Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I sold GM automobiles for a couple of months in 1986, and a lot of customers didn't want anything to do with a front wheel drive vehicle. A couple of them flat stated they would quit driving if they couldn't get a car with a full length driveshaft and rear wheel drive, and predicted that GM would go broke if they tried to change over completely. They were wrong all the way around.
GM plans to eliminate all passenger vehicles from its lineup that use gasoline and diesel by 2035, and offer nothing but electrics. The change that has been predicted for the last 25 years is on the way. There are a lot of people now who are saying that they will never give up their petroleum powered vehicles, and that GM will go broke if they try to change over completely. I personally think they will be proven wrong as well. GM will be around long after all of the naysayers are gone. You can't stop progress.
Why would we want legislation to force GM to stay on gasoline if the technology is there to go electric?
It's likely that by 2035, electric battery technology will have progressed to the point where there isn't as much of a disadvantage (if any at all) compared to a gas car.
Whatever. If there is demand, someone will offer it. If electrics can hit the range of gasoline at a similar price point, they will sell. If they continue to be in the $40K+ segment, plenty of us will not make the switch. I refuse to pay more than $20K for a vehicle, and will probably not buy another for at least 5 years. The used market needs to be affordable for the lower middle class segment and people who are just plain thrifty like myself.
GM plans to eliminate all passenger vehicles from its lineup that use gasoline and diesel by 2035, and offer nothing but electrics.
So they want to destroy the environment with highly toxic chemicals and waste. We go from toxic chemicals to highly toxic chemicals. Yeah, that makes sense for the environment. Maybe we could come up with cars that run on cyanide or aqua regia.
Why would we want legislation to force GM to stay on gasoline if the technology is there to go electric?
It's likely that by 2035, electric battery technology will have progressed to the point where there isn't as much of a disadvantage (if any at all) compared to a gas car.
Every automobile manufacturer on the planet has seen the writing on the wall, and they are all in the process of developing EVs. As technology improves, we will see more offerings geared to the pocketbooks of the Middle Class. We will also see increased interest in owning them as the recharging grid is developed across the country and batteries become more efficient at holding a charge.
They are not only cleaner, they are cheaper to operate, have far fewer moving parts, and they are as quiet as a golf cart, or at least the Tesla a buddy of mine owns is. The best part is, you will no longer have to worry about the price of crude oil from foreign sources or the United States becoming involved in a war to get more of it. EVs will break the backs of the oil cartels. It's a win-win situation.
I sold GM automobiles for a couple of months in 1986, and a lot of customers didn't want anything to do with a front wheel drive vehicle. A couple of them flat stated they would quit driving if they couldn't get a car with a full length driveshaft and rear wheel drive, and predicted that GM would go broke if they tried to change over completely. They were wrong all the way around.
GM plans to eliminate all passenger vehicles from its lineup that use gasoline and diesel by 2035, and offer nothing but electrics. The change that has been predicted for the last 25 years is on the way. There are a lot of people now who are saying that they will never give up their petroleum powered vehicles, and that GM will go broke if they try to change over completely. I personally think they will be proven wrong as well. GM will be around long after all of the naysayers are gone. You can't stop progress.
I think their success will be largely determined by technology. If the issue with slow charging is resolved, the range will be less of a factor. However, I still have doubts about the grid supporting the potential influx of EVs by 2035. Perhaps, 2050-2060. And during a major hurricane, filling up several cans of battery juice will be a problem.
I think their success will be largely determined by technology. If the issue with slow charging is resolved, the range will be less of a factor. However, I still have doubts about the grid supporting the potential influx of EVs by 2035. Perhaps, 2050-2060. And during a major hurricane, filling up several cans of battery juice will be a problem.
I think the way it will eventually go is you'll need a special license plate to drive a gas car, kind of like states have antique car license plates now that don't have to pass the emissions tests regular vehicles do. Of course by then, electric vehicles will have been adopted by most people and it won't be that big of a deal.
For me, my requirements to switch to an electric car is to be able to go 300 miles in one charge at 75 MPH and to be able to recharge in 15 minutes.
Electrics have a long way to go to be able to replace gas and diesel vehicles in just 14 years. They need to match the range of a gas/diesel rig, be able to charge in the same 5 minutes a gas rig can-and infrastructure needs to be able to support them. The bigger question-does our power grid have the excess capacity to handle a massive influx of EVs?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.