If it's electric, then it should have an infinite MPG. How come does it only acheive 100 mpg?

At what point is the vehicle getting 100mph? In "all electric" mode for 40 miles?

Good mph is great, and to do it in style is awesome. I am doubting their claims are accurate though.

Fantastic comment at the end, considering the production means.

A current version Hummer is actually more environmentally friendly to produce than a Prius because of the by products of the the production and disposal of Lithium-ion tech.

So it would seem this new environmental Hummer would be worse than the old one.

+the double mileage of the Prius is a marketing hype. At its top efficiency it only goes 40 miles? That's unrealistic for even commuting.

I mean mpg. Stupid no edit option.

Bad news for lithium limited world deposits which could also be used at some point for nuclear fusion (hopefully). If you are interested about the subject read this http://ergobalance.blogspot.com/20 [...] thium.html

Hope they develop a new technology for batteries lithium is more precious than we think...

Apparently, it's actually a hybrid:



Implying that there is a partly-electric mode. Although, it's pretty silly to say "even though" here, because if it can deliver 100 mpg, then it really isn't in all-electric mode, and therefore it wouldn't need to be recharged every 40 miles. Unless, of course, the "all-electric mode" is a deceptive misnomer, and simply means that using maximum electric assistance can deliver 100 mpg.

All in all, though, it's kind of interesting to see this happening. Now Americans can still drive around their huge-ass military grade vehicles and be environmentally conscious too!

@everyone before me, It said it needs recharging every 40 only in all electric mod, not gas/electric mode.

I am sure that it is Dual-mode so it is 40 miles on just the electric motors, it probably has a gasoline engine as a backup to power the motors as well as charge the batteries.

Yes that's exactly what we're doubting. Something isn't adding up.

Military grade, NOT. The H1 is military grade. The H2 is basically a Chevy Tahoe with a different body, and the H3 is basically a Chevy TrailBlazer again with a body change.

Yeah, I'm just having a hard time buying this one. I see how it could use electricity for initial acceleration so you could use a much smaller combustion engine which would operate at a higher efficiency while cruising and charging the battery. Still, the 100mpg claim seems a little ridiculous. I guess we'll see when it comes out.

How about, we are just a small footprint on the earth. Even with our great expansion of 200 years, we do not touch the vast majority of the land, almost none of the ocean and have absolutely negligible effects on the atmosphere. Plants change the earth in far more and in more pronounced ways than humans do.



That is the best argument against almost every single green activity. If the activity requires a label of green, that means that it is inefficient and is trying to justify it's cost as the expense of purifying people's false guilt.

Lower power computer chips are not green, unless they are deliberatly made lower power at the expense of usability. The reasons for lower power chips is not electric bills for your home user, but the heat that they put into the house. For businesses, it can be the bills, which include cooling, electricty to use as well as compactness of data servers.
Other uses for low power chips are mobile devices. What is the purpose of a low power car? Speed bump? Money pit? Because they have yet to build a "green" car that in the end does not cost as much over it's life cycle as a normal car with the same capabilities. Now, I think electric vehicles have their place. Say you live away from a fuel pump, but have a windmill, solar power, deisel generator or some other form of electricity at your rural site, an electric vehicle would make sense. Similar to those two wheeled things (segway?) that people use in business settings, having a flamable liquid as well as the exhaust from an ICE is not good, but an electric version for short runs works perfect, and because you are in a setting with lots of wall outlets, it is convenient to refuel. These are not done for reasons of "Green" they are done because it is the best solution and most efficient use of resources. Outdoor (Segways) primarily use gasoline, it is the more efficient fuel source.

When people talk about green, what they are talking about is irresponsible and ineffecient uses of our resources, all done to purify your soul from the false guilt that they ply you with.

Lets say that the gasoline engine can charge the batteries in 1 hour (unrealistic but easy for math) and during that time the vehicle is getting 16mpg When the batteries are charged and the engine can shut off you are basically getting "infinity" miles per gallon as you are using no gasoline. Since doing averages with the number infinity is basically a giant guess they probably assume that it gets that mileage. I would bet that if you drive 20 miles each way to work then you could basically only use the engine 2 business days a week and 100mpg AVERAGE could be attained.. Electric, gas/electric charging, electric, etc...

If it has an all-electric mode, and it can travel 40 miles on battery power alone, it's probably an E-REV like the Volt. If so, it is an electric vehicle, not a standard plug-in hybrid. This seems very likely based on what is said in the article, I have no idea why the author didn't attempt to clarify this. The engine is not coupled to the wheels at all in a vehicle like this, so its not a hybrid, there's no "electric assist". The electric motors are the only thing that drive the wheels. After the battery is depleted, the engine acts as a generator and kicks on and off as needed to extend your range indefinetely (as long as you keep putting gasoline in it). It does not recharge the battery as you drive, because the idea is to plug it in when you get home, and use the grid to recharge the battery.

So it sounds to me like a Hummer with the Volt's E-Flex drivetrain system. As to how they get the 100MPG figure, that's up to the EPA, and it probably involves a somewhat long trip that is done partway on battery power alone, and partway with the generator running (well kicks on and off, due to regenerative braking, and other factors). Once the battery power is depleted it probably still gets very good mileage. But the idea is that it is charged off the grid like all-electric vehicles, but when you deplete the battery, it can burn gasoline and is still fairly efficient.

It doesn't work that way. The engine doesn't charge the batteries. That wouldn't make sense, since you'd be burning additional gasoline to charge the batteries up. Instead what it does is that once tha battery is "depleted" (30% ish), the engine (generator) kicks on and off as needed to power the electric motor and keep the battery at that level of power. It can do this all day long if it has to. Then when you get home with a depleted battery, you can charge it off the grid.

