There are people who want to own a truck, and people who need to own a truck. I'm of the opinion that you can get rid of the former, but not the latter; while American truck sales are slowing down for the first time in years, either due to the high cost of gas or the stigma of owning an environmentally-unfriendly vehicle, my theory is that the wannabes are simply being weeded out while the need-to-bes are standing firm. If you work in one of the trades, or feed your family by doing something that requires you have a strong back, chances are you need a truck. The green movement is not going to sway you and you just curse more at the gas pump.
Since the trades aren't going away (God willing), how can we resolve environmental responsibility with the need to drive big-ass vehicles? One promising answer comes from Via Motors, a sort of automotive co-developer that takes Detroit's existing machines and renders them, through technical wizardry, electrified.
Because Via modifies existing trucks, that means you can get the big-ass Silverado with the Crew Cab, or a GMC Suburban if you need to haul enclosed loads, or a GMC cargo van if you need to abduct shrill environmentalists, and still clock about 100 miles per gallon. Via vehicles will go for 40 miles before the gas engine even kicks in, making it the perfect local runabout; should you need to travel further distances, the gas engine will carry you another 300 miles before you need to tank up.
As for power, Via's Vtrux (the hacked Silverado) produces 402 horsepower, so you can throw both Little Sal and Big Sal in the crew cab while still hauling a half-ton in the bed. But here's the real killer app: For those working in remote locations without electricity--you've undoubtedly seen utility trucks hauling those wheeled generators behind them--the vehicle doubles as a generator. That means you can leave the gennie in the garage and plug your power tools directly into the truck. You can also, in a blackout, use the vehicle to power your house.
The only thing that will prevent individuals from jumping on the Via bandwagon right away is the asking price, which is estimated to start at 79 large. You can make that up in fuel savings over time, depending on how much you drive, but that's a big nut for a lone tradesperson to cover. I'm hoping Via sets up a financing branch with attractive rates, at least until their manufacturing costs come down enough for the regular Joe to buy in.
In the meantime they're targeting the people who can cover the nut and will realize the long-term savings: Fleet owners.
Via is currently taking pre-orders for $1,000 a pop. Deliveries are estimated for mid-2013.
Here's a look at their vehicles (and a test drive) taken by Jay Leno and featuring Via CEO Bob Lutz, of GM and Chrysler fame:
Create a Core77 Account
Already have an account? Sign In
By creating a Core77 account you confirm that you accept the Terms of Use
Please enter your email and we will send an email to reset your password.
Comments
Way to go VIA Motors!
As for humans breathing in oxygen and exhaling co2, that is a good argument for intelligent plantlife to wage war on humans. I was more curious about things like how much coal would burn to charge a battery, and it's byproducts long term impact vs. ICE with gasoline. Lots of other things too, like the manufacture of batteries, and waste byproducts that have to be buried, and might even be more harmful than nuclear waste which at least can have a half life manageable over several generations.
That might be considered a damage, though I suppose any assertion to damage is subjective somehow. I am far less interested in the semantics of the term damage though when looking at long term damage to DNA (which damage is actually measurable, and can conclusively be determined 'damage') So that's a good starting point.
Just curious though on any good reads -also diesel hilux is awesome
I'd love a diesel Toyota HiLux, but won't get a gas Tacoma because of the poor economy.
bob: "damage" is a relative word. You breathing and releasing CO2 can be construed as "damage" depending on who you talk to. I think we can critique energy input, raw materials input, and waste from cradle to grave but to term these inputs/outputs "damage" is a little counterproductive, don't you think?
For example, pulp packaging is termed the greenest you can get since it is not only recyclable, but compostable. Yet currently the majority of suppliers are in China. If you look at the energy used to make these in a Chinese factory, where that power comes from, the transportation required to get raw materials in and FG's out and onto the water, into a port and intermodal shipping + distribution...you'd be better off packaging your product in a PET blister here in the States from a local supplier.
I guess my point is, everything is relative.
This idea of replacing powerplants in existing form factors is one I have been arguing for some time.
"powerplant replacement that will allow people to keep driving vehicles they are used to with new efficient powerplants. Given the economies of scale in modern automaking, with multiple marques sharing components, this should be doable."
"I really don?t want to buy a new car to get access to this technology, but I would like to see someone devise a powerplant that can replace the existing ones in modern cars. The car is not something that needs to be perfected: the materials from which they?re made, perhaps, but mostly how they are powered is where the benefits are to be had. Not as cool, perhaps, not as much headline-grabbing or front-page picture potential, but what makes more sense: replacing/upgrading a million motors and powertrains in existing cars or trying to create uptake/demand for replacement cars?"
actually any kind of damage you can think of that is impactful in any way. just curious