.5B for Tesla (6B Ford, 1.6B Nissan)

TylerDurden

100 GW
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
7,176
Location
Wear the fox hat.
US to loan $5.9 bln to Ford, $1.6 bln to Nissan
Tue Jun 23, 3:25 pm ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The US government will loan 5.9 billion dollars to Ford Motor Co. and 1.6 billion dollars to Japanese automaker Nissan to invest in improving the fuel economy of their US-built vehicles, officials said Tuesday.

The loans are the first awarded out of a 25-billion-dollar program to help automakers meet upcoming fuel efficiency standards, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said at a press conference. "I'm pleased to announce eight billion in provisional loan agreements that will drive innovation in fuel efficiency and help revolutionize the automobile industry in America," Chu said. "These loans will help the auto industry meet and even exceed the president's tough new fuel standards while creating jobs, reducing our dependency on foreign oil and ensuring America's competitiveness."

Another 465 million dollars will be loaned to electric sports car maker Telsa.

Additional loans will be awarded to "large and small automobile manufacturers and parts suppliers up and down the production chain" over the coming months, said Chu, who vowed to release the funds as quickly as possible. The energy department began discussions with Chrysler "the day they emerged from bankruptcy" protection and has already begun reviewing the technical aspects of General Motors's request in the hopes that it will successfully emerge from bankruptcy protection, Chu told reporters.

Ford will use the 5.9 billion dollars retool plants in five states and boost the fuel efficiency of close to two million new vehicles annually. The department of energy estimates these upgrades will lead to fuel savings of more than 20 million gallons of gasoline a year. That would produce a savings of more than half a billion dollars a year for US drivers at current fuel prices, Chu said.

Nissan will use the loans to modify its Tennessee plant to produce zero-emissions electric vehicles and the lithium-ion battery packs to power them. With this loan, "Nissan expects to cut the costs of its batteries in half and ramp up production of 150,000 American-made competitively priced electric vehicles annually," Chu said.
Ford chief executive officer Alan Mulally embraced the "historic green partnership" and said the automaker was committed to investing nearly 14 billion dollars in advanced technology vehicles in the next seven years. "Ford is absolutely committed to fuel economy leadership with every new model we introduce," Mulally said. "We are transforming our vision, retooling our manufacturing plants and bringing to the market new, more fuel efficient vehicles."

Nissan welcomed the loan and said it is "committed to being a leader in zero-emissions mobility." "This loan is an investment in America," Dominique Thormann, senior vice president for Nissan North America said in a statement. "It will help us put high-quality, affordable zero-emissions vehicles on our roads." Nissan plans to begin selling electric vehicles in the United States in 2010. They will initially be imported from Japan but production will shift to Tennessee once the Smyrna plant is up and running in late 2012.

California-based Telsa Motors said it will use 365 million dollars for production, engineering and assembly of the Model S, an all-electric family sedan that carries seven people and travels up to 300 miles per charge. The additional 100 million dollars will be used for a powertrain manufacturing plant.

A study published Monday found that even tighter fuel efficiency rules could help boost the profits of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler by three billion dollars a year. The University of Michigan study found that the Detroit Three have vastly underestimated the American public's willingness to pay a premium for fuel-efficient vehicles. The study found that an industry-wide mandated increase in fuel economy of 30 percent to 50 percent - from roughly 35 to 40.4 miles per gallon - would boost demand by enough to occupy two additional large assembly plans.
 
Tesla is getting most of the founding bound to the purpose to develop and built their own ( american) batteries, this i getting tesla some mayor longterm founding that can be used to getotherwise needed credit ( if so).

thsi is a stimulous that came in handy as a bailout, too.
 
The first I heard of the Vectrix, it was selling for around $12,000. After a couple years it was around $9,000. If Vectrix goes into receivership, I think it might be a desireable takeover acqusition. I havent heard a compelling argument why their having finacial problems, (nobody wants to advertise their problems).

