Now that another weekend of Fancy Person ThingsĀ® at Monterey Car Week is in the books, it’s time to return to reality: an auto industry disrupted by batteries, software and labor disputes over things like batteries and software. Good Monday morning, Autopians! Time to rise and grind.
We kick off this late summer week with news about how General Motors is fixing its slow electric vehicle rollout; how Hyundai and Kia are hatching similar plans in America; the way Tesla plans to “lock” its true battery capacity with software; and the fight over wages in all of these new battery plants.
I’d almost apologize for going so “tech” heavy today, but as you know, I don’t make the news. I just tell you about it. Gimme a beat and let’s get nasty.
GM On Slow EV Rollout: We’re Working On It
Have you seen the Barbie movie yet? I thought it was delightful. (And maybe the best thing Ryan Gosling’s ever done.) But in addition to launching a Mattel Cinematic Universe that nobody asked for, it’s also so rife with GM EV product placement that a few scenes feel like a TV commercial; the Chevy Blazer EV SS crossover, in particular, figures pretty heavily into the film.
There’s just one problem: you can’t even buy it yet. That particular model is said to go on sale in the spring 2024, and it’s already been delayed. Same with the new Silverado EV. The Cadillac Lyriq doesn’t seem to exist outside of Detroit-area press fleets, and the GMC Hummerāan inherently limited-volume car due to its price and sizeāhas been rife with problems. Earlier this year GM was touting the fact that “all” of its EVs would qualify for the new tax credit, but the vast majority of those cars aren’t even in production yet.
GM’s made a lot of big electric promises but so far it’s been slow to deliver. But it makes sense why: besides setting up a whole new supply chain, it’s building an entirely new architecture called Ultium that uses new batteries and new software. This is very new territory, even for The General.
So now, CEO Mary Barra’s message is taking shape: help is on the way. Here’s Automotive News:
GM will get some help reaching that goal when its second Ultium Cells battery plant with joint- venture partner LG Energy Solution opens in Tennessee this year, joining the one already operating in Ohio. With more battery capacity and more EV nameplates on the way, GM is working to resolve issues that have constrained its ability to scale production.
More than 2,000 Lyriqs and Hummer EVs reserved by customers were in transit to dealers at the end of June, Barra said on GM’s second-quarter earnings call. And more than 1,000 Lyriqs were delivered to customers in July, CFO Paul Jacobson said during a J.P. Morgan conference this month. It took GM nearly a year to deliver the first 1,000 Lyriqs.
“There’s been some criticism that we should have been faster with our EVs. We’re going as fast as we can, but we wanted to make sure we were leveraging a platform that’s going to give us efficiency with Ultium and that consumers weren’t going to have to compromise,” Barra said. “I’m very confident with the product portfolio we have coming, the pricing and the demand.”
Honestly, though: I find it tough to knock GM on this one. You can knock the massive multi-brand marketing hype, for sure, because at some point you have to deliver on your huge promises (or you find some that you can kick down the road forever because your company’s market cap is tied to them.) But if GM sees the move to the Ultium EVs as the long-term, long-game future of the companyāwhich is nicely profitable at the momentāthen it makes sense to take time to get things right. It’s one thing to have glitches with an expensive toy like the Hummer EV; that won’t fly with the more mainstream cars.
Anyway, GM is working on the electric thing.
Battery Plants Are A Point Of Contention In The UAW Fight
Spurred in part by big federal investments thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, pretty much all of the automakers that build cars in the U.S. are spinning up new battery plants like that GM-LG plant in Tennessee. You can’t have EVs without batteries, right? But that’s exactly part of the labor fight going on in Detroit right now. As Bloomberg explains, those workers are making crucial GM parts but they aren’t a unionized shop:
One of the more divisive topics putting General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Stellantis NV at risk for potential strikes in the coming months concerns the thousands of battery workers theyāll need the next few years.
The United Auto Workers wants to represent these hires, and for them to get the same pay and benefits as union members at other facilities.
The companies want to cordon off this conversation from negotiations of new four-year labor contracts theyāre negotiating with the UAW. For one, most of their battery factories are still under construction. Plus, these facilities arenāt the carmakersā outright ā each of them have set up joint ventures with Asian battery manufacturers.
