backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 171 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Dec 28 at 11:11 PM

BYD F3DM  (Source: Qilai Shen/Bloomberg News)
The F3DM can run 60 miles on a fully charged battery and recharge in seven hours

Green crusaders and consumers looking for an alternative to gasoline power for their vehicles have been clamoring for a green plug-in hybrid for a long time. Several automakers have plans for plug-in hybrid vehicles to come to market in the next few years.

Chevrolet for instance has its Volt extended range electric vehicle set for entry to the market in 2010. However, a Chinese company has grabbed the distinction of being the first carmaker on the planet to offer a mass-produced plug-in hybrid.

The Chinese company is called BYD (Build Your Dreams) and is now selling the F3DM plug-in hybrid in its home country. The vehicle has a full electric range of 60 miles on a full battery. The lithium-ion batteries can be charged fully in seven hours and the battery can be charged to 50% of full capacity in only ten minutes at a special charge station.

In addition to the battery power, the car also sports a 1-liter gasoline engine that charges the batteries for extended driving. BYD founder and chairman Wang Changfu said, "The development of electric-powered vehicles is the best way for the Chinese auto industry to surpass other leading countries."

The F3DM will sell at a price of about $22,000 initially and will be first targeted at government agencies and corporations. American Warren Buffett purchased a 9.9% stake in the company in September, which could mean that the vehicle may find its way to America in the future. Buffett's purchase cost him $230 million.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
foriegn auto makers
By JoshuaBuss on 12/19/2008 12:01:30 PM , Rating: 5
just another sign of how behind we are here in the U.S.. even China can make a volt-killer and get it out the door before us. (for less money and with a greater all-electric range, no less)




RE: foriegn auto makers
By bobsmith1492 on 12/19/2008 12:05:57 PM , Rating: 4
Now to see how much it costs, how long the battery lasts (number of years of operation), and if it has any major safety issues...

That's the nice thing about working outside the US - you can use your first production run for reliability and safety testing and if a major problem pops up, you don't need to worry about lawsuits!


RE: foriegn auto makers
By therealnickdanger on 12/19/08, Rating: -1
RE: foriegn auto makers
By afkrotch on 12/19/2008 2:37:38 PM , Rating: 2
It's a communist country. Mr. I Build Cars and Mr. I Haul Trash can make the same amount of money.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By therealnickdanger on 12/19/2008 5:00:13 PM , Rating: 3
They are not all paid the same, actually.
http://www.payscale.com/research/CN/Country=China/...

Factory work is pretty terrible:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-673356494...


RE: foriegn auto makers
By helms on 12/19/2008 5:44:29 PM , Rating: 5
You are an idiot. There are no true communist countries, there were none in the past, there are none now. The countries that call themselves communist are only communist in name. A more adequate name for the systems in these countries is, capitalism version 2. If you bothered with research or actually visited the country you would realize that China is more capitalistic than America. Why the f**k do you think that they put crap into pet food and milk. To save money, leading to higher profit for the companies involved = capitalism. Capitalism is ingrained into their culture, from the time when a child is born they are taught to compete. This starts off in school, those who fail to make the grade get ditched from school way before they finish. Approximately 3 yrs before university is when they get kicked out of school. They obviously do not get paid the same, more education = better paid jobs. There is no such thing as help when you suddenly lose your job, if you lose your job, you rely on your family or the money you saved when you were working, if you don't have one and don't have any savings your f**ked. At least in America for the first month or rather after you lose your job you get unemployment income.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By BansheeX on 12/19/2008 9:07:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You are an idiot. There are no true communist countries, there were none in the past, there are none now.


I disagree, China has worse political freedom, but more economic freedom than us at the moment, and that's a huge problem for us. They're a wealthy creditor nation with trade surpluses and a high savings rate. We are the opposite. They essentially traded us a lengthy consumption binge in exchange for all of our manufacturing and savings. If they ever depeg and spend their trillion in dollar reserves, it's bad news for us. With a depreciated currency, we wouldn't be able to outbid for imports. Without factories, we wouldn't be able to replace those imports with domestic goods. Without savings, it would take decades to build them.

Courts for recourse against companies who taint products are one of the few desirable functions of government. That's China's problem, not capitalism or burdensome regulation and licensure. If a company ever poisoned a product here, FDA regulation wouldn't be able to stop it, but the court system would make damn sure the company who did it suffered financial consequences. Generally, these consequences far exceed the profits made from the fraud or misrepresentation, thereby serving to prevent them. Remember when Firestone cut corners and had all those defective tires that killed people and got sued? The bad press reduced sales and the court costs outweighed the profits by a longshot. A ripple of fear was sent over the entire tire industry, immediately reminding other companies how foolish it would be to do the same. To make a long story short, your contention that these kinds of product misrepresentations pay off in a free market is pure nonsense.

