Impact/EV-1:a forensic reconstruction

[Nevyn]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Is it just me, or is the "Impact" (prototype of the EV-1) a much better looking car?

The nose is obviously different, and I detect a deeper contour in the doors and a slightly "hunched" rear fender -- anything else different that you can see? Was the Cd different?

Wheels/rims are different too.

[cfg83]

Hello -

While doing EV1/Volt comparison research, I found this old GM documentary on the Impact :

Imagine the Impact - May 1990

GM May 1990 Issue Update video about the phenomenal Impact (EV1) prototype development program, testing, and future possibilities for electric vehicles. The Impact prototype and EV1s had the lowest Coefficient of Drag (Cd = 0.19) of any production vehicle.

CarloSW2

[aerohead]

The 1995 Peugeot 106 EV was constructed on the same assembly line as the gasoline-powered 106.
The EV version sold at a price premium of $6,000,$19,000 vs $13,000.
This was at a production volume of 4,000 units/year.
At a production volume of 40,000-50,000 units/year the 106 EV would cost same as gasoline car,$13,000.
Had GM put the Impact body on the Saturn SC,and mass-produced the EV-1,at 50,000 units/year,Saturn could have sold the two cars side by side,a 80-mpg HWY SC,and the plug-in EV,both at the same price.
At 2-3 EV-1s per week,GM valued the cars at $ 500,000 each.
The Bugatti EB 110 was selling at the same time at $378,000.
The Rolls-Royce Bentley Java was slated to sell at $150,000.
Honda created an Accord Station Wagon from the sedan with a change of 74 components out of 3,000.
Chrysler created a 2-dr coupe out of the Neon 4-dr by changing 4-parts.
For 1994,the average cost to produce an automobile in the U.S. was $8,770.
GM's ave. profit for the Caprice/Roadmaster/and Caddilac variant was $6,000-$8,000.
GM's ave. profit on a Suburban was $10,000.

[cfg83]

aerohead -

You're making me cry. What could have been ...

CarloSW2

[Tweety]

Well, in this case we cant really blame GM for stupidity... It's not stupidity if you don't want to understand, it's moronic or idiotic or whatever label apropriorate for it... If they wanted to make the EV1 they probably could have gotten their maths straight and figured out how to make it cheap... But someone up high in the organisation didn't want the EV1 to stay alive... And they didn't want it to be cheap... I still refuse to buy any GM product on general principle if there is alternative available...

[texanidiot25]

/Blame GM

Ford, Nissan, and I think even Toyota all had various EV concepts and test cars in the 90s. Hell, none of them ever got as far as GM either, at least not to the public. A lot of balls were dropped by all manufacturers.

[The Toecutter]

Originally Posted by texanidiot25

/Blame GM

Ford, Nissan, and I think even Toyota all had various EV concepts and test cars in the 90s. Hell, none of them ever got as far as GM either, at least not to the public. A lot of balls were dropped by all manufacturers.

Yup. Once the genie of having a motor that lasts 500,000+ miles with no maintenance is out of the bottle, there's no putting it back...

Toyota did end up selling a few hundred RAV4 EVs, BTW, but they refused to mass produce them. There are a few with more than 150,000 miles on the original battery pack, still going. A shame that we can't buy that battery... a set in Dave Clouds EV accounting for the same weight as the lead acids currently in there would get him a range of over 500 miles in similar driving conditions...

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Tweety

Well, in this case we cant really blame GM for stupidity... It's not stupidity if you don't want to understand, it's moronic or idiotic or whatever label apropriorate for it... If they wanted to make the EV1 they probably could have gotten their maths straight and figured out how to make it cheap... But someone up high in the organisation didn't want the EV1 to stay alive... And they didn't want it to be cheap... I still refuse to buy any GM product on general principle if there is alternative available...

It could be that Roger Smith,the out-going Chairman of GM,was the only person who wanted it.
It could be that California's zero-emission mandate was the real issue,and how it might spread to other states,and how each state could potentially come up with their own rulebook for making cars.
With the legislation killed,there was nolonger a 'need' for the car.
I'm not a GM stakeholder,I have no idea what motivations were.
If I were a carmaker and had the chance to sell EPA CAFE 200-400-mpg cars which would allow me to also sell more guzzlers,that might be an interesting motivation by itself.

[aerohead]

During development,the Saturn drove across the US with a Chevy Spectrum body,and the Impact drove up and down the West Coast with a Geo Storm body,in plain view of all.
Bowing in 1987 as the Impact,and considering that GM CAN do a product cycle in 36-months,technologically-speaking,there would have been no barrier for the Saturn SC to have worn the Impact's body when it debuted in 1990.
At a conservative 80-mpg HWY ( MacCready gave it 100-mpg ) the car would have been a major coup,selling alongside the EV1.
Also,with a base price coming in at under $9,000 ( US ),it would have been a tremendous value for the customer.
With 'Badge-engineering' the car could have also been marketed as a Buick,Cadillac,Chevrolet,Geo,Holden,Lotus,Oldsmobi le,Opel,Pontiac,SAAB,and Vauxhall.Daewoo might be entitled to producing also.
With the 1-inch ( 25mm ) drop,and 'accessories' as she wore at Ft.Stockton for the land speed record,at below Cd0.16 she'd be a real screamer and have lowest carbon footprint of any production automobile.

[cfg83]

aerohead -

Originally Posted by aerohead

It could be that Roger Smith,the out-going Chairman of GM,was the only person who wanted it.
It could be that California's zero-emission mandate was the real issue,and how it might spread to other states,and how each state could potentially come up with their own rulebook for making cars.
With the legislation killed,there was nolonger a 'need' for the car.
I'm not a GM stakeholder,I have no idea what motivations were.
If I were a carmaker and had the chance to sell EPA CAFE 200-400-mpg cars which would allow me to also sell more guzzlers,that might be an interesting motivation by itself.

Have you read this? :

Amazon.com: The Car That Could: The Inside Story of GM's Revolutionary Electric Vehicle (9780679421054): Michael Shnayerson: Books

I haven't finished it yet, but I have maybe 30 post-its in it right now for quoting. If you want, I will start posting the tidbits in this thread. The book is dirt cheap (when it's used) on flea-bay.

I won't make the claim that it isn't biased, but I think it does have at least one answer for the majority of questions asked on this thread.

CarloSW2