And as usual, new UAW President Shawn Fain isn’t mincing words about how he feels here:
Fain understands carmakers needed to form joint ventures to access battery technology, but they could have hired the workers at better pay. He has a solution in mind: have the car companies do the hiring at auto-worker pay rates, then lease these staff to the battery ventures.
āWeād love to see it, or some type of arrangement, but the companies have to be willing to do it,ā Fain said in an interview. āTheir intent was to create a different class of workers.ā
The challenge for the UAW is that generally speaking, EVs need fewer parts and less labor than conventional cars do. So those battery plant workers could someday form a big chunk of “auto industry” jobs in America.
The UAW fears that if they aren’t unionized or getting good wages now, that may never happen. But the automakers are desperate to cut costs in the race to electrify, so they don’t want to pay those higher union wages, and I’m willing to bet companies like LG or SK On don’t want to mess with the UAWānow or ever.
More on that from Fain:
The car companies say their joint ventures werenāt set up to be end runs around union wages. They need the expertise of battery partners to build the packs powering their EVs, and for these facilities to be cost-competitive.
āTo me, thatās code for a race to the bottom,ā Fain said. āMary Barra made $200 million over the last nine years. I donāt know how someone looks themselves in the mirror knowing what they are doing at Ultium.ā
I think this will be an especially interesting part of the UAW negotiations to watch because it really encapsulates what’s at stake here: does the future of the American car industry include union labor or not?
Hyundai, Genesis And Kia Also Ramp Up U.S. EV Plans
I struggle with a persistent problem in my life: I would really love to own one of Hyundai and Kia’s rad new EVs, like an Ioniq 6 or an EV6. But they are still very expensive and, because they’re built in Soth Korea, left out of the EV tax credits (unless you lease them, and then it’s debatable whether you’re saving money or not because that “deal” could just get baked into a lower residual at the end of your term.) A shame! These cars are great, but pricey.
Help is on the way here too. Automotive News has an update on Hyundai Motor Group’s huge battery and EV factory plans across the South. You know how Tesla has the Gigafactory? Hyundai calls theirs the “Metaplant.” They got the golden arches, mine is the golden arcs, etc.
Kidding aside, the Korean giant has big plans for EVs in the U.S., including the big vehicles we Americans love most: three-row crossovers and pickup trucks. They get us. From the story:
Six models are planned for the plant, which has a capacity to build 300,000 EVs a year and the ability to produce up to 500,000, depending on demand. Three of those models are likely to be Genesis vehicles. Production of the Ioniq 7, Hyundai’s three-row electric kid hauler, could also move to Georgia. In late 2026, both Kia and Hyundai are expected to launch midsize electric pickups geared toward the U.S. market; both could be candidates for Metaplant assembly.
Hyundai also spent $300 million upgrading its plant in Montgomery, Ala., to build the Genesis Electrified GV70, an electric version of the top-selling luxury crossover, as well as the hybrid version of the Hyundai Santa Fe.
In a similar move, the group is spending $200 million to ready the Kia Georgia factory in West Point to assemble the EV9, a boxy, three-row crossover and Kia’s second dedicated electric vehicle. Kia EVs also will benefit from a joint venture between HMG and battery supplier SK On that will likely be its primary source of power packs.
The first wave of Kia EV9s, to go on sale this year, will be imported from South Korea. Kia Mexico also is likely to undergo electrification upgrades. The company already produces the compact Forte and subcompact Rio, which is being discontinued after the 2023 model year, at its factory in Monterrey, Mexico. Forecasters believe two smaller electric crossovers will come from the plant after a full-scale retooling.
Besides the tax credits, being able to build these cars locally and at a greater scale will no doubt lower their prices long-term. I don’t see Hyundai doing crazy Tesla-style fire sale moves, but as it ramps up these cars in America, I fully expect them to become more competitive in price. But that could take several years to happen, unfortunately.
Tesla Will ‘Lock’ Its New Battery Capacity With Software
I will scream this from the rooftops until I am dead: the way automakers plan to make a bunch of money in The Future is by having you pay over time for features that were once baked into the total purchase price of the car. “Recurring revenue” will be a huge part of the way they do business soon and that’s all driven by software.