To further prove the fallacy of socialism, let's cite a cost and ignore the benefit: small cars without rollcages. Making only a perfectly safe car legal would price almost everyone out of the market, such idealism would no doubt have worse cost-benefit ratios than letting cheaper but less safe cars be sold and driven. Yes, more people will die, but that's only because far, far more will be allowed to weigh a known risk. If government can declare those known risks not worth it for the rest of us, very few people would have cars. The reality truly is that there is a cost to human life and benefits that can exceed it. This is what regulationists find so hard to accept.

When China was economically socialist and Hong Kong wasn't, it was a perfect contrast between the two economic models. People had greater individual control over their lives and money in Hong Kong, so much so that China had to build fences and guard posts to keep people from crossing over. Ever since taking a more hands-off approach with regard to market transactions, the prosperity and growth of China has accelerated dramatically. Same thing with India post-1970. To cite the milk incident as proof that it wasn't worth it is grossly disproportionate to the complete lack of middle class growth under socialism. And it's a problem with the court system, not the market.

Capitalism is the truly the system with the least costs and most benefits, it works to human incentive and puts the most money in the hands of its earner where it will be spent with the most thrift. It allows individuals to transact with one another to mutual benefit. It offers an incentive for hard work and a disincentive for lazy work. But when government gets in there... watch out. Government has a key power private industries don't, the power to appropriate money (tax) or its value (inflation) by FORCE without court interference. And the more money and power government appropriates, the more likely you are to see bribery and collusion deciding the winners rather than legitimate competition. And that's the difference between socialism and capitalism. Capitalism is the percentage of money in the hands of its earner. Socialism is the percentage of money in the hands of the "community" via political leaders.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Alexvrb on 12/19/2008 11:16:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Remember when Firestone cut corners and had all those defective tires that killed people and got sued? The bad press reduced sales and the court costs outweighed the profits by a longshot. A ripple of fear was sent over the entire tire industry, immediately reminding other companies how foolish it would be to do the same.


Yeah except it was just as much Ford's fault as it was Firestone's. They built a tip-happy vehicle (Exploder and its clones), and when their own engineers realized how unsafe it was (flipped over very easily even in their own testing), Ford decided that it was too expensive to redesign it. So instead, they made some minor changes and tossed it into the market. One of those brilliant changes was to take the cheap tires, and run them at a much lower than recommended PSI. They set the recommended PSI to 26.

Furthermore, if you set the tires to 26 and then take your average driver who rarely checks them, they could be driving on the highway with significantly less pressure in their tires and never know it. Yeah, the tires were problematic to start with. Big time. Combine that with severe underinflation, tires hot from a high speed highway run, and maybe some hot pavement, and those tires are going to shed tread left and right. Furthermore, that particular vehicle is really prone to flipping over. Lose a tread, and you're going places, and not good places.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/20/2008 5:49:05 PM , Rating: 4
Nonsense. We should never point the finger at a car company if someone takes a vehicle that doesn't sit low to the ground and drives it irresponsibly.

If someone sucks at driving, they need to slow it down and learn - or pick a different vehicle that's easier to drive.

Somehow people became confused and thought they were Mario Andretti behind the wheel of anything that moves. Darwinism at it's best.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Alexvrb on 12/21/2008 11:12:45 PM , Rating: 3
I hope you're joking. You're saying if a vehicle is unsafe, the driver should just *know* its unsafe and drive something else? It has nothing to do with their driving in this case. The vehicle has:

1) An inherently poor rollover resistance, even for a vehicle of its class.
2) Poor tires.
3) Factory underflated tires.

Furthermore, even Mario Andretti in one of these Exploders wouldn't be able to do much, if one of the tires had its tread seperate under more-than-common highway conditions.

From tirefailures.com:
quote:
This sequence of events occurs so rapidly that it is virtually impossible to handle most high speed tread separation failures and resulting loss of control of the vehicle. This was demonstrated by tests of Ford Explorers with Firestone tires in which an experienced test driver, who knew the tread was going to separate, lost control and the vehicle rolled over.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/26/2008 10:38:33 PM , Rating: 2
I'm saying anyone who drives a large top heavy vehicle as if it isn't large and top heavy is an idiot.

Only stupid people think they can drive whatever they own without consideration of what it's inherant weaknesses are based on what type of vehicle they CHOSE to drive.

It is really news that a top heavy SUV can't handle as well as a sports car? Duh? DUH DUH DUH?

Sorry, this is ridiculous. Some people simply can't drive well and are foolish to drive vehicles that require higher than average driving skill if they insist on driving as fast as everyone else.