If it used the engine to recharge the battery (using more gasoline) while you drive, then you might get home with a full or nearly-full battery. Oops! Now I can't charge it off the grid. So to recap it doesn't recharge the battery as you drive - that would be silly. It keeps the car moving, and keeps the battery from getting deep-discharged (somewhere below 30% charge) which shortens battery life.

Research the Volt for more info.

Since this is supposed to be coming from GM, I'll believe it when I see it. It is all marketing hype at this point. GM is trying to convince the world, in the midst of death throes, that it is doing something - just like it is trying to convince the world it is doing something when they say they will produce the Volt - another "I'll believe it when I see it" vaporware vehicle.

But - IMHO - they are trying to take advantage of the people for whom their vehicle makes their life and their image. I'm not buying it.

If they were to drastically reduce the weight of the existing H3, they could achieve a significant fraction of their target efficiency. They could do this if they made most of the body and frame out of carbon fiber. The structural integrity would be vastly improved with carbon fiber, too. However, they will not use carbon fiber because of the standard rant "its too expensive."

GM should stop trying to convince the world they are doing something good and actually do something good.

Ugh, it's that constant skepticism for proven things that holds back progress in this country. Take, for example, people who still believe "climate change" is some massive conspiracy or at least hype created by tens of thousands of scientists worldwide.

Look, I'd rather have people moving toward greener transportation with the mindset that they want to save money, instead of having a bunch of people skeptical about the technology, creating a slow adoption rate. Let's be realistic here. There are always trade offs to new technologies. The costs of finding new ways to reduce fuel consumption (via hybrids) at this point are far outweighed by the benefits. Batteries are the least of our concerns right now - their disposal is dealt with by the dealers.

1) The "costs" that are pointed out here (associated with manufacturing hybrid vehicles) only serve as a "straw man" that deflects effort and support away from where it should be put: toward technologies that ultimately minimize environmental costs. Hybrids are a stepping stone toward other alternative forms of powering transportation.

2) Do you really think that by producing hybrids, we're creating some serious battery epidemic due to that source alone? Come on, hybrids take up a TINY chunk of lithium battery sales worldwide. Don't blame it on hybrids please. If anything, bring up a new issue about batteries and how to recycle/cleanly dispose of/produce them.

Thanks for hearing my rant. =]

Uhh..didn't GM just drop Pontiac and Hummer? Or was it just Pontiac?

Cool even douche bags can be green now...

They cripple the fuel economy on all vehicles now, then they put out talking points like: "well, the new safety features add weight" for the idiots to repeat to each other. The my car weighs twice as much as a SmartCar, and has 2.5x the engine displacement. My car gets 30mpg, the SmartCar gets 40, how the f*ck did they manage to make it get such crappy gas mileage for it's size? It's smaller than a Geo Metro that gets 60mpg, and has a more modern engine with multi-port fuel injection, etc... Anybody who doesn't believe there's a conspiracy is a kook...

the hummer 2x more effient than the prius means nothing if we don't know the price of the hummer. what if the hummer is 2x more costly than the prius? hey i got a car in my garage that is 10x more effient than your prius!! But it's $500,000!!!

Quote :
When you think about all these hybrids and other "green things," don't forget to include all the manufacturing that goes into producing these systems and batteries. Yes we are saving on gas consumption, but at what other price?
----

Interesting thing about that quote from a 200 yr historical context. When the cotton gin was first invented, it's adaptation was slow because it required less reliance on slavery. The nay-sayers of the cotton gin said, "sure, it's efficient, but at what other price?" obviously meaning less slavery which is a common commodity of the era.

Right now, fossil fuel is our slavery market. We get it from foreign land, we can't get enough of it, and it's the very center that drives our economy. When something "green" comes along that reduces our reliance on fossil fuel, it creates chaos in the status quo and is usually met with harsh resistance.

Engines have an optimal efficiency at a certain RPM and power output. Usually a gasoline engine is most efficient at 70% of its total power. This is why vehicles are not very efficient. It takes something like 16HP to power a Ford F150 down the road at 60mph. Most of the 5.4liters are around 300hp. So you are using 6% or so of its total power, which is not efficient and results in having 18mpg (New models) or so.

Now this hummer has the motor and generator connected directly to the battery. It will only kick in when needed and when it does it will most likely kick in at its optimal efficiency. If it is a 200hp motor and is putting out 140hp at optimal efficiency yes it is taking more gas, but it is putting out more power per gallon of gas. That power goes to the wheels and to the battery to charge it back up. It will probably only charge to 80% since most batteries charge slowly above that and power will not be used. This will cause the engine to have to throttle down because the power is not being used, resulting in less efficiency.

What's the point if it's not as powerful as the regular Hummer's. Well, it's not like anyone uses them for there real use anyways. >_>

GM is Blowing Big Smoke Up Your A$$. The 3 AutoMakers should have done this 10 years ago. Dumb A$$

And you wonder why these guys are going bankrupt. There goes the bail out.

ktasley said: "A current version Hummer is actually more environmentally friendly to produce than a Prius because of the by products of the the production and disposal of Lithium-ion tech."

Do you really believe yourself? Are you perhaps referring to the completely BS and debunked report by Chris Demorro (or one of the other ones) that claims the Hummer is more green than the Prius, based on stupid assumptions like the hummer will last 400,000 miles and is fully recyclable while the Prius must be disposed of with very little recycled after 100,000 miles or less?

Those reports are fodder for people who want to justify buying big vehicles to make up for their own small "engine."

HUMMER not military grade, vaguely resembles HMMWV, just a poseur vehicle for pogues, remfs, and fobbits.

damn wrong quote...arrr

american car companies suck balls, just look at the crap they put out. the cars they put out are nothing but eye candy.

oh my gosh