Now, that’s not exactly what’s happening here, but Tesla has a great example of the software-driven control automakers will have over future cars. Those new Standard Range versions of the Model S and Model X will have the same battery pack as the Long Range versions of those cars (a sizable 100 kWh) but its “true range” will be locked by software. This is from the tech site Not A Tesla App, which follows such developments closely:
Tesla has previously utilized software-locking strategies, allowing the company to streamline its manufacturing process. The new Standard Range Model S and Model X vehicles are no exception to this approach. These cars have the same battery packs as their Long Range counterparts, but 21% of the capacity has been locked.
Tesla’s software-locking strategy for the new Standard Range Model S and Model X continues its innovative manufacturing and market positioning approach. Whether or not Tesla will offer the option to unlock additional battery capacity in the future remains an open question.
There are a few ways to look at this. For one, I think it is a clever approach for Tesla, rather than having to develop all-new battery packs for the relatively slow-selling Model S and Model Xāboth are older and more expensive and vastly outsold by the Model 3 and Model Y. But I worry about a waste of resources involved with building a big 100 kWh pack, and then “locking” its true capacity. Then again, Tesla sells so few of these cars and may have 100 kWh production so dialed-in it may not matter.
But even beyond Tesla, this is the kind of thing you can expect more of in the future. You want to “unlock” all your car’s features? You’re gonna pay up. Or you find some way to grease it yourself like jailbreaking a smartphone.
Your Turn
Would you ever “hack” your car to unlock its true features? You can tell me, I’m not a cop. If I was a cop, I’d have to tell you I was a cop. That’s how it works.
Either way, I think that like nature, the car tuners find a way, and there could be a whole new generation of enthusiasts figuring out crazy stuff to doānot with parts, but with code.
Wouldnāt hacking just be tuning for bigger nerds than the nerds that already tune cars. Can you even blow up an EV? Does the battery just start on fire and burn down your friends dyno? If I can just irresponsibly add power with no repercussions for my actions, hell yeah. If I risk a fire, yes. If that fire itās probably, maybe. If that fire is likely, maybe not.
What, hack a car to access features that are already part of the car that you own? I mean, I probably wouldn’t buy a car like that in the first place, but if I did, yeah, that would be like the first thing on the agenda. Then go do donuts on the front lawn of the automakers closest facility to me for some personal catharsis
I’ve “hacked” both my cars with VCDS. For example a lot of cars were sold with the hardware for lane keep, auto high beams etc, but it’s not active. You can code it in very easily.
“Would you ever ‘hack’ your car to unlock its true features?”
My cars are British, Dutch, and French, all between forty and fifty years old, with an even older two-stroke SAAB thrown into the mix. At this point I spend much of my free time trying to mitigate their true features, not encourage them.
I have seen at least one Lyriq in a hospital parking lot a couple months ago, it was close to the parking deck entrance so not sure if it was a doctor’s car or not. More recently, weekend before this last one, I was returning from a trip to the beach and saw not one but two billboards for the nearby Cadillac dealer that had “2023 LYRIC” on it. Is there a word for when the original product spelling is incorrect on purpose but then it’s typo’d so that it would technically be correct but not really?
Not directly related to the H/K EV news here, but Kia has a limited edition EV6 for winning utility of the year in forest green over a beige interior, like a classic British Racing Green combo. The EV6 is probably what I’d get if I had to get an EV tomorrow, but I’m glad I don’t because I would probably be aggressively seeking out that combo.
For car “hacks” – a lot of cars have “hidden” features and settings that the OEM doesn’t enable for one reason or another (like regional laws) or let you program without a tool, VW for example is common with lighting or sensors and such. Fob-operated windows down is one I’d like to enable, I’m not sure why VW didn’t include it considering you can close all windows holding the lock sensor on the exterior door handle, unless open/close is tied together on the fob function and U.S. laws don’t allow remote window closing on the fob or something.
Toyota had remote window roll-down too but didn’t enable it factory for whatever reason, which was odd because Honda and Nissan had it at the same time.
I passed a Lyriq in Maryland yesterday going way too slow in their lane. First one I saw.
