Red Tory v.2.0
That ridiculous crockumentary "Who Killed ..." somehow managed to ignore the fact that Toyota and Honda (after just 6 months!!!) both killed their electric car programs as well. So why is the film covering up that transparent fact? because its audience is ignorant of all cars electric - they are the perfect stooges to parrot the absurdly stupid theories of the film, which imagines a corporation somehow wanting to stick with a technology that is clearly inferior instead of a revolutionary technology that will catapult them into the lead. The EV-1 was one of the worst cars ever built - this from a panel of distinguished auto analysts surveyed by Time a few months ago. It took 8 hours to recharge (sorry if there's a familiy emergency) , cost three times more than the much better Honda Civic,
had a battery pack that cost over $20,000 and only lasted 5 years or so (none of those that leased the EV-1 were stuck with the cost of battery replacement - GM supplied the batteries free). The EV-1 ghad a driving radius that could be as little as 35 miles. Got any destinations over that distance? Tough, buy a second car. Of course, the fun part was that you never knew how far the EV-1 could travel (and probably didn't even know how far you needed to either). Angus MacKenzie of Motor trend recently declared that the EV-1 couldn't have been killed - it was DOA. GM could only find 50 persons willing to sign a lease agreement of the more than 5,000 customers who had expressed interest in the EV-1. I was one of them - until I learned about the EV-1's battery pack and driving range. The car simply wasn't even remotely viable as a replacement for a gas
powered car. It was the most expensive transportation ever conceive.
My understanding is that the first EV-1s had a range of 60-70 miles with later ones in the 110-160 range. Where are you getting the 35 mile figure from?
By the way, have you even seen the film? Because from your comments, it would seem not. Curious...
Commenting by HaloScan
