000 compacts with a 200 miles daily range is going to be a challenge given the petroleum driven alternatives.

4krysia · June 2009

this can't be a real story... NO one could be that stupid. does anyone have a link to a reputable website covering this story ? :confuse:

gagrice · June 2009

NO one could be that stupid

I would not bet on that. Look at the mandates by California. They did this before with zero emissions and we ended up with the EV-1 fiasco. Several $billion spent and nothing to show for it. Nothing wrong with alternatives being developed. Mandating LNG plug-in hybrids to be developed, is as stupid as trying to change the laws of physics. CA Governor Ahnold is someone dumb enough to buy into that concept. I don't think the Prez is any smarter either. When you add Pelosi and Reid you can see why this country is in deep doo doo.

Whether the story is factual is up for debate. It is all over the web. Would be interesting to hear the transcript.

ateixeira · June 2009

I'm now seeing that $10,000 Versa advertised for $7995.

Add freight, I'm sure, but MD limits the processing fee to $100, so it can't cost more than $8800 or so.

Of course you'll have to live without A/C. :sick:

nippononly · June 2009

Of course you'll have to live without A/C.

And a radio. And I forget what else, but a lot of things that cost $0.50 apiece but substantially increase inconvenience have also been cut from the base model Versa.

Still you are correct that you DO get a brand new 35 mpg car from a volume automaker with standard 3/36 and 5/60 warranties.

ateixeira · June 2009

I would have to add A/C at a minimu, I think that's a grand.

Then add a Kenwood in-dash GPS/Stereo for about $800 or so, you'd have a heck of a value at about $10,600.

nippononly · June 2009

I know that Toyota wires its cars for stereo speakers even if the car is sold without a head unit. In fact, I think the speakers are installed even if there is no factory head unit. I wonder if Nissan does the same with the radio-less Versas.

ateixeira · June 2009

My guess is they do.

Think of the complexity of a modern wiring harness - it would probably cost Nissan more to build 2 different wiring harnesses vs. one.

You're right about Toyota - I had an aftermarket DVD/LCD installed in my Sienna and the installers told me it was pre-wired. They used the OE wiring harness to run power to the unit I bought.

I put a hitch on my Forester and it was also plug-n-play, the plug was sitting there ready to go. Though at one point I heard only the Outback and Forester are pre-wired that way.

I'm sure some options are not pre-wired, and they install extra sub-harnesses for them, but something like a radio is very likely pre-wired.

nippononly · June 2009

Well of course, your Sienna is not sold without a stereo, so all of them are pre-wired, in fact they are WIRED, because they have a stereo in them from the factory.

gagrice · June 2009

I thought at one time a heater and radio were mandatory by Federal Law in every state except Hawaii.

fezo · June 2009

Wouldn't surprise me. The last car I remember that they were options on was my mom's 66 Biscayne. Those were the only two options on it.

Karen_S · June 2009

Join Consumer Advice Editor, Phil Reed, and other Edmunds staff for an auto industry chat Wednesday night, 9:00-10:00 pm/et (6:00-7:00 pm/pt). To enter the chat, click on the banner at the top of the page. See you there!

nippononly · June 2009

I think every car sold today has heat as a standard feature, but radios are becoming increasingly optional again. I think automakers see it as a way to get some costs out of really inexpensive models, and also it is a recognition that factory radios are mostly expected to universally suck, especially by folks under 40, who would just as soon have a blank plastic plate there which they will go and replace with a better aftermarket stereo for less money at Best Buy.

stever · June 2009

"When you get out into the marketplace, it's probably just 5 percent of the public that desperately wants something environmentally sound and is willing to pay a premium for it,"

Lutz: Only About 5% of the Population is Willing To Pay Up for Green Cars (Straightline)

ateixeira · June 2009

I was referring to the DVD home entertainment system, that's pre-wired (mine didn't come with one).

ateixeira · June 2009

I think 10 years from now we'll look back and say that Lutz was the most honest auto exec from this era. I'm sure others would prefer that he shut up but he'll be remembered for saying what he actually felt, not what the spin doctors told him to say.

lemko · June 2009

A friend of mine once bought a 1989 Plymouth Sundance America that had neither A/C or a radio. I also believe it had a stick shift. It was the ultimate stripper model.

ateixeira · June 2009

You sure? I think those had air bags.

I remember a buddy of mine had a girl friend with a base Civic that had NOTHING. The manual was a 4 speed, the seats were plastic (vinyl), and it didn't even had a passenger side mirror. The shifter was a pole sticking out of the floor, too.