For whatever reason Ford decided to not even offer Traffic Sign Recognition and Global Window Open/Close (via the fob remote) on the Maverick. A little code massaging with FORScan and mine now sports both. Plus activating the BCM’s fog light output pins in conjunction with an F-150 Powerboost’s light switch for OE operation.
I was just mentioning programming tools and remote window operation too – same thing on my GTI, I’m not sure why it wasn’t just offered since past VWs had it. Best guess is maybe US safety laws/NHTSA don’t like the idea of remote window closing. Perhaps it’s a lawyer thing for the traffic sign recognition from Ford too even though other makes offer it.
It’s not even necessarily a US-market thing. The Bronco Sport and Escape have those features (TSR is usually gated behind some form of CoPilot 360 option) which is why the code is there to be enabled.
OR, maybe they are doing this to make the batteries last longer, like in my Samsung phone with the 85% charge thingy.
So, car costs go UP, and they want to lock features behind a paywall. Great. This is just great. Meanwhile, my salary just kinda….. stays the same. Wait, wait, I get 2.9% per year, pretty good in the grand scheme of things.
Obviously not if they’ll let you pay to unlock the extra capacity. They already limit the usable capacity of the battery to extend its life, this is purely about money.
First off are you a cop can be answered no or do I look like one.
Would I hack the software? If I owned the sure. Lease nope.
Glad to see big players like GM, Hyundai, Kia going for EVs as that will should normalize the playing field.
Am I thinking the Kia should rebrand as Killed in action is not a good way to refer to your product. š
I prefer my EVs to have only the bare minimum electronics necessary to function as EVs, and to otherwise be analogue. This makes them a LOT harder to hack.
My Triumph GT6 has a controller programmable with a laptop via a web browser, a “dumb” DC-DC converter, and a Brusa NLG charger that requires a Windows XP machine to reprogram. Everything is accessible and nothing encrypted. If a part fails, I can swap it out and replace it with something similar off the shelf, as long as it is rated for my battery pack voltage, with no hassle. Plug and play. The batteries are a single string of large format prismatic CALB CA100FI batteries, and were initially bottom balanced, with no BMS, and the cells are to within 0.001V of each other 10 years after installation. The batteries, being LiFePO4, won’t burn your house down if something goes wrong; instead, they’ll belch out toxic smoke and leave you melted piles of plastic, but the car will survive. All of the other functions of the car are mechanical. There are no sensors, no power-anything, no electronic locks, no CANBUS. This car is less complicated than it was with the carbureted 2.0L inline-6 cylinder ICE.
An EV designed similar to this, with the electronics kept to a minimum, could be built to last a human lifetime if the mechanicals and chassis were designed to be sufficiently robust. And any 80-IQ high-school dropout Bubba could fix practically anything on this car while drunk, if you trained him how to remove/install individual batteries(make sure the socket drive has insulation wrapped around the handle and neck so that you don’t short across battery terminals, remove all jewelry, metal-framed glasses from your face, ect when the battery box is open and when servicing it, wear safety goggles/gloves, ect).
We really need simple, repairable EVs that last for fucking ever. The way the car companies are currently making them is totally backwards from realizing the potential of the technology from a resource use, longevity, and recyclability standpoint. Modern EVs appear to be designed for planned obsolescence, and to waste as much resources during their construction as possible driving a high price tag. Tesla appears to be the least egregious of the manufacturers selling in the USA, as their battery packs can last 300,000-500,000+ miles if taken care of and are designed for 2nd and 3rd useage cases after they are no longer appropriate for traction applications, but their cars are STILL complicated messes and rolling fire hazards. BYD seems to be pretty decent as well, but they aren’t available in the USA yet. All the other manufacturers don’t at all seem to care what the hell they are doing, and it shows. It’s little wonder the values of most modern EVs have such steep depreciation curves.
I came across an Audi E Tron GT listed for $57,000 yesterday when browsing and I just found another one for $62,000. It looks like both needed full battery replacements in the first 10,000 miles and are now being resold. If this doesnāt speak to everything youāre saying about manufacturersā approaches to them and depreciation I donāt know what does.
