EV1 Electric Car: Did it Suck or Not?

Yes, the batteries are pretty much the only problem with EVs which is what the original poster mostly complained about. The EV1 was a great car otherwise. There are much better battery technologies now but getting the price/performance down to general public use is a couple years down the road. Though rising gas prices may make the price point realized sooner than later.

As far as higher electric rates...well, those lessees should have gone to a Time of Use rate schedule that would have favored them recharging at night with much reduced rates. Or go solar and have free juice for your ride for life.

And I hear all sorts of ranges of what GM spent. From this post of $2B to Rick Wagoneer a couple of weeks ago saying $0.5B was spent. And they never say who's money they spent. I wonder how much of it was given to GM by the government?

I remember thinking at the time that it came out that the EV1 "sucked" -- it cost $40k but had the amenities of a $15k car, it had a range of 75-100 or so miles, and it couldn't be recharged any faster than overnight. The problem with the EV-1 was that you had to plan your life around the car, not the other way around. A car that inconveniences people is never going to sell. It was a mercy killing, notwithstanding the collective rose-colored glasses.

What WAS interesting is that despite the intense fuel cell hybrid research being done by Daimler-Benz (at the time), Toyota came out of nowhere and beat them to an innovative AND marketably mainstream vehicle. Despite being the long-time owner of an American car, I sometimes wonder if the tainted touch of American car company management was responsible for Daimler falling behind as well.

It's also entirely possible that fuel cell hybrids are just never going to get off the ground without a major breakthrough in the price point of catalysts and on-board reformers.

How did the RAV 4 EV compare to the EV1?

Anybody ever convert a small car to plugin-EV using those kits that cost $3k or so?

Johann, EV1 drivers could put up solar panels and have "free" juice? Where should EV1 drivers have stolen solar panels from?

consumer_q,

I converted a VW bug in the early 90's to electric, on a shoe-string budget. I used too-few batteries. but other than that, the experience was more rewarding than the limited mileage or the inconvenience. I would do it again in a heartbeat. But be prepared to spend upwards of $8000 for a kit. you could refer to cloudelectricdotcom for lot's of great info.

My Scion XB feels like a limousine when I have been riding my bicycle or motor scooter for a few days. The point is that any car will be a good car in the energy strapped future. The EV1 was plenty good enough. 75-100 mile range not good enough? In the energy strapped future it will seem like a luxury.

consumer_q - I assume the plugin upgrades add more battery capacity and charging equipment. A normal car would need much more than this, an electric motor for starters.

I ride my bike most days and that will continue. I want something electric, but I live in apartments and can't plug in at my parking stall yet. Someday that might be possible, but not yet. If it had a removable battery to plug in, I might have gone for it then. That wasn't the case, so I didn't.

no, we cant make them today. Because the same problem still exist...and thats that our battery tech sucks.

Hopefully with nannotech, we will have much better betteries within 10 years...Ones that will make gas be-gone.

The movie lied about everything concerning GM's EV1.
Their claim that "thousands" of eager customers were ignored by GM is a total fabrication - GM was only allowed to produce the car as an experimental vehicle for test purposes and was limited in the number it could put on the road (the car did not meet the NHTSB safety standards) and GM decided not to throw good money after bad by redesigning a car that so obviously had nothing going for it. The car cost a fortune
($54K)and could only be put into customer hands by leasing it at a large financial loss. GM had always hoped that someone would invent an advanced battery, but when that didn't happen, that ended GM's (and Honda's and Toyota's)hopes for an electric
car. Today there is still no battery available that could make an electric car practical. Who wants a car that you can't even drive out of the county, much less the state you live in? You would have to own two cars. And where are you going to get the car recharged after a long commute to the city?
The movie makes the hilariously insane claim that Honda and Toyota slavishly followed GM's lead and discontinued their own electric cars (as if they had no way of knowing whether their own cars were practical). I've never seen a movie (except Oliver Stone's
braindead JFK) that so completely destroyed reality
with a pack of lies that were notable mostly for being so
transparent and silly and
easily disproved. It's a sad commentary that there are young Americans naiive and gullible enough to believe this fantasy.

While I think that it's important that a documentary has been produced analyzing the dubious political practices of the automotive industry, oil industry, et al in inhibiting adoption of sustainable (or at least sustainability-enhancing) technologies, I think it's probably more important to survey what developments are occuring *now* in sustainable mobility. I would point readers to Joel Makower's post on Worldchanging, which begins:

"Who killed the electric car? Who cares? It's history!

