2008 Chevy Uplander Handicap Entervan Braun Wheelchair Van . * Warranty Included on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM executive chief EV engineer says reducing cost of plug-in vehicles is 'huge priority'

As we know, another major automaker investing heavily in electrified vehicles is General Motors, and it's doing things much differently than rivals BMW, Ford or Nissan. The Chevrolet Volt extended-range EV is a modest seller at its $35,000 sticker price but a huge hit with owners. The Chevy Spark BEV, still in limited availability, puts smiley faces on its owners and drivers. The just-introduced Cadillac ELR, a sharp-looking, fun-driving $76,000 luxocoupe take on the Volt's EREV mechanicals, has admittedly low sales expectations. With this interesting trio in showrooms and much more in the works, the third vehicle electrification leader I collared for an interview at Detroit's North American International Auto Show (see #1 and #2) was Pam Fletcher, GM's executive chief engineer, Electrified Vehicles. ABG: Why do your EREVs need four-cylinder power to extend their range when BMW's i3 makes do with an optional 650 cc two-banger? "We designed [the Volt and the ELR] to go anywhere, any time" - Pam Fletcher PF: I get that question all the time: why not something smaller? You don't really need that much. You use the electric to its ability, then you just need to limp. But we designed those cars to go anywhere, any time, and we don't want their performance to be compromised. If you're driving through the mountains, we don't want you to be crawling up grades, or to be limited on any terrain. So it's optimized to be able to travel literally the biggest grades and mountain roads around the globe at posted speeds. Because what if you can't? Another good reason: when the engine is on, you have to run it wide open throttle, max speed, most of the time. And while we can do a lot with acoustics, and the ELR has active noise cancelation, a small-displacement, low cylinder-count engine at high speed, high load all the time isn't something you want to live with. That's how we came up with the balance we did among the key factors of performance, NVH [noise, vibration and harshness] and range. ABG: Where you go from here? Is the range-extender engine due for an update? PF: We know and love the current Volt, and there is still a lot of acclaim about it, so we think it's a good recipe. But we are heavily in the midst of engineering the next-generation car, which I think everyone will love and be excited about.

'84 MotorWeek Cherokee, Bronco and Blazer comparison indulges your SUV nostalgia

These days, truck-based, full-frame SUVs are somewhat of a rarity on the auto landscape due to the rapid rise in popularity of easier-driving, car-based crossovers. Although, without the gradually building popularity of these chunky, high-riding vehicles decades ago, it's unlikely that America's roads would be filled with so many CUVs today. In its latest dig into the archives, MotorWeek has found a 1984 comparison test of a trio of these early Sport Utility Wagons, as long-time host John Davis called them, that helped get acceptance of this segment going. This is a red, white and blue test of the SUVs from American automakers at the time and pits the Chevrolet Blazer, Ford Bronco and Jeep Cherokee (specifically in Wagoneer guise) against each other. Driving manners and interior usability are considered in the evaluation, but Motorweek actually takes these vehicles off road, too. Among the bigger revelations is the improvement in on-road ability in the past 30 years. While specific 0-60 times aren't given, all three models take around 10 seconds just to get to around 50 miles per hour in the 500-feet on-ramp acceleration test. Check out this clip to see just how far this segment has progressed in the past three decades or just get a blast of nostalgia from these now vintage models. News Source: MotorWeek via YouTube Chevrolet Ford Jeep SUV Off-Road Vehicles Classics Videos Ford Bronco chevy blazer

Recharge Wrap-up: EV torque secrets, UC Davis maps future of biofuels

A UC Davis white paper maps out "Three Routes Forward for Biofuels," balancing investment risk with carbon benefits. The first option is "incremental," in which we tinker with the existing biofuel manufacturing infrastructure for small improvements over time. The "transitional" plan suggests integrating cellulosic production and other innovations with existing operations. The third route, called "leapfrogging," would mean building refineries based on new technology such as cellulosic and algae-based biofuels. The paper suggests ways the US could use these three routes together in different areas, and predicts the payoffs in terms of carbon emissions could be significant if the right people are willing to risk the capital. After all, financial advisers are always telling investors to diversify their portfolios to manage risk and rewards in the same way. Read more over at the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies. The Formula E Long Beach ePrix will offer free admission. The seventh round of the inaugural all-electric race season, which was moved from Los Angeles to the streets of Long Beach, will offer fans free grandstand and general admission. The race, which takes place on April 5, 2015, will use a 1.6-mile portion of IndyCar's Grand Prix of Long Beach. Read more at LA Times. Polaris is now offering its 2015 GEM electric vehicles, including the new street-legal eM1400 LSV. The passenger and utility vehicles come in two- to six-passenger configurations, many of which are street legal on roads with posted speed limits of up to 35 miles per hour. The eM1400 LSV utility vehicle seats two, offers 1,250 pounds of payload, 1,250 pounds of towing capacity, a top speed of 25 mph and a range of up to 45 miles. Its on-board charger plugs into any standard 110-volt outlet. Read more at Hybrid Cars and check out all the different configurations yourself at the Polaris website. In EVs, more torque does not always equal faster. Green Car Reports found this out when driving the Fiat 500e (with 147 pound-feet) against the similarly weighted Chevrolet Spark EV (with 400 pound-feet). The secret is, at least in part, in the gearing. The Fiat has a 9.6:1 reduction gear, making it quicker at lower speeds despite having far less available torque, while the Chevy uses a 3:1 ratio. The trade-off though, is in top speed. Furthermore, Chevy electronically limits the torque delivery at low speeds, as 400 pound-feet is a lot of launch for the little Spark EV to handle.