Theyāre literally worth half of what they sold for new a year ago. Granted theyāre both branded as lemons because of the battery replacements, but still. Yikes. Hell if they dip into the 40s I might even take a lookā¦
They’re completely unrepairable outside of a dealership. When dealership support ends, the car is completely landfill fodder. Which is a complete waste of resources considering the electric drivetrain could easily last a human lifetime(or two… or three…), if the rest of the car weren’t crap and if everything weren’t locked behind a proprietary software accompanied by a manufacturer-imposed paywall.
I think the manufacturers want the technology to fail, so they can say they tried it, and it didn’t work, and go back to ICE and all of the maintenance it entails(which will also be locked from access via software). EVs should be inherently long-lasting, low-maintenance vehicles, and that runs contrary to the ethos of profit maximization.
And an ICE car that has to have an early engine replacement under warranty barely loses value.
Heck, it goes up in most cases. When Toyota redid the bottom end in my parent’s 200K Camry before I sold it for them, it bearly doubled its Blue Book..
E-tron was expensive, beautiful, and possibly the most inefficient modern EV ever built. A lovely place to sit until you had to get out and charge it over and over. Why anyone would pay $67k for one today is a total mystery.
The GM product placement in Barbie was somehow jarring in a movie that was jarring-incarnate
Parts of the movie really do look like a Chevy ad!
“Parts of the movie really do look like a Chevy ad!”
Why, does Mahk make an appearance?
Margot Robbie rolling in Mattel and GM bucks. Smart and beautiful.
“Time to rise and grind.”
I have to get up at like 1 a.m. for a flight. Absolutely not. I am rolling over for a siesta while I still can.
Also, hell yeah, hack your cars. Of course I’m for home-tuners getting the most out of their own cars. We really need to enshrine the right to tinker with *our own stuff* before it’s too late, too.
NHTSA ruled against massachusetts’ right-to-repair law in june. OEMs seem to view RTR as an existential threat…I’d always thought because they wanted to protect dealerships, now i’m beginning to think they are focused on their future recurring revenue business model.
(“nothing repairs like a deere”).
yes, our community is under assault.
It’s just another instance of the NHTSA forcing us into heavier, more expensive, more fragile vehicles. I’d like to invite all the corrupt NHTSA officials on a cruise and sink the ship in international waters after disabling the emergency equipment. Wait until they mandate breathalyzers. And I don’t drink, so it’s not because I’m a drunk driver.
may i extend your invitation to IIHS also?
That doesn’t seem right, how can a federal agency dictate state law?
Something is wrong there.
The NHTSA juuuuust reversed that decision and gave MA’s law the go-ahead: https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/right-to-repair-law-massachusetts-auto-repair-nhtsa/
Hasn’t Tesla been doing this all along? I remember news some years ago that Tesla was “unlocking” the extra range for folks in FL who were evacuating before a hurricane or something.
They’re not the first to do this either, Intel has been doing the same with their processors for decades. That’s why the 300mhz Celerons and PIIs were such overclocking legends back in the day.
That example was allowing the battery to use the buffer that prevents it from over discharging, as heavy discharging is detrimental to battery life long term.
Telling a 100KW battery to operate as a smaller battery is different, like of your car shut down every time it hit 1/4 tank. You know the gas is there, but it won’t let you use it.
Tesla has never unlocked the overcharge or overdischarge safety buffers on their batteries.
Tesla sold many 75 kwh Model S cars with capacity software locked down to 60 kwh. They sold many 60 kwh locked to 40 kwh, and also some 90 kwh cars locked to lower capacities, both 75 kwh and 60 kwh.
That extra capacity was temporarily unlocked remotely at no charge to the owners during an evacuation preceding a Florida hurricane.
I’ve said it before, GM and other legacy automakers don’t really want to move faster on EVs since they are losing money on every one. They want the buzz without the loss.
Once the warranty was up I’d risk hacking it. It also depends on the paperwork signed at buying. A savvy lawyer may well make a case that forcing owners to sign a restrictive EULA in the car after purchase is equivalent to an “ironclad” contract made under duress and is so void. It’ll take deep pockets to find out, though.
As the company that made the EV1 over 25 YEARS ago I think they could have been doing a lot more between now and then.
