Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Topic: Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this (Read 2911 times) previous topic - next topic

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

April 07, 2009, 02:34:39 AM

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/gm-conjures-up-a-people-moving-pod/?ref=automobiles

Because motorcycles have not been around for over 100 years....

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #1 – April 07, 2009, 07:13:10 AM

It's a cross between a Segway and that wheelchair concept Toyota came out with a few years ago. I'm a GM guy, and yes, this is a huge waste of effort. Not cash, though, since they said it cost half of a percent of their annual engineering budget. Just a waste of resources.

Walk, you lazy schmuck, but first rent WALL-E.

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #2 – April 07, 2009, 07:35:37 AM

Top Gear tested the Toyota version; called the iReal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IT7qK1hrro&NR=1

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #3 – April 07, 2009, 09:09:17 AM

thats utterly rediculus............ in the future, no one will talk to each other, its all going to be text messageing, and chairs that ask people out for you....... wheres the fun in that???????

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #4 – April 07, 2009, 09:49:47 AM

This will be shortlived like Ethanol, Hydrogen cars, and Saturn.

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #5 – April 07, 2009, 10:38:03 AM

Well, I can understand why they're doing this. It's only a matter of time before pods replace cars in urban areas, for the most part, and I'm sure GM doesn't want to be behind the ball on yet another emerging market trend. Remember, Chrysler gave us the Pea Pod less than a year ago, and the iReal is one of a number of Pods that Toyota has designed. Nissan also had a swivelling Pod car a couple of years ago. Even BMW/Mini are looking at bringing the Isetta back. The Smart started something, and I think the more congested cities get, the more you will see personal transport shrink. In puppiesan, you pay taxes based on the size of the parking space you need, among other auto related things. In Europe you pay by displacement. I could see New York riddled with pods, but not rural areas.

Still, if they do end up spending more than 0.5% of their budget on this kind of decades away future, they need to be slapped. Right now they should be putting every penny they have into making their current vehicles better and more efficient, and getting the Volt to profitability.

*edit*
Yes, I'm bored as hell at work. If you are too, clickity-click.

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #6 – April 08, 2009, 03:35:43 AM

Quote from: oldraven;266277

Well, I can understand why they're doing this. It's only a matter of time before pods replace cars in urban areas, for the most part, and I'm sure GM doesn't want to be behind the ball on yet another emerging market trend. Remember, Chrysler gave us the Pea Pod less than a year ago, and the iReal is one of a number of Pods that Toyota has designed. Nissan also had a swivelling Pod car a couple of years ago. Even BMW/Mini are looking at bringing the Isetta back. The Smart started something, and I think the more congested cities get, the more you will see personal transport shrink. In puppiesan, you pay taxes based on the size of the parking space you need, among other auto related things. In Europe you pay by displacement. I could see New York riddled with pods, but not rural areas.

Still, if they do end up spending more than 0.5% of their budget on this kind of decades away future, they need to be slapped. Right now they should be putting every penny they have into making their current vehicles better and more efficient, and getting the Volt to profitability.

*edit*
Yes, I'm bored as hell at work. If you are too, clickity-click. ;)

Pods
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z14284/Suzuki-PIXY-Concept.aspx (this one is crazy)
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z9032/Toyota-i-Unit.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z7437/Toyota-PM.aspx
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=Toyota+ireal&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=W2vbSZGaKYqcMv6Qga8I&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title

Pod cars
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z15805/Chrysler-Peapod.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z14286/Nissan-Pivo-2-Concept.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z10239/Nissan-Pivo.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z14314/Toyota-RiN-Concept.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z4838/Toyota-POD.aspx

Micro cars
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z14136/Mitsubishi-i-MIEV-Sport.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z15869/Nissan-Nuvu-EV.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z16448/Toyota-FT-EV-Concept.aspx
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z14315/Toyota-Hi-CT-Concept.aspx

you sound for it, based soly on what everyone else is doing... gotta love sheeple.

As for volt,, its another remedial remix of what has already been done and taken away from us ,,,,,,,,,,EV1
God how people forget so easiely how effectively we have been scewed out of an option of the electric car. first it died out due to the advent of the combustion engine, then it died out due to GM going around and taking them back from customers ,, in secret.

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #7 – April 08, 2009, 07:13:42 AM

It's not about following, it's about GM surviving, and about reducing congestion, consumption, and pollution in urban areas. They won't completely replace the car. I never said it would, nor would I want it to. But Pods are a sensible solution for more than half of the population of this planet.

And please don't spew that about GM going around all cloak and dagger to rid the world of EVs. The only company who didn't recall all of their leased EVs and crush them was Toyota, because they sold theirs and couldn't. Ford, GM, and Honda all leased theirs, and destroyed them when the programmes were over. The majority of WKTEC was complete BS.