"What's far more interesting is who's working to bring electric cars to life. Despite the hype and buzz created by the recent debut of a passionate documentary film examining the life and premature death of General Motors' all-electric EV-1 vehicle in the late 1990s, there's a far more newsworthy story: Several notable efforts are taking place to bring all-electric or plug-in hybrid-electric vehicles to market. And for all appearances, these stand to be far more substantive -- and more sustainable -- than GM's initial entry ever was."

The rest of the post is at http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004627.html.

Thanks for the plugin kit link!

"Who wants a car that you can't even drive out of the county, much less the state you live in?"

I do. If the metro areas had smaller cars and cars without emissions most smog would go away.

"You would have to own two cars."

Many households already have multiple cars. Why not have a non-polluting EV commuter car and a hybrid for longer trips?
Furthermore, one would not need two cars if they chose to rent for those rare lengthy trips.

"And where are you going to get the car recharged after a long commute to the city? "

Ideally, there would be charging stations at stalls. Better yet, solar cells that power the charging stations. You must realize that infrastructure changes as technology becomes popular. How did the early adopters of gasoline powered automobiles manage without refueling stations on every corner?

There is a market for electric cars with low speed limits and short distance restrictions. One example: many teenagers have a need for such a car to drive to school or work, and who rarely leave their city. Surely there are plenty of people who could use one for a short commute who have a second gas car for longer drives. Just because not everyone would buy one for all their travel needs doesn't mean there isn't a market for it.

How about one that seats 3-4 people with a range of 450 Kilometers? would that be too limited a range for some of the posters here?

This is no showroom model either, it runs!

http://www.gizmag.com/go/5844/

Americans are spoiled-we take for granted what the Third World doesnt have-Kevin

Sorry Lil' Hugger but unless the car can pass govt. safety standards then it's nothing more than a demonstrator and that car won't pass as pictured. Once all the things that will make it pass are added on the weight will go up and the range will drop.

That being said continuing research and high fuel costs should give us the viable commuter electic. A small 2 seater with a 100 mile range would work for me. The car would have to pass govt. crash tests however.

i think the EV1 time for it to go did come. Lead acid batteries simply weigh to muc. NIMH in the late 90s was STILL relitivly new and did have serious issues. If the EV1 was produced today with more cost effective means it would be profitble at 40k.

In stead of anextensive aluminum frame.

A very simple and crude steel frame reinfoced with thermo plastic could product a 2 seater about the size of a honda insight. would weigh about 1200 lbs for its rolling chasis

sans drive train and interior

these items would ad about another 1200 lbs.

GM shouldnt of crushed them but sold them and required a impossible to bust contract relieving them of all product liability and maintance and support

2 seater with 100 mile range...

People are already doing this with conversion kits in their own garages. check out http://www.electroauto.com/gallery/vp914.shtml Hopefully it won't be long for the masses.

We owned one and while we always felt great driving it around Pasadena, it was pretty much the most impractical vehicle we have ever owned. We never got close to 130m on a single charge, and believe me, we tried hard because it was difficult planning your drive around the few charging stations.

We replaced it with a much cheaper (and easier to charge) electric golf cart. Perfect for tooling around town. And serious driving is left to my wife's A8 or our new Golf gti (wich is a REALLY fun car BTW).

I think it is dumg to what they have done to the cars.In steed of storing them there smashed them and its horible. The world finally had a help for global warming and they just smash the hole thing to them its just about money and its stupid.

Many lies are told by GM and its paid minions about the EV1. If it was such a bad car, why were dozens of would-be buyers camped out in front of GM Burbank to offer $25,000 for the last 78 EV1? Why did GM have two would-be buyers arrested for blocking the sidewalk, trying to buy the EV1?

GM lies. That's a fact.

The EV1 was a great car; on the original DELCO batteries, the 1997 lead-acid battery-powered EV1 only had a range of 60-70 miles, but that's not a big problem. Most of our driving is done less than 40 miles from home, as even GM is forced to admitt. IIt was not the range, but the poor quality of the DELCO batteriies that drove us nuts; but when GM was forced to replace them by good Pansonic lead-acid batteries, the range immediately shot up to 110 miles, and they NEVER failed.

Honda and Toyora, proving GM a liar, came out with Nickel Metal Hydride ("NiMH") EV-plus and RAV4-EV whille GM was whining that it would be unable to use NiMH. Finally, GM was forced to release 465 1999 EV1 with superior NiMH batteries, which had a range of 140 miles (EPA) and 160 miiles if driven with care.