Too busy chasing short term profits (giant SUVs)
An agonizing history of shooting itself in the foot. They cry whenever regulations try to force improvements, but happily suck up any gov.$ and pull off the Precept for the 2000 NAIAS , then immediately drop it when funding ends, and concentrate on Hummer and other antithesis that can achieve high margins. IMHO the current incentives are too winner picking without thinking it through, and should have forced 50mpg. average however you can achieve it, agree on an interchangeable battery module standard, and charging standard, real full life cycle environmental impact evaluation, and let the best solution win.
The Precept got 80 mpg as a diesel-electric hybrid, mostly thanks to its drag coefficient of 0.16. This was a midsized car capable of seating 5 people.
If a pure EV weighing in around 3,200 lbs were built out of it, it could have been an EV that only needed 120-150 Wh/mile on the highway. Think of the implications of this with modern battery tech. You could have a 30 kWh battery get you 200 miles range on the highway. Guess what a smaller battery pack does for manufacturing cost?
THIS is how you get a sub $25k EV. You’re not going to pull it off with massive 100 kWh batteries.
GM could have got us there in the late 1990s/early 2000s.
I supplied 3 full interior sets for the Precept. There was the diesel hybrid, a hydrogen, and a pure EV.
Do you have any info on the pure EV version of the 2000 GM Precept? I have never come across a pure EV variant in all of my reading and searching(thousands of hours worth on the subject of EVs). I am very interested to know more. This would be an excellent platform for an EV, even moreso than the GM EV1.
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/faviconV2?url=https://www.conceptcarz.com&client=ABOUT_THIS_RESULT&size=32&type=DARK_MODE_FAVICON&fallback_opts=TYPE,SIZE,URL https://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z448/gmc-precept.aspx
Talks about FC and hybrid, didn’t see anything about pure EV variant. To be clear, I was only involved in prototyping, and producing the interior components. Did get flown out monthly to hammer out details with designers for a year before reveal, and got to see the “body in white” early on for interference issues. I was told there would be the three variants, and was stuck hosting a off site display of my prototypes of other laminated EPP interior components during the show, and never got to see the completed car(s).
Thanks. I wasn’t aware of the H2 fuel cell variant either.
Fuel cells back then were about 40% efficient. It claims 108 mpg equivalent. There are roughly 33.5 kWh in a gallon of gasoline, so 108 mpg equivalent multiplied by 0.4 would be 124 Wh/mile! That is the sort of efficiency needed to reliably get 200+ miles range on a 30 kWh pack.
This is comparable efficiency to the Solectria Sunrise. This H2 Precept was probably around 3,000 lbs, which would make it 300 lbs heavier than the Sunrise(the curb weight specs shown on the page are for the diesel-electric hybrid Precept model, unfortunately, and back then, fuel cell systems including stack, batteries, and storage tanks were at least as heavy as comparable BEV systems). It would make sense, since the Precept was slightly more slippery from an overall CdA standpoint than the Sunrise.
The modern auto industry could build a similarly efficient platform today. If anyone really wants to get an affordable long-ranged EV to market, this is one way to do it. If the 1st world nations automakers don’t do it, the Chinese are going to. It’s low hanging fruit waiting to be plucked. The Chinese have an $11,000USD BYD Seagull for sale in their home market already.
People really need to stop bagging on GM for the EV1. EV tech wasn’t there for mass market acceptance and they correctly identified that. Then they were actually quite early in the modern EV market with the Volt and Bolt, perhaps to their detriment since the Volt became a political lightning rod.
There are plenty of valid criticisms of GM. Killing the EV1 isn’t one of them.
Tesla demonstrated that people would buy a $50,000 luxury sedan with a 200 mile range in the early 2010s. It could do 0-60 mph around 6 seconds on its initial release.
In the 1990s, we had the technology to do the same thing with an inferior battery, by having a more efficient platform, and then upgrading the drive system to handle the extra power. AC Propulsion had a 200 horsepower AC system ready to go in the 90s, demonstrated in the TZero. The designer, Alan Cocconi, was also the designer for the 133 horsepower inverter used in the GM Impact, the prototype to the EV1.
The Solectria Sunrise, in 1998, had a real-world 200-250 mile range on the highway, with a 26 kWh NiMH battery pack. The designer claimed it would have been $20k in mass production, with a 67 horsepower drive system.