If you want the real story of the EV1, look up Gary Witzenberg on autobloggreen. He was an engineer who actually worked on the EV1 project, and has far more insight into why the program was cancelled than a Michael Moore wannabe. Like the fact that CARB wouldn't let them put a range extender on the car, and, like the Volt, they were losing money on every model. They started the programme to appease CARB's Zero emissions mandate, just like everyone else. Why do you think they were only leased or sold in two states? Four automakers built EVs for the same reasons, four automakers lost money on the ordeal, and four automakers axed those vehicles. Guess who's the only one who catches shiznit for it. I didn't forget, and it sounds like you never knew. http://www.autobloggreen.com/category/at-witz-end/

BTW, isn't this just another EV? Wow. GM making two EVs, and planning more spin-offs for the future. Never give credit, but discredit whenever possible. Trust me when I say that city life will consist of either public transport or pods. London is a hair's breadth away from banning ICE cars from their city centre as it is.

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #8 – April 10, 2009, 12:40:19 AM

no i had not ran across that information,,sounds good ? on paper maybe but the whole EV from the early 90s has a hole in your story. I have found information on the topic similiar to that though.

there were too many satisfied customers begging to buy the car.

why would a company stop production on such a high percentage of customer satisfaction? with a focus on that statment alone, you can not arrive at any other cross road than greed and oil being in bed with auto.

there is no argument to the satisfaction of the product. Someone pulled the plug because,, like you said,, the program was over. Its time to get back to gas.
Since the program expires does not mean a company could not have continued production on the car,,plain and simple. The program was a booster to develope technology. Show me one source that mandated any car company could not continue to build these super efficient cars. With that one question, i consider myself as the only one as of late who can see through the smoke.

Most of the time, I agree with everything you say and cant disagree with your previous post based on its substance. I do sometimes look beyond that and with this topic, I stick to my guns and say it again......God how people forget so easiely how effectively we have been scewed out of an option of the electric car.

as for the loosing money part,,, thats smoke unto itself. A grant to do xyz......yeah , who in the right capitalistic corp mind is going to report a profit? what were the terms of the profit? no one knows because that is probably the reason the 4 mentioned all reported losses. What is it they say when starting up a new buisness,,? you report a loss for atleast the first 3-5 years before you show profit.

its all smoke. Put that EV on the road today and it pays back the enviroment 10 fold compared all gas production models. Wouldnt it be nice?

my point here is,,,,You are dead right but you are still dead.

Good thing Ford is not wasting money on a gimmick like this

Reply #9 – April 10, 2009, 11:02:02 AM

Quote from: jcassity;266692

why would a company stop production on such a high percentage of customer satisfaction? with a focus on that statment alone, you can not arrive at any other cross road than greed and oil being in bed with auto.

They are businesses, who make products to make money. When you don't make money, it's a failed project. Any other industry but the automotive one would have done the same thing, or never started in the first place. But they have Government nannies to force their hand, even if it ends up costing them in the end. Even CARB knew it was a failed exercise, because they dropped the Zero-emissions mandate, which is when the four EVs met their end.

Quote

With that one question, i consider myself as the only one as of late who can see through the smoke.

Trust me when you say you're one of many. Very many. That's why I seemed so frustrated in my last reply, because I've come across this SO many times since that movie came out. If you want to see some of those jousts, look at the comments section of most of Witzenburg's articles.

Quote

as for the loosing money part,,, thats smoke unto itself. A grant to do xyz......yeah , who in the right capitalistic corp mind is going to report a profit? what were the terms of the profit? no one knows because that is probably the reason the 4 mentioned all reported losses. What is it they say when starting up a new buisness,,? you report a loss for atleast the first 3-5 years before you show profit.

The scale of losses was over double what they charged. Especially since they were all leased. I remember reading once that it cost roughly $80k back in the early 90's to produce the car, and they had just finished working on a new battery (that was sold as an option and nearly doubled the range of the car) in the last year of production. The whole project was there to please CARB in the first place. None of the companies even wanted to build the car, because of the serious deficits involved, but tried to avoid the fines. The truth is, only a small focus group wanted these cars. Not enough to make a profit within 3-5 years. The vast majority of the motoring public were not willing to spend that much money on a car that couldn't give them a fraction of the range of a traditional ice car

Quote

Put that EV on the road today and it pays back the enviroment 10 fold compared all gas production models. Wouldnt it be nice?

my point here is,,,,You are dead right but you are still dead.

And look at it this way. Much of the technology used in the Volt was carried over from the EV1 project. That sounds to me like the program was shelved, rather than axed. Consider this the EV2.

This time, though, they're telling CARB to take a hike, and installing that range extender, so the car will appeal to a much wider audience. They also have something they didn't have back then. LiIon technology, which is the biggest difference between the two vehicle's EV powertrains. They're already working on the second generation car, even though this one hasn't started production, and have slated a third for production down the road. They're saying the second Gen. actually has a chance of making a profit as well. Consider they're also showing a crossover (Orlando) and a Cadillac sports car (Converj, which you should check out, because it's the best looking Caddy concept yet) based on the same technology and platform, which both show a promise of profits.

My biggest frustration is that GM is always the one who is targeted in this argument, when there are three other global automakers who were in the same kettle. Honda and Toyota, and later Ford, all changed lanes and started building Hybrids, about a decade later. GM is now leading the pack in getting back to EVs, but no matter how much this corporation, who hasn't a penny to waste, spends on the effort, people still bring up the defunct EV1.