328 of the Toyota RAV4-EV were sold to the public, and, together with hundreds of fleet-lease RAV4-EV, are still in use today on their original NiMH battery packs.

GM, lying as usual, ignores NiMH for the VOLT, claiming that they need "research money" to develop Lithium!

Here we have a battery, NiMH, that works, every day, year after year, in visible all-electric EVs, and GM just ignores it.

If GM were serious about selling the VOLT, they would release it right now with existing NiMH batteries. A 300 lb. NiMH battery pack -- about the weight of the transmission and clute it would displace -- would give the VOLT a range of 50 miles.

Even a 500 lb. battery pack of Panasonic lead-acid batteries would be enough for the VOLT, and that's a lot lighter than some of the dumb fuel cell scam cars.

The reality is that GM has no intention of the VOLT being anything more than a PR ploy, to defuse the PR disaster that they brought on themselves by crushing the EV1, and by the movie Who Killed the Electric car (GM and Chevron!)!

How does the discomfort of smog , and natural disasters sound, aswell as lung cancer and other related illnesses sound?

I drove The EV1 for 3 years to work and all over L.A. I put over 25,000 miles on the car. It was the best car I ever had for many reasons. Not just because I didn't buy gas anymore. It was the batmobile. Fast and exotic. Everybody I let drive it or ride in it love it. They were blown away. They wanted one. Just like people who want a BMW or Mercedes, it was all about the price. But you didn't spend money on gas or maintenance. No tune ups or oil change. So it was very cheap to operate. I spent about 40 cents a day to charge my EV1 to go 50-60 miles. About as much money as an extra refrigerator would cost. It wasn't perfect yet. But a very, very good first atempt at a real production 100% electric car.
I can't figure out why some people hate the idea of EVs so much. You use your own electricity to run it. You are indipendant of gas prices and oil availibility. You can charge it with solor panles and run your house too. Don't be coned by the forces that want to keep the status quo. Lets save our counrty for our kids and stop burnig gasoline.
I KNOW THE TRUTH, I LIVED IT!
Educate yourself about 100% electric vehicles.
EV1 Driver,
Jeff

I watched the movie who killed the electric car and I thought it was very interesting and I really hope that some day they will bring the Ev1's back and put them on market because i really think they would be a very good sollution to the invironment and I think that people would actually wnat them.

The only reason the ev1 died was the oil companys did not want people to stop buying gas
these car would have shut the oil companys down
and that just was not going to happen.

I’ve been repeatedly reading electric-car battery claims, condemning versus praising, over and over again, and I’m fed up with it.

What we need are simple open-standard, automated and accelerated life-time battery tests, with statistically-sound results presented openly to the public (whether consumers or product developers).

Such standard automated tests (controlled by open-source computer programs and test circuits) could be conducted by colleges around the world.

This would be much more effective than giving another $Billion to car companies to blow on another PR exercise.

Push the oil & car company lobbyists aside, and get such a rigorous and widespread battery testing program in place ASAP – because we urgently need to make well-informed decisions based on the best evidence rather than PR, propaganda, and crooked politics.

We urgently need to understand how reliably and cost-effectively NiMH and/or lithium batteries will work for vehicles.

And when I mentioned that ‘we urgently need’ this, I’m not kidding: Think war on terror, think Russia, think Iran, think global warming, think peak oil (which may have already occurred in 2005!!!):

http://www.energybulletin.net/31332.html

Everyone thinks the oil companies are the ones that don't want electric cars. The car companies do not want to stop selling OEM parts for thier motors. Mufflers, pistons, rings, spark plugs, air filters, oil filters cams, radiators, pulleys, just to name a few. The automotive aftermarket industry would suffer also. Auto mechanics would suffer. No tune ups, valve jobs, emission problems, oil changes and transmission work. It would be a small time before trucks were the only gasoline engine transportation. The government would not let that happen and niether would the car manufactures. I believe the above is what is holding back the electric car. GM and the likes will only make an electric car when an independent comes out with one and they have no choice.

I personally would love to have a car that could go only short trips with long charge times. Most American households have more cars than people anyway. Europeans drive much smaller cars or no car at all. We have a different idea of luxury and space in our country. I have to admit nothing feels better tan a spacious interior and V-8 power, but using up oil is irresponsible, increased ethanol is raising the cost of all live stock feed and putting a strain on farmers. I truly hope GM's new Volt will take off and soon. But for now we are at the mercy of battery research.