If GM would have taken James Worden’s Solectria Sunrise, ironed out the bugs, maybe used more conventional build materials, put in AC Propulsion’s drive system, didn’t sell their share of COBASYS/Ovonic to an oil company(who shelved the battery tech), we could have had a sub-$25k EV sedan that did 0-60 mph in under 6 seconds and had a 200+ mile highway range, in the late 1990s. No one built this hypothetical car, but all of the pieces were there back then to build it.
You don’t think people wouldn’t have bought that?
I think it’s pretty well established that you’re willing to make a lot of compromises in pursuit of small, cheap EVs. It has not been established (quite the opposite) that the mass market will. I also don’t particularly believe any of the claims you’re making about the Sunrise given that no one has built anything remotely close to those specs for that price. Maybe it could have been done, but the compromises would have been extreme.
Further, while the Model S launched in 2012, the Volt actually beat it to market. It’s not like GM dragged their feet on electrification. Yes, they chose to pursue a different path than Tesla, but I think it remains to be seen whether they were wrong to do so. Sentiment is increasingly in favor of PHEVs given the problems with scaling battery and charging infrastructure.
Again, I don’t think GM is perfect. Far from it. After all, they wanted to kill the Bolt and did kill the Volt. But I think they also deserve credit for the surprisingly smart decision to un-kill the former and for pushing electrification long before Tesla made it cool to do so.
What I was describing regarding an EV with a Precept style body in another post would be a mid-sized or possibly full-sized car with the frontal area of a W123 Mercedes sedan. The Sunrise was a compact car, but its low drag coefficient of 0.17 could be attained with other vehicle sizes, and such a car didn’t necessarily need to be small.
The $20k mass production MSRP for the Sunrise is taken from the book “Charging Ahead” by Joe Sherman, where the designer James Worden was quoted at the World Electric Vehicle Association’s twelfth annual meeting. A production run of 20,000 cars was required to meet this cost according to the designer. Even if that was not possible given that the construction made extensive use of composites using production methods that were not attempted or perfected by the mainstream manufacturers, wind resistance doesn’t care if conventional or exotic materials are used, and it is from drag reduction where most of the car’s efficiency gains are realized vs a conventional car design. Conventional build materials would have turned a 1,500 lb car minus batteries into a 1,900 lb car minus batteries, which would not have massively impacted efficiency, but could have allowed a manufacturer to keep the cost down if production volume was sufficient.
Before the Model S, and before the Volt, there was the Tesla Roadster. If anything, the Volt was a reaction on GM’s part to the bad press it received for killing the EV1 and to the film “Who Killed the Electric Car?” The original Volt prototype in 2006 was widely laughed at because it wasn’t even yet running on electricity. A lot of the problems with modern EVs are the result of trying to build them as direct replacements to gas guzzlers. This is totally the wrong way to go about it, because EVs are not gasoline powered cars. They have totally different requirements and needs imposed by the limited gravimetric energy storage capability of their battery packs. Modern attempts to build EVs that weigh 4 tons and have barn-door aerodynamics are predictably very expensive and yield poor results, and will probably prove ruinous in terms of ownership costs. At least Tesla’s Model S, even though it’s a 5,000 lb pig, gets slightly better highway efficiency than a Chevrolet Bolt that weighs more than a half ton less, because the Model S takes account of the importance of wind resistance in its design, and reaps the benefits accordingly.
The criticism isn’t that they killed the EV1, it’s that they dropped the ball after that. GM had the lead. They could have continued to develop EV tech but let Toyota pass them by with hybrids. Then Tesla took the lead and paved the way but instead GM continued to crank out giant gas guzzling trucks and SUVs like it was 1959.
To be fair they sold those trucks and SUVs so the blame is also on cowboy cosplaying customers as GM.
I’ll hack my car if it’s reversible. That way I can load the original code is it needs OEM recalls or warranty fixes.
I “hacked” my brand new Kia when I got it. I wanted cruise control with the stick shift and the dealer said it wasn’t an option. I ordered the OEM ribbon cable and the switch, pulled the steering wheel, and installed them in an hour. Kia prewires all their cars the same, so it was plug and play.