The first year they were a little "buggy", but the bugs have been identified and fixed. I can only assume that many were initially snapped up by wealthy early-adopters, and that market was satified the first couple years (new product prices usually drop when sales begin to slow, or a serious competitor appears) and many potential interested customers at the new, lower prices were hit by the economic recession. Plus full-on E-motorcycles like the GPR-S are about to be introduced for around $8,000.

If I was pushed into buying a scooter right now, I can get 80-MPG from a $1400 Chinese full-sized scoot with a 150cc engine. So there doesn't seem to be any middle ground between the dirty 2-stroke low end and the lithium high-end. The $7500 price difference means I wouldn't even have to buy a used scooter with a fried engine. I could buy a new full-sized for $1500 (sell engine on EBAY to fried-engine scooter-boy) and install an ETEK + controller for around $1,000 more.

That just leaves the batteries, If I had a healthy budget I wouldn't hesistate to get 72V of lithium, but even if settling for the slower performance, shorter-range, and lower top-speed of 48V-60V of lead-acid...I could get into an electric scooter for MUCH cheaper than a new/used Vectrix.

Nobody should ride a scooter on the highway at 55+ MPH. Whoever gets control of Vectrix should downgrade performance to 45-MPH and make a much cheaper entry-level lead/acid model, with lithium as a long-range upgrade option.
 
spinningmagnets said:
The first I heard of the Vectrix, it was selling for around $12,000. After a couple years it was around $9,000. If Vectrix goes into receivership, I think it might be a desireable takeover acqusition. I havent heard a compelling argument why their having finacial problems, (nobody wants to advertise their problems).

The first year they were a little "buggy", but the bugs have been identified and fixed. I can only assume that many were initially snapped up by wealthy early-adopters, and that market was satified the first couple years (new product prices usually drop when sales begin to slow, or a serious competitor appears) and many potential interested customers at the new, lower prices were hit by the economic recession. Plus full-on E-motorcycles like the GPR-S are about to be introduced for around $8,000.

If I was pushed into buying a scooter right now, I can get 80-MPG from a $1400 Chinese full-sized scoot with a 150cc engine. So there doesn't seem to be any middle ground between the dirty 2-stroke low end and the lithium high-end. The $7500 price difference means I wouldn't even have to buy a used scooter with a fried engine. I could buy a new full-sized for $1500 (sell engine on EBAY to fried-engine scooter-boy) and install an ETEK + controller for around $1,000 more.

That just leaves the batteries, If I had a healthy budget I wouldn't hesistate to get 72V of lithium, but even if settling for the slower performance, shorter-range, and lower top-speed of 48V-60V of lead-acid...I could get into an electric scooter for MUCH cheaper than a new/used Vectrix.

Nobody should ride a scooter on the highway at 55+ MPH. Whoever gets control of Vectrix should downgrade performance to 45-MPH and make a much cheaper entry-level lead/acid model, with lithium as a long-range upgrade option.
1) who was selling new Vectrix maxiscoots for $9k? they were still $12k around seattle last i checked.

2) the GPR-S has been out for a while, but isn't a viable option imo: how is one to obtain service if not a neighbor of the electric motorsports shop?

3) don't buy a cheap chinese scooter. consumer reports and conventional wisdom agrees. much better to go with a Kymco or SYM, if not a japanese or italian brand. there _is_ plenty of options between the low end chinese scoots (which aren't 2-stroke any more) and the high end, electric or otherwise.

4) i ride my 250 cc Piaggio on the freeway regularly without issues. your statement that "nobody should ride a scooter on the highway at 55+ mph" is ignorant.

IMG_5737.jpg
 
In Utah the speed limit is 75, which means the 18-wheelers are doing 80-MPH. I was on a motorcycle (a Honda Rebel 250 with full-sized wheels) and was pulled over from the lane alongside a truck, to behind it as he passed me. I was in the slow lane in preparation for an off-ramp attempting to resist changing lanes, and it pulled me over anyways.

The trucks here are allowed to pull three trailers and the rear trailer experiences a certain amount of wagging. They wag even when full, but its worse when empty. People drive around them every day without dying, but like juggling chainsaws, it only takes once.

If it is legal and fairly safe to ride a scooter on the highway at 55+ where you live, I encourage you to do as you wish. My statement was merely my opinion, but I assure you it was based on personal experience.

The Vectrix is advertised as capable of highway speeds. The company has many problems, but the higher speed could be traded for more range. They don't need one, and they do need the other (again, just an opinion, I admit I could be wrong).

cattle_road_train.jpg
 
spinningmagnets said:
Nobody should ride a scooter on the highway at 55+ MPH. Whoever gets control of Vectrix should downgrade performance to 45-MPH and make a much cheaper entry-level lead/acid model, with lithium as a long-range upgrade option.
I think you're confused about what the word 'scooter' actually means. My Honda SilverWing scooter is quite capable of handling the highway at 90mph, and it's smoother at that speed than many harleys at 55. (I prefer to cruise at 70, given the balance of traffic speed, wind noise, and fuel economy.) There's no reason to assume that a scooter can't be designed and built to handle any particular speed range. I've seen the Vectrix up close, and compared it to my Silverwing, and it's clearly got the tires and suspension and weight to safely handle highway speeds.

However, as a design goal, you really only need highway speeds if you are building a bike capable of long-range touring. And an all-electric bike isn't going to do 400 miles in a day, given the need to recharge at anywhere between 30 and 60 mile intervals. So you are right, the Vectrix was built 'too big', it has size and power that it doesn't need, given it's range limit. They tried to reproduce a big gas maxi-scooter (400cc target size), but should have reproduced a small maxi-scooter (250cc target size).

But downsizing to a 45mph top speed is also wrong, if you want to cover a wide range of commuters. Most suburban commuters will have to use roads with a 45mph speed limit, and that means traffic is actually flowing at 50+mph. To safely keep up with traffic, and to have a little reserve speed, that means a top-end close to 60mph, which is actually what the Vectrix offers.

The biggest problem with the Vectrix, from my perspective, was that it cost far more than my SilverWing but delivered far worse performance & capability. It needed to be smaller and lighter, which essentially requires a shift to lithium batteries, not lead. I'm not sure how Vectrix could manage cheaper, given the expensive design path and custom-built components they use, but that's part of why they are now going bankrupt. If they had designed the bike to use more off-the-shelf components, mass produced for other scooter models and thus cheaper, they might have done better.

If you want to see what this design philosophy generates, check out the product line from Current Motor Company: http://www.currentmotor.com/rev1.html
 
since tesla is held by Daimler at 10% share they should tart unsing some of their patents and other alike property, a trike that can lean into corners was allready built in design study stage with mercedes ( yes, joystick-steered in a fashion that i could be homologated).


aslo, the mcc smart generation one with it´s rear engine bay, tridion safety cage and a new redesigned non-motor-blackbox integrated controller for the esp/ abs and airbags in separate ( they allready have these as spares for the elder series ...) should make a nice home for the ac propulsion 150 drivetrain for example, this would be an ev that costs less than 25 grand to make including all controllers excluding batteries; i believe the prototypes and even a smaller productioning run could be entertained out of the remaining stock and spare parts alone.

another potential option i did not check in detail is to have the toolset of the old a-class ( the version originally developed to have a pure electric drive in after the year 2000 regulation that 2 % of cars sold have to be electric in 2008 - was killed by the oild lobby in 2006 so the a-class was hitting the market as ice only... hence they failed the swedish "elch-test", no batts to keep it upright in the sandwich floor..:) ) and go out from there, this setup is also really safe and way ahead in engineering effort to anything electric on the market allthough i believe the smart gen1 ( available with solid roof, glass sunroof or convertible) would make for a easier conversion and also sell better.

such a setup could sell at a price competitive to a miata but out-accelerate it and be much more savy and "fresh", too. not mentioning it would be as reliant as for the mechanical part.
 
Back
Top