Well, well. I just heard about the film "Who killed the electric car?" today. I started asking questions and find out that the film is directed by a Chris Paine, who is the registrant for the Papercut Films website, with the 'film company' address being 10866 W Washington Blvd
Culver City, CA 90232, which turns out to be a 'mailbox' storefront (check it out for yourself on Google with 'streetview').
All credibility for this film, this director and its message just went out the window.

As far as the question of electric goes, it's coming, sooner or later.

And your point, John, is?

Chris Paine is a real person, apparently, here's his bio:

Chris Paine is the director of "Who Killed the Electric Car?" He drove a GM EV1 electric car from 1998-2003. After GM confiscated his EV1, he bought a Toyota RAV4 EV—which were briefly available for sale. He still drives it.

"Who Killed the Electric Car?" is Paine's first feature documentary as director. Previously he was an executive producer on "Faster," about MotoGP, the world's fastest motorcycle race (with narration by Ewan McGregor), and Mark Neale's "William Gibson: No Maps for These Territories" (featuring Bono). "No Maps" was named best documentary by the Los Angeles New Times in 2001. Chris has directed segments for the MTV/Initial television series "BUZZ" as well as the personal documentary "Return to the Philippines." He assisted writer/producer Michael Tolkin on the feature films starting with Robert Altman’s "The Player" (1992), and "The New Age" (1994) and "The Rapture" (1991). He has also produced short subjects including "Mailman," which premiered at the 1995 Sundance Festival. His improvisation experience included two seasons with the Los Angeles performance group "Theatersports".

Before becoming a full-time filmmaker, Paine founded Internet Outfitters which became AppNet/Commerce One in 1999, one of the early players in California's internet boom. The firm created marketing and customized software services for corporate customers and nonprofits. He merged the firm to AppNet, Inc. as part of an IPO in 1999. Paine served as president of AppNet's operation in southern California until the firm merged with Commerce One in 2000. Paine also co-founded the robotics developer Mondo-tronics in San Rafael with Roger Gilbertson. Mondo-tronics provided its nickel titanium "muscle wire" to NASA's Mars Pathfinder mission.

On the activist front, Paine worked on the Nuclear Freeze and the Nevada Nuclear Test Site actions in the 1980s as well as protests at the Concord Naval Weapons Yard during the U.S.-backed contra war in Nicauragua. He also shot footage for the California Coastal Commission to fight a proposed freeway bypass around Devils' Slide. Currently, Paine supports the work of the Rainforest Action Network, Conservation International, and the Amazon Conservation Team.

JR,

Sorry, but those of us in the movie business know this address well. It is one of the addresses for the Sony Pictures Studios lot.

10866 W Washington Blvd
Culver City, CA 90232

Tim Russell,

Sorry, but passing the Government safety standards for most battery electrics should be an issue, especially since the Prius and the Hond Civic Hybrid already pass the Electric Battery standards for spillage contained in section 301 of 49 CFR 571, which are the only standards unique to electric cars.

Honestly, I could buld a very light weight car with a NASCAR caliber roll cage that would far exceed the rest of the government standards, drop in an 11 inch electric motor, power the car with Lead Acid batteries, and get 40 miles to the charge with a car that will do over 100 MPH while meeting all government standards without any real problem in doing so.

Most of the safety regs are actually simple to meet, like a lighted dashboard and easily accessible controls. How many cars have you seen where the driver can't reach the steering wheel?

A list of the regs can be found here:

http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/standards/FMVSS-Regs/pages/Part571.htm

You can then review the regs on the GAO's website where they publish the CFR for free.

Seriously most of the standards aren't that difficult to meet or exceed with technology that is available "off the rack" so to speak.

If you're interested in an electric vehicle to use in your neighborhood / city, check out the GEM ALL ELECTRIC NEV (Neighborhood Electric Vehicle). Very interesting that there has been virtually NO promotion of this vehicle by Chrysler!
http://www.gemcar.com/
(They need to add solar to the roof of the vehicles...)

I REALLY want an all electric vehicle like the EV1!!
(I'd take a VOLT, for longer trips, I guess.) Let's keep up the pressure.

It's pretty obvious to me that the government destroyed this car because it would interfere with their money intake. If all people drove these cars, there would be about 85% less oil and fuel consumption (all of which profits the government), and they would be broke. About the only upside to this car for the government, might be that it could benefit their hydro companies, but that doesn't outweigh the loss on crude oil and fuel. There was nothing wrong with the EV1, infact it's disappearance was due to it being too good.

I have never owned a car that didn't have drawbacks. I am more than sure that the EV1 had multiple faults. I feel like a lot of you think the ev1 was a god send, and I am afraid that none of you ever had the opportunity to lease one, or perhaps even see one in person.
For me, I read a commment about "Rare" long trips above. And, I want to know what qualifies as a long trip. For me anything over two hours is fairly long. But more often than not I find myself driving for that long every other weekend and back in the same day.
Thats OK, Its the Idea and the premise that counts. Keep trying. Build me a car that will carry 4 adults for six hours of driving at 70 MPH and carry all our surfboards and gear then sign me up.
But untill then, I cant use it. not even to commute. How would I meet my clients if my car only got me to my office. it doesnt work yet, maybe for sunday drives to church and back but I couldnt imagine spending even $5000 to have a car that i could only go to church in.
J.

I think I am one of a very ew people who currently actually own an electric car. I just saw the movie, who killed the electric car and it was a bit over the top with the conspiracy and I think GM had valid reasons for killing it... how ever there are MUCH cheaper alternatives. I have a flybo 60000zk, I got mine a little damaged so I got a really good deal on it and only paid $6000 or it [brand new in perfect shape they are still less than 10k]. It is slow [35 mph] and I DO have to own a second car for longer trips, but I already owned 2 cars so that is no different. It runs on lead acid batteries which are very heavy and huge but does not affect car performance. I have 6, 200 amp hour 12 volt batteries running a 72 volt system. I get 40 - 50 miles on a charge, and since the car was so cheap I am actually saving money just commuting to work, there is your answer practical, efficient cheap and slow... good enough for me.

My take, no way would I ever buy an electric car or 40 or 50K when it was so limited, but for 6000? why not? I love mine, I use it every day and it is cheap to run and drive. the electric car is NOT dead, just diffent now than it was then. :-)

I think I am one of a very ew people who currently actually own an electric car. I just saw the movie, who killed the electric car and it was a bit over the top with the conspiracy and I think GM had valid reasons for killing it... how ever there are MUCH cheaper alternatives. I have a flybo 60000zk, I got mine a little damaged so I got a really good deal on it and only paid $6000 or it [brand new in perfect shape they are still less than 10k]. It is slow [35 mph] and I DO have to own a second car for longer trips, but I already owned 2 cars so that is no different. It runs on lead acid batteries which are very heavy and huge but does not affect car performance. I have 6, 200 amp hour 12 volt batteries running a 72 volt system. I get 40 - 50 miles on a charge, and since the car was so cheap I am actually saving money just commuting to work, there is your answer practical, efficient cheap and slow... good enough for me.

My take, no way would I ever buy an electric car or 40 or 50K when it was so limited, but for 6000? why not? I love mine, I use it every day and it is cheap to run and drive. the electric car is NOT dead, just diffent now than it was then. :-)

The usenet post says the leases didn't even cover the cost of servicing the vehicle but it doesn't need oil changes, doesn't use spark plugs or, therefore, require tune ups. So where does the cost of servicing them come from? Tire rotation? Come on, dude! Not all of us are that dumb and it's an insult for the person who left that post to assume that we can't see through the nonsense.

The usenet post says the leases didn't even cover the cost of servicing the vehicle but it doesn't need oil changes, doesn't use spark plugs or, therefore, require tune ups. So where does the cost of servicing them come from? Tire rotation? Come on, dude! Not all of us are that dumb and it's an insult for the person who left that post to assume that we can't see through the nonsense.

I do not feel bad for GM's poor earnings right now. They had a perfectly feasible car on the market. They wouldn't even let the leasees keep the EV1s and buy them. Instead, they collected all of them and crushed them. GM can go out of business for all I care. They invest their time and money into polluting SUVs which don't sell. GM's days are numbered.

A few comments...
1) Jamie's question about service, I believe is answered by the comments about battery issues. Poor quality batteries, incorrectly spec'ed ones... cost big $$$ in parts and labor to replace.

2) A number of people commented about why not sell the retiring EV1's to the public. My guess would be liability issues. These were experimental cars that didn't meet crash standards. Governmant regulations probably prohibited sale. Toyota's were closer to off the shelf products that already met standards.

3) Limited mileage/