I think it might be different when it’s software based, always connected, and you’re a registered ‘user’ so to speak. Hardware mods are always easy, but I have a feeling doing the same thing with a tesla via software is not so straightforward.
Oh, I agree. Just like when I hack my iphone, and a new update breaks it, so I have to find a new hack LOL
There WILL be shops that specialize in this in the future, no doubt
I wonder if one could remove (or pull a fuse to disable) the OTA receiver unit to prevent updates.
I bet you could remove the antenna from the ECU or something, but that might also be integrated into the radio antenna
FM runs 88-108 MHz. Not sure how well an antenna designed for that range will work for whatever frequencies the car uses to talk to the mothership. More likely that would have its own antenna.
Find it, cover it in foil and you should be good.
Yeah, I did similar with my 05 Magnum R/T. It didn’t have automatic headlights but did have automatic climate control. Since I had that, the vehicle was wired for it. I ordered the switch, connected it and voila. I was also able to do the same for the trunk release, so I can pop it open from the inside. I’m sure with the battery tech, it will be akin to when farmers were relying on hackers to make all the different modules on John Deere equipment easier to work on.
Tesla is probably only locking out the 21% by changing the state of charge. You are probably still using the whole battery, and might even get a bit more life out of it
Honestly I used to be against this more but these cars may be perfect for elderly folks as charging to 80% max is generally best for the overall life and the charging speeds for these regular lithium ion batteries. I still think it’s stupid to call these things a different name like “Standard Range” as they’re no different mechanically than the longer range models.ļ»æ
Apparently, their original idea, the “Cheap Bastard Edition” didn’t pass muster with focus groups.
“Cheap Bastard Edition” would appeal to this focus group.
Right? Thatās right up the Autopianās alley. Cheap Bastard Edition. Brown Edition. We Turned It Into A Van Edition. Thereās money to be made here, damn it.
“There’s money to be made” from people who refuse to spend money! š
It would have had I been in that focus group.
SOLD! Well, in a few years after the depreciation hit.
“…does the future of the American car industry include union labor or not?”
It sure as shit better, as it should, otherwise the UAW will nuke the whole US economy with lawsuits. As they would and could.
Gonna have to change the name of the Ultium platform to Ultimatum if the UAW gets its way.
If possible, I’ll support companies that don’t require that. But, yeah, I’d absolutely hack my car to get access to the features. And you may have to do so as cars stop being supported, either because companies go under or because they just want you to move to a newer model.ļ»æ
I saw a Hummer EV on the road over the weekend. Looks just as dumb in real life as it does in pictures.
But doesnāt it just scream āsave the rainforestsā when it bears down on you at 80mph with the driver texting?
With regards to Tesla software locks:
Hack the planet!
There’s very few features I’d want badly enough to torch a warranty over.
It’s the same reason I don’t tune or modify my cars anymore. The stakes are simply too high given the cost of repairs and the ease of detection with dealer software. Way too many horror stories of automakers denying claims. Even if you decide you’re in the right and you’re going to fall back on every car forum’s favorite law, the Magnuson Moss Act, well, you still need to prove it in court.
This. If itās an old car Iāve bought cheap itās one thingā¦but if itās a car Iāve bought new with a warranty Iām not messing with it, especially in a performance oriented car where a part going bad can set you back 4 or even 5 figures.
I SAW A NEW LYRIQ ON THE ROAD! It was near Seattle, so quite a way from SE Michigan.
I saw a Lyriq on Friday in PA.
Up here in western NY too with NY plates.
Saw my first Rivian Friday. Out of state plates, but I can confirm they are real finally.
Weird how regional trends work out; we’ve had plenty of Rivians for some time around here. No Lyriq yet, but I don’t expect it will be popular here in Idaho.
Me too. I’ve been seeing Rivians in the North Atlanta ‘burbs for months, along with a couple of Lucids and a whole bunch of Taycans. Occasionally I see a Lightning or a Mach-E, or a Hyundai Ionic. And it seems like half the cars are Teslas. No VINfast or Fiskers yet though.
Me too, saw one at a charger in a McD parking lot. Had to stop just to get a look at it. We’re on one of the main highways connecting LA and the bay area, so while we’re low population, occasionally get to see new models a they pass through.