It was reliable, sure, but that's probably because there wasn't anything to be broken!

lilengineerboy · June 2009

So just to come back to the topic, so far it seems like the answer is still NO.

xhe518 · July 2009

I remember a lot of "gloom and doom" back in the 1970's about how the fuel economy, safety, and emissions regulations would eliminate all fun cars and we'd all be driving 3 cylinder 70hp econoboxes by now.... Instead, cars are faster and more powerful than ever now, and cleaner and safer too. Anything with a 0-60 time over 7 or 8 seconds is considered slow now. I see no reason why a EV or a "green car" couldn't be fun to drive, as technology improves.

euphonium · July 2009

My Green '66 Mustang GT has been the most fun to drive for over 42 years.

Neither of us is "tuned" to any sort of any Environmental movement. GW = Myth!

gagrice · September 2009

I like the 62 MPG part

As a plug-in full hybrid with a turbodiesel engine, upward-pivoting doors and radical styling, BMW's 4- seat Vision EfficientDynamics concept carnow on display at the Frankfurt auto showis packed with technology enabling it to be both frugal and fast.

The rear/mid-mounted direct-injection, 1.5-liter 3-cylinder turbodiesel puts out 163 bhp and 214 lb.-ft. of torque. Combined with the electric motors, the total system output is 356 bhp and 590 lb.-ft. of torque, giving a level of performance that BMW says is "superior to anything provided so far by a hybrid vehicle.

Due to the car's considerable power and relatively low curb weight of 3076 lb., BMW claims the Vision EfficientDynamics concept can hit 100 km/h (62 mph) in 4.8 seconds, and easily exceed its electronically limited top speed of 155 mph.

BMW diesel hybrid

fintail · September 2009

Well, we knew Toyota wouldn't be working on exciting hybrids

I'm waiting for MB to unveil a diesel hybrid. Shouldn't be a real jump now that they have a gas hybrid along with some of the best diesel lineup on the planet.

ateixeira · September 2009

Wow! She's a looker, too.

I half expected to see some dinky little econobox that would be priced at $40 grand.

Instead it's a car that may actually be worth a lot more!

Kudos, BMW. :shades:

andre1969 · September 2009

You sure? I think those had air bags.

Well air-bag at least, in the singular. My '89 Gran Fury had a driver's airbag, but no passenger. I think Chrysler put a driver's air bag standard in all of its cars starting in mid-1988, so all the 1989's should've had an airbag. I had an '88 LeBaron coupe that must've been an early model though, because it had a lame attempt at "passive" restraints. Basically, it had a shoulder strap that latched into the door that theoretically you never had to unfasten. If you were a contortionist, maybe. There was also a separate lap belt that anchored in the floor by the seat and latched inward by the console.

Speaking of dirt-cheap, back in college a friend of mine bought a 1990 Horizon America. I think the only option it had was an automatic transmission. I can't remember now if it had no radio or an AM-only radio, but I do remember putting in a sound system for him.

ateixeira · September 2009

In that late 80s a base Civic had a 4 speed manual shifter on the floor with no boot. It also had no side mirror on the passenger side. The seats were covered in a cheap, shiny vinyl.

Makes cost cutting today seem insignificant.

nippononly · September 2009

isn't just contemplating the diesel, they also expect to launch a series of 4-cylinder models:

BMW plans to offer four-cylinder gasoline engines in the United States in an effort to meet stricter fuel economy rules.

Introduction of the powerplants, equipped with the automaker's next-generation twin turbochargers, is the goal and we will do it, Jim O'Donnell, CEO of BMW of North America, said Tuesday at the Frankfurt auto show.

....BMW will add a four-cylinder variant for its next 3-series in the United States by spring 2012, O'Donnell said. The automaker already equips its European 3-series with four-cylinder gasoline and diesel engines.

BMW also is considering adding four-cylinder gasoline engines to its X1 and X3 crossovers and 1-series model in the United States

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090916/FRANKFURT/909169995

Lighter cars and lighter smaller engines, that's the trick.....

larsb · September 2009

It's "enjoyable" to get 550 miles between fillups in my TCH.

It was enjoyable to show off for my friend who visited from Texas by spending a whole 3-day weekend without getting refueled.

It's nice to have the equivalent of an "electric turbo" too, for when passing or needed to merge into traffic.

So you can get some of both of these emotions from a 2007 TCH.

nippononly · September 2009

I have driven the TCH and I will certainly give you enjoyable, as it is a machine that coddles while providing better fuel economy than most other midsize cars.

But exciting? From my perspective there is nothing exciting about driving a TCH, and in the wide spectrum of cars available today, this definitely ranks below the 5th percentile in excitement. IMHO.

But at 35 mpg, it also isn't that green. As we look toward the future, I really want automakers to take green seriously, particularly the fuel economy aspect. We need 50 mpg midsizers and 75 mpg small cars, like YESTERDAY.

fintail · September 2009

Now here's a green car

Will Green Cars Be Exciting To Drive And Enjoyable To Own?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles