To: Broken_Clock who wrote (99214 ) 10/26/2008 9:02:22 PM From: TH Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194 BC, I did not. Sounds like I would have liked to see it. I know lots of stuff about that new program, but I can't post it here at this time. One of the comments I made a few months ago is very true. Your comment about the hill fits well with this comment I posted. Regarding the previous GM electric car, it is well known that GM killed the EV1 by their own actions. There is a film about it called, "who killed the electric car". No one ever mentions the EV1 while at GM. I just wrote a technical position paper for a high profile vehicle in development at one of the OEM. It was short, but to the point. They want to do something that is not impossible, but the capital equipment to do it does not yet exist. And the market so small for this application, that no one would fund it. I found it very odd that one of the features they wanted would drain additional power from the vehicles electric system. There is ZERO performance advantage of this requested feature, but it would look very cool. My point is that someone needs to throw darts at the real target. I did offer a low cost alternative to this request that has zero power requirements and looks equally <cool>. Back in 94/95 I was working with Ford at their special facility to build an electric car. As I've mentioned before, it took a lot of begging to my board to get approval for this program. There was little to be made on the first generation, but everyone agreed that the exposure and the new low weight technology we would develop would provide a decent return. Ford pulled the plug in less than 2 years, because gas was cheap. Nuff said. GT TH