GM Introduces Plug-in Hybrid- in 1969
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto 
on 09.17.08
Popular Science asked "wouldn't it be great to have a car that changed from electric drive for use around town to gasoline power for highway driving?" and GM answered with the XP-883.
"It makes so much sense," the magazine wrote in July, 1969, "that we feel they're missing a bet if they don't put it in production."
Unlike the Volt or the Prius, it was tiny and light.
Chuck Squatriglia in Wired describes it: "The heart of the car was a 35 cubic inch (573 cc) two-cylinder engine -- small enough to be exempt from the emissions rules of the day -- coupled with a DC motor powered by six lead-acid batteries just like the one under your hood. You could tool around in all-electric mode or in gas-electric mode, according to PopSci. In hybrid mode, the electric motor did all the work to about 10 mph, at which point the gasoline engine took over. If you needed to really get up and go, the engine and motor worked in tandem. Still, the car was as slow as it was advanced. Top speed was just 60 mph, and it needed 28 seconds to get there -- making it only slightly faster than a Citroen 2CV6."
0 to 60 in 28 seconds- no wonder it never made it to market.::Wired
Another Early Hybrid: Hybrid Inventor Victor Wouk, 1919-2005
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Perhaps it'd have seen a faster 0 to 60 if they'd cut holes in the floor so passengers could help propel the car, Flintstones-style.
I wonder how a car like this would fare in modern crash testing.
In 1969 GM introduced a Plug-in Hybrid- that had poor batteries, and far too small an a electric motor.
The point was to make the electric car look small, uncomfortable, and slow. It would still have sold, but GM has not wanted to become a part of the green revolution. The EV1 and Volt are part of the same strategy, a "greenwash" to avoid introducing electric cars.
Do not look for Electric cars from GM, they just buy up the technology and keep it off the market. There is too much money in OIL.
Try the 1917 Woods Diesel....just a little bit earlier
http://www.escapekeygraphics.com/entry/4/The_History_of_Fuel-Electric_H
GM was not the only company that made an electric car then crushed it so why does everyone blame them for killing the electric car.
In 1969 the average price of a gallon of gas was 35 cents and don't forget the era of the muscle car.
"GM was not the only company that made an electric car then crushed it so why does everyone blame them for killing the electric car. "
Because every angry mob needs someone to hate.
everyone blames gm because they led the charge in killing the electric car. suing the government, making shitty commercials, not allowing people to own their cars... etc.
Ford has chosen direct injection gas engines for their fuel efficient technology
VW has chosen to use diesel with a BioDiesel teaser promise.
Toyota and Honda have gone with electric assisted conventional engines.
GM has chosen to promote gasoline assisted electric cars.
The rest are doing nothing.
The way it looks to me is that GM is the closest company to getting us off oil based transportation. I have to agree with GM on this one. As soon as the battery technology affordably arrives, electric cars will be mass produced. Lithium based batteries have all of the range and environmental friendliness required for a green car, but the PRICE is 20x greater than everything else. When price drops, we will get our 300 mile per charge car with a charging time of under an hour (to 80% off capacity or 240 miles). This will meet most drivers requirements
People tends to forget that Toyota destroyed their electric RAV4 too. Yes, they destroyed the unsold ones but allowed users to keep their own ones. Now, they are using that accumulated experience for the Prius. I wonder how good the Chevy Volt could be without the real-world data gathered by a running fleet of EV1 owners.
Since "GM" killed the electric car I have not seen everyones savior Toyota produce an electric car or did I just miss that part of their lineup.
So let me get this right--when Honda takes back the Clarity, which costs leaseholders, not owners, (just like the EV1) $600/mo, will everyone be crying, Honda Killed the Hydrogen Vehicle?
@MattKelly
There's a big difference between the Clarity, which has almost no infrastructure to support it, and the EV1 which could be charged from the 220 volt chargers installed at home. GM was also planning on putting 1000s of chargers all over the place to be publicly available. Building 220v chargers is extremely cheap ($1000s of dollars) and simple to connect to the grid. Hydrogen fueling stations cost millions of dollars each and the vehicle cannot be fueled from home. Whereas the Clarity has no future due to the incredibly expensive infrastructure required to support it, the EV1 and other electric vehicles like it would have required minimal infrastructure to be supported.