HINT: You won't see tractor trailers driving like some SUV owners do. Why? Because they're on the road enough to have gained some common sense.

An experienced test driver doesn't mean anything because they were trying to cause a failure. I'm experienced in having ice cubes melt and no matter how skilled I am at it, if they melt I will still have a problem (drink gets warm).

The fact is, very few people actually had accidents because of tire failure, but you don't want truth, you just want random 3rd party speculations. What about everyone else who had that vehicle but DIDN'T crash? Oh, wait, now we're trying to consider facts instead of speculation, isn't it funny how when facts get involved, suddenly there is an obvious variable not yet considered?

It's crazy that people too dumb to walk and chew gum are driving SUVs. Tires? If anyone can't drive their vehicle after a tire blows out, they are irresponsible to drive that vehicle. Driving is not about can you do it in best case scenario, it's about doing so safely in ALL possible scenarios... or staying off the road so as to not risk other peoples' lives.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By helms on 12/20/2008 12:04:19 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
To make a long story short, your contention that these kinds of product misrepresentations pay off in a free market is pure nonsense.


You make a good point, but nevertheless they do pay off as long as you don't get caught. Just like the fraud perpetrated by Bernard Madoff. It was paying off for him until he got caught.

quote:
When China was economically socialist and Hong Kong wasn't, it was a perfect contrast between the two economic models. People had greater individual control over their lives and money in Hong Kong, so much so that China had to build fences and guard posts to keep people from crossing over.


They were trying to cross over because they believed they would have a better life in Hong Kong than the mainland at the time. China at the time was worse than HK in living standards, but this does not mean that living standards were worse because it was economically socialist and HK was not. In all likelihood if you went to China now and tried to get someone to marry you and flashed your green card, I would wager a significantly large proportion of the female population would jump at the opportunity.

quote:
To cite the milk incident as proof that it wasn't worth it is grossly disproportionate to the complete lack of middle class growth under socialism. And it's a problem with the court system, not the market.


I didn't cite the milk incident as proof it wasn't worth it. I cited it as proof that China is economically capitalist. I agree that capitalism is the best system for human beings now and into the future. It has proven its effectiveness for at least 50 years if not more. Nevertheless I see it as flawed (You probably don't, this is where we disagree). A flawed system for a flawed species. Communism was never meant for humans, that is why it won't work. It is meant for elves.

I do not believe the complete lack of middle class growth was due to communism at all. Like I said before, I don't believe there are any true communist countries. To get an idea what I believe a true communist country would be like watch Zeitgeist Addendum from here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277...
and note the resource based economy.
Nevertheless I will reiterate the fact that I don't believe their dream of a resource based economy will succeed. I believe there is a extremely high chance it will fail if someone actually tried to implement it just like communism failed because the human race is flawed. Not to mention the lack of detail of how it would actually work, and the false notion that there will be no crime.

By the way I do not live in the US, or China where workers (factory/construction) sometimes don't get paid after they have completed a job, not to mention they get paid crap, barely enough to survive. I thank the universe that I live in Australia. The way I see it China is a country that I probably don't ever want to go to for a extended period of time and America is a country that I will visit only after I finish my degree and want to get a job in the engineering of military craft. Which makes sense considering the amount the US spends on defense, lol.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Ringold on 12/21/2008 1:22:40 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
China at the time was worse than HK in living standards, but this does not mean that living standards were worse because it was economically socialist and HK was not.


Not to sound overly harsh, but I believe you fail to understand at all the economic reforms which touched off the prosperity currently seen in China. If you'd cracked open and read any study or book on China's recent economic history, doesn't matter if it were written from the neo-Marxist perspective or a more classical liberal perspective, they all point to free market reforms made in the 80s and the clear break from the state control which ruled previously. It was absolutely the difference in economic systems that lead to the difference between Hong Kong and the mainland. What you appear to be offering is some revisionist view of history, or perhaps an extremely narrow view of what constitutes a whole economic system.

quote:
In all likelihood if you went to China now and tried to get someone to marry you and flashed your green card, I would wager a significantly large proportion of the female population would jump at the opportunity.


Obviously, because as an American I hail from a nation who was founded on classical liberal (free market) principles in 1776, and has basically adhered to them ever since. Free market principles in China are probably only the same age as the average DailyTech reader. Exponential growth can do impressive things, but turn a devastated failed socialist state in to a shining beacon of wealth and prosperity in 3 decades it can not!

Now, if I went to Hong Kong and asked a random lass if she wanted a ticket to America, she may well ask me why the hell she'd want to pay our higher tax rates. Indeed, maybe she'd offer me the ability to stay in Hong Kong, and if she could swing me a job, maybe I'd stay. (I can't be bothered to get a link from The Economist, but earlier this year certain US embassies had lines extending around them with expat US citizens waiting to renounce their citizenship in order to avoid punitive taxes. Hong Kong was one, there were a few others.) I personally know a few people, some in my family some not, who make good money there and have no intention in the short run of returning to the US.

By the way, India? Same song, only slightly different dance.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By helms on 12/21/2008 5:08:53 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Not to sound overly harsh, but I believe you fail to understand at all the economic reforms which touched off the prosperity currently seen in China. If you'd cracked open and read any study or book on China's recent economic history, doesn't matter if it were written from the neo-Marxist perspective or a more classical liberal perspective, they all point to free market reforms made in the 80s and the clear break from the state control which ruled previously. It was absolutely the difference in economic systems that lead to the difference between Hong Kong and the mainland. What you appear to be offering is some revisionist view of history, or perhaps an extremely narrow view of what constitutes a whole economic system.


I believe it is erroneous to imply that a connection between two events means that one event caused another event. Economics is not a science, there are probably a huge number of variables of which economic reform is only one such variable. I would use the video game analogy, although there is evidence of a link between violent video games and violent actions:
http://culturalpolicy.uchicago.edu/conf2001/papers...
I believe it is wrong to say violent video games cause violent actions. There are a huge number of other variables which are not accounted for, unrelated to video games which when combined with violent video games may cause a violent action to be undertaken. It is also true that the huge number of other variables by themselves without any violent video games may result in violent actions.

Another analogy is global warming/climate change. There are many variables which affect the earth's climate of which man is only 1 variable. One would hope that scientists have taken into account all the various other variables before reaching the conclusion that man is the most significant cause of global warming/climate change. In the absence of the accounting for the numerous other variables involved or if our current understanding is too limited to account for these other variables, global warming/climate change is at best a guess that may be true but also likely to be false. Note: I am a climate change agnostic.

I am a believer in the concept that groups with more altruistic individuals do better than groups with less altruistic individuals yet selfish individuals within a group do better than altruistic individuals in the same group. As such I believe 1 variable contributing to the failure of communism and perceived success of capitalism is that there is only 1 group in the current world. As stated before I believe that capitalism is probably the best system for humans, however for communism to even have that small 0.05% chance of succeeding, communist countries must create their own group, this means decoupling from the world economy and becoming entirely self sufficient. I would wager that no attempt at communism has succeeded in decoupling themselves from the world economy and probably because there is currently no country in the world with all the resources required to be self sufficient. In the absence of this decoupling or self sufficiency any communist country must participate in the world economy and as such it no longer is a group competing with the other group called the rest of the world, but an individual within the group called the whole world. If we look at global warming/climate change those countries that actively take measures to reduce the emissions of CO2 are at a competitive disadvantage in the short run and possibly the long run compared with those that don't. As stated before, selfish individuals (America) do better than altruistic individuals (Europe) within a group.

I must also ask, do any of the books that you mention on China's recent economic history take into account the variable called the Industrial Revolution and the fact that from Britain it subsequently spread throughout Europe and North America. One would hope they do, if not, failure to account for this lead, the way in which it spread and the fact that Western countries are unlikely to give away this big lead for free is already a big flaw. Note: Hong Kong was once a British Colony.

I believe the only sure thing that improves lives is technology. It is no coincidence that capitalist America is a world leader in technology. One can probably point to other third world countries which were probably never communist like China yet are currently behind China in living standards.

My thoughts on the technological lead of the first world which improves living standards. How will China go about purchasing a reduction in this lead from the west? Answer: By practicing capitalism and allowing the West to export jobs to China and pay Chinese workers crap to do those jobs. In short, capitalism seems to be very effective at spreading technology. Communism probably has no effect on the spread of technology or is slower at it. That is another variable to consider. The fact that capitalism probably spreads technology better than communism does not mean that communism causes lower living standards in a world where every country has reached the technological capacity of the first world and as such have the same starting point. Comparing China with Hong Kong two places which most likely had different starting points is erroneous. Not to mention that the West has influence and it is an outside force. If the outside force called the West was removed and China was still economically socialist and HK still economically capitalist, would the outcome be altered, in all likelihood the answer is Yes it would.

Another factor that needs to be accounted for is that different communist policies may well have drastically different results. Say China implemented a different communist policy in the past to the one they implemented, how would that affect the outcome.

Until the day that economics becomes a science, e.g. we are able to build a 100% accurate computer model of the real world which accounts for all variables, and then by adjusting these variables we can observe the outcomes. Forgive me if unlike you I don't place 100% trust in your books on economy.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mars777 on 12/21/2008 11:26:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
One would hope that scientists have taken into account all the various other variables before reaching the conclusion that man is the most significant cause of global warming/climate change


This doesn't make sense. If they "reached the conclusion that man is the most significant cause" they have obviously taken into account some other cause.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By animedude on 12/19/2008 10:39:48 PM , Rating: 4
A more adequate name is fascism v2. The only thing keeping the country together is nationalism.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By foolsgambit11 on 12/19/2008 7:14:17 PM , Rating: 1
Labor is on average about 8% of a U.S., union-manufactured car - usually around $2400. Even if they paid their workers nothing, this car in the U.S., all other costs being equal, would be between $23,900 and $24,400 (depending on if you calculate it by average percentage or average dollar cost).

Obviously, though, all other costs are not equal. But don't blame the $18000 difference between this and the Volt on labor costs.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By foolsgambit11 on 12/20/2008 7:28:18 PM , Rating: 3
I'm going to repost what got downrated above, because there's absolutely no reason to downrate it. Except for perhaps my utter lack of humor in the post, taking what was a snide pot-shot at U.S. manufacturers' labor costs and bothering to refute the smear campaign.

"Labor is on average about 8% of a U.S., union-manufactured car - usually around $2400. Even if they paid their workers nothing, this car in the U.S., all other costs being equal, would be between $23,900 and $24,400 (depending on if you calculate it by average percentage or average dollar cost).

"Obviously, though, all other costs are not equal. But don't blame the $18000 difference between this and the Volt on labor costs."

And I'll add this time that the potential reasons for the difference in cost are myriad, and include development (GM tries to make sure their vehicles will continue to work, China 'appropriates' plans rather than develops), safety equipment (increased material for crash safety, the increased weight leading to increased power requirements, &c, &c), material (subsidized metal, batteries, &c, as well as less metal due to safety standards), and possibly direct subsidy by the Chinese government. Any other reasons people can think of are welcome. But labor is at most about 13% of the difference in price


RE: foriegn auto makers
By omnicronx on 12/19/2008 12:49:32 PM , Rating: 4
Cost 21k (US) or 149,800 yuan
Battery cycles: 2000 cycles
safety issues: they use iron-phosphate-based lithium-ion batteries which are much more stable, although it will limit what they can do in the future as they won't be able to pack as much energy into each cell.

sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYD_F3DM
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/12/byd-f3dm-e...

It even has 3 modes of operation:
1.full eletric
2.Series-hybrid mode (gas engine recharges battery when juice runs below a certain percentage, but is not connected directly to the drivetrain.(this is what the volt will have)
3.Parallel hybrid mode which is what we are used to seeing in the prius.(which will not be in the volt, the gas engine in the volt will not directly drive the car)

The only thing is, many sites actually claim it will take 8-9 hours to fully recharge ( on 220v power supply), which is up to 3 hours more than the volt (6-6.5 on a 110v power supply). How long this car will take to recharge on North American power standards is anyones guess.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By MozeeToby on 12/19/2008 1:23:02 PM , Rating: 2
I imagine that if you purchase they car you will have a 220 line run out to your garage. Almost all houses in the US already have 220 for stoves, furnaces, and other large appliances, so it shouldn't be too expensive to run an extra line.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 1:48:37 PM , Rating: 2
It could be that simple or it might cost you $5k to upgrade your homes electrical capacity coming into your property. More than likely older homes will need upgrading. Newer one's maybe, maybe not.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By afkrotch on 12/19/2008 3:03:54 PM , Rating: 3
All US homes have 240v. It's the way power is distributed in the US. The only older homes needing upgrading is the ones that have zero power going to them.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 4:31:06 PM , Rating: 3
Dude, you can't just simply slap in new electrical lines in your house. The service to your property has MUST be able to support the extra current draw that any new devices create. That's why I said what I said. Your home might be able to support your new 220v line ran to your garage or you may need to upgrade the service to your property so that you can run a new 220v to your garage. And upgrading your service to your house is expensive.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By CyborgTMT on 12/20/2008 2:15:54 AM , Rating: 4
I can't believe I have to explain this on a hardware site....

You can install as many 220 lines as you wish, it's amperage that is the issue not the lines themselves. Most older homes have 60 amp service in them. My apartment (rather new building) has 125 amps. I could easily run 3 refrigerators, air conditioning, washer, dryer, and oven and not worry. In the older home you'd be able to run just a few of these at the same time before you trip one of the breakers. But you could run a new line for your car in the older house, you just couldn't charge your car, wash your clothing, cook dinner and run the dryer all at the same time.
BTW if your house has a 60 amp set up, you need to upgrade it anyway. Mostly due to the age of the wiring and fire hazards.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/20/2008 5:53:11 PM , Rating: 3
It's not the home that will be a problem, it's the power grid up to that point.

Most people plug it in at night and don't need it fully charged within 5 hours. Many given the choice would opt to not even upgrade their garage to a high current 220V circuit because they don't need that rapid recharge capability.

Upgrading the service to your house is not all that expensive for most people compared to a $40K automobile that ought to cost only 2/3rds that.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By omnicronx on 12/19/2008 4:59:02 PM , Rating: 4
Regardless, the chinese figures are 7+ hours with a 220V line. The volt only takes 6-6.5 on a 110V line meaning not only does it recharge faster, but at lower voltage.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By foolsgambit11 on 12/19/2008 7:08:58 PM , Rating: 2
At a lower voltage, but no doubt at a higher amperage. The question to ask is how many watts the batteries can absorb per unit time. Considering this car can go 50% further on a charge, is it any surprise a full charge takes about 50% longer?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/20/2008 5:54:27 PM , Rating: 2
yes it would be a surprise if 50% more batteries took 50% longer, since it is not expected the limit would be current on a 220V line given the previous figures.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By foolsgambit11 on 12/20/2008 7:57:28 PM , Rating: 2
If the limit were current on 110V lines, it would probably be the limit on 220V lines. They are usually sized to accommodate the same wattage, with 220V lines being proportionately smaller gauge. Remember, too, that charging times are for Chinese homes, not U.S. homes, so you can't compare times based on how U.S. homes are set up with respect to 110V and 220V lines.

But you're right, it would still be unlikely that 50% more battery would take 50% more time to charge. Most of the time on both charges would be below maximum current of the charging system, I'd imagine. So the difference in times would be solely how fast you could get through the bulk charge of the battery, a fairly small part of the charging regimen.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By tjr508 on 12/21/2008 7:48:01 PM , Rating: 3
There seems to be a lot of confusion over the issue on what voltage to charge these cars at.

First off, where are these 220V lines you people keep talking about? Lines ran to homes around the USA are XXX->240/120 if a center tap transformer is used or XXXD->208Y/120 if a 3p transformer is used.

Next, the input voltage of the charging device only determines one thing and one thing only: Gage of wire to be used. (size/type of breaker goes along as well but that would be nitpicking). The input voltage further has no relation to the output voltage of the device (since an internal transformer is likely the first component connected to the power wire) and therefore has no relation to the charging time of the battery.

When they say 'special' charging station, they likely mean either a very expensive power supply connected to a single phase source that would be much too expensive to sell with the car or they could mean a customized power supply set to run off of available three phase power that is not typically found in homes.

Finally, it is always takes longer to charge the second half of the battery's storage because the potential difference is smaller towards the end of the charge. Adding more juice at this point can easily overheat or otherwise damage the battery.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By MrPoletski on 12/22/2008 7:37:03 AM , Rating: 2
A 'special charging station' almost certainly means a 3 phase power source, the kind you'd find in an industrial setting. Fortunately gas station forecourts are exactly the kind of place where you might expect to find 3 phase power being used (along with factories etc).

3 phase power will greatly reduce reactive power considerations and basically provide a much higher current and much more stable current to the batteries allowing them to charge faster.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/28/2008 11:11:38 PM , Rating: 2
"Stable" current is no factor, if average current can be attained without tripping the circuit breakers, a little deviation in max and min current won't be an issue so long as all subcircuits remain within limits.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/28/2008 11:09:48 PM , Rating: 2
You obviously have no grasp of electrical wiring.

No, no, no! They are not ever sized to accomodate the same wattage. please just don't ever post if you don't know WTF you are talking about.

Remember too, that US homes also have 220V. Why are you even posting when you have no grasp of the facts? Are you 14 years old and have no knowledge of anything?

The difference in charge times has to do mostly with the current the circuit can support, up to 80% or so, because up to that point it is efficient enough that heating of the battery pack is within tolerances, beyond which point the temperature of the pack has to be a limitation on how much current is supplied to it.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Yahma on 12/19/2008 4:16:19 PM , Rating: 3
I'd like to see this chinese car crash tested. The last chinese car to undergo ADAC crash testing in Germany failed so miserably, that it was said all occupants would be effectively killed in any collision over 30 mph. Less speed would only result in serious injury... haha! Call me when the chinese can make cars as safe as BMW.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Fireshade on 12/22/2008 6:48:31 AM , Rating: 3
@Yahma:
Yes, Chinese cars do not need to adhere to the more stringent safety laws as western cars do.
However, you did not finish your ADAC crash test story.
I think you are referring to the Landwind SUV. Since that crashtest, the manfacturer has strengthened the chassis, and the car now has a test safety of 2 stars on the NCAP tests. This is the same as the new and very western Range Rover (!).

So next time, please tell the whole story, not just a suggestive part ;)


RE: foriegn auto makers
By encia on 12/21/2008 9:26:01 PM , Rating: 2
Prius is a Series/Parallel hybrid i.e. non-USA Prius has an EV switch i.e. “stealth mode” or “golf buggy mode”. Please review Toyota’s HSD.

Prius can be upgraded to a Plug-in Hybrid by changing the drive battery to Li-ion based battery.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By encia on 12/22/2008 1:47:31 AM , Rating: 2
Refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_hybrid_vehic...

The Prius employs a "combined hybrid".

"Combined hybrid systems have features of both series and parallel hybrids. They incorporate power-split devices allowing for power paths from the engine to the wheels that can be either mechanical or electrical. The main principle behind this system is the decoupling of the power supplied by the engine (or other primary source) from the power demanded by the driver."

Try again.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By William Gaatjes on 12/20/08, Rating: 0
RE: foriegn auto makers
By Reclaimer77 on 12/19/2008 12:44:30 PM , Rating: 1
Behind ??

This car is crap. 40 mile range, and a seven HOUR recharge ! Are you kidding me ?

I'm not a fan of GM, but the Volt at least allows you to take longer trips. This car is just not viable for 90% of most people.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Yawgm0th on 12/19/2008 12:51:10 PM , Rating: 1
It's a 60-mile electric range, and an unknown amount when using gasoline (I did not see it in the linked article). It would assuredly be well over 100 miles, if not over 200 or 300. This is fine for the vast majority of urban and suburban commuters for whom this is designed. This car is far more viable than the Volt for far more people.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/20/2008 5:55:43 PM , Rating: 2
If we ignore safety and reliability, in which case our present ICE cars would go further and be cheaper too!


RE: foriegn auto makers
By omnicronx on 12/19/2008 12:53:17 PM , Rating: 2
It has a 60 mile rage. Plus it has the option of being gas engine assited and battery assisted similar to the Prius. I don't like to say this but this car is actually more capable than the Volt.

The only thing holding it back is the inferior iron-phosphate-based batteries, which is the reason Toyota and Chevy are taking so long (so they say) to release their new vehicles. These guys may have the positioning now, but if Toyota and GM have the technology for more efficient batteries that last longer and charge faster, they may still have the advantage when their vehicles are released, and into the future.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By theapparition on 12/19/2008 1:06:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It has a 60 mile rage. Plus it has the option of being gas engine assited and battery assisted similar to the Prius. I don't like to say this but this car is actually more capable than the Volt.

It has a 60 mile range in China. If ever imported into the US, the signifigantly stricter safety and emissions laws would certainly ensure that it didn't get anywhere near that.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By glitchc on 12/19/2008 2:14:30 PM , Rating: 2
I'll give you the safety in terms of adding more weight, but emissions? It's an electric car. Even with a 1L engine, how much can it cost add a catalytic converter?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 4:35:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Even with a 1L engine, how much can it cost add a catalytic converter?
Modern catalytic converters are expensive. My 1992 Sentra's catalytic converter cost $700. Newer cars are even more expensive than that.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 4:36:19 PM , Rating: 3
And most new cars have two.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By foolsgambit11 on 12/19/2008 7:20:16 PM , Rating: 2
And emission control isn't going to affect the all-electric range - unless it adds significant weight, which I can't imagine it does.

But yes, safety is probably a big concern. This car would probably have to weigh a few hundred, maybe a thousand pounds more in the U.S., if prior safety standards in China are any indication.

Although, there was a report this past week that many small cars are much safer than most people think - safer than many large vehicles - thanks to modern safety equipment like side airbags.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By theapparition on 12/22/2008 9:00:57 AM , Rating: 3
While personally I'm not one to harp on safety, I've read many of reports similar to the one you mentioned and all make the same silly argument. They all compare modern small cars to older large cars.

Yes, modern safety equipment like side airbags, abs, stability control and crumple zones all contribute to make a smaller car safer, when compared to a similarly equiped larger car, the larger car always ends up being safer.

But what do I know? I drive smaller fiberglass boxes that will one day probably kill me.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/20/2008 5:57:01 PM , Rating: 2
Surely you don't think the only emission related item on a modern car in the US is a catalytic converter?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By theapparition on 12/22/2008 8:54:04 AM , Rating: 2
Catalytic converters are not the only requirement for emmssions.

Did you ever think that the engine may need to be designed differently just to pass in the US, even with cats? And engines that pollute less generally produce less power, which means more time to charge on board battery, aka lower fuel economy.

Not so simple now, is it?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By BruceLeet on 12/19/2008 1:48:00 PM , Rating: 1
Are you seriously trying to 1up Warren Buffets judgement?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By gregpet on 12/19/2008 4:03:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you seriously trying to 1up Warren Buffets judgement?


Sure, Buffett invested $3 Billion in GE at $22.50 share - today GE is at $16.35...Nobody is perfect!


RE: foriegn auto makers
By jbartabas on 12/19/2008 4:28:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sure, Buffett invested $3 Billion in GE at $22.50 share - today GE is at $16.35...Nobody is perfect!


Not that I care much about Buffet or his investments, but it seems your little story lacks a conclusion like:

A/ ... and it is certain GE shares will never recover from the current level,
B/ ... and Buffet is in dire need to sell his GE shares right now, at the current value, to be able to retire ... or
C/ none of the above, so your argument does not make much sense.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Yawgm0th on 12/19/2008 12:54:51 PM , Rating: 5
While it looks good at first glance, being a Volt-killer at half the price, there's one major caveat that's easy to ignore: It's a Chinese car. Chinese-manufactured goods are not known for their safety or craftsmanship. I'm not saying American vehicles are great, but China is in another realm entirely when it comes to quality.

This car will have a lot to prove before it will be trusted. If it's proven reliable, easily serviced, and affordable, it could very well be marketed to the American consumer.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By DigitalFreak on 12/19/2008 1:22:58 PM , Rating: 4
No doubt. Read the reviews of cars the Chinese make and export for sale in Europe. Total junk.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By SpaceJumper on 12/19/2008 1:29:45 PM , Rating: 1
It will still be better than GM.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 1:49:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It will still be better than GM.
Got any proof of that?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By afkrotch on 12/19/2008 3:06:44 PM , Rating: 4
GM nearing bankruptcy. Must mean something is wrong about GM.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By gregpet on 12/19/2008 4:10:42 PM , Rating: 3
It's called legacy costs!


RE: foriegn auto makers
By JoshuaBuss on 12/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: foriegn auto makers
By Sunbird on 12/21/2008 2:08:55 AM , Rating: 4
Korean is not the same as Chinese...


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 4:39:05 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
GM nearing bankruptcy. Must mean something is wrong about GM.
And what does that have to do with the previous posters comparison of quality between GM and a Chinese automaker.

PS - Is everyone this retarded nowadays?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Bubbacub on 12/19/2008 7:00:06 PM , Rating: 1
to be brutally honest, american and chinese cars are both crap.

if you weren't so fixated on patriotically supporting inefficient and outdated companies you could enjoy driving high quality european cars (that have suspension that lets you go round corners! wow!)

p.s i'm from the UK, we had British Leyland etc. which was as bad as the Big 3 are in the states now - after decades of government bailouts they finally went bust and the few profitable bits of the company went on and most of the car plants are still going with new owners and new profitable designs. its a tough pill to swallow but the US needs to let some its industrial dead weight die


RE: foriegn auto makers
By mindless1 on 12/20/2008 6:02:39 PM , Rating: 2
You might consider getting out more often, it's not 1985 anymore and there aren't so many differences that really matter between more european and american cars built to the same target buyer, except possibly price.

How easily the obviousness of the truth eludes some people. On any busy road in america there are plenty of american cars defying your stereotype. Interestingly enough, most of them end up having a lower TCO even if they have an extra repair or two during their lifespan.

Oh, but you wrote "high quality" so really you may mean only luxuriously priced cars versus something costing barely more than 1/2 as much? There's a reason the market has both types, blame the buyers for creating that market if you want to turn your nose up at what cost-cutting does to any product we might buy.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Ringold on 12/21/2008 2:11:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
p.s i'm from the UK, we had British Leyland etc. which was as bad as the Big 3 are in the states now - after decades of government bailouts they finally went bust and the few profitable bits of the company went on and most of the car plants are still going with new owners and new profitable designs. its a tough pill to swallow but the US needs to let some its industrial dead weight die


There are those in America who know this, and point it out, but they are ridiculed as selfish, heartless, simply being anti-labor or outright stupid for exacerbating what some think would be some huge economic calamity. The UK is a fine example of a country that has survived, and prospered from, the passage from a manufacturing based economy to a service industry based one.

We (Americans) could collectively learn a lot by looking across the pond. Basically every issue we face today, Europe has faced in the past. Every policy option we debate today has probably been tried by one European nation or another, and long enough ago that results are now clear. France doesn't have mass radiation sickness from its nuclear power, the Swiss don't die in mass from lack of health care due to its market and tax-credit based health care, Ireland hasn't devolved in to a mini-Somalia due to free market reforms, German's dont work for Somalian wages because Germany lacks (afaik) a minimum wage, but France has had high average unemployment due to restrictive labor rules and heavy government control of the economy. We could learn a lot, if we wanted to. (I don't think we want to)


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Penti on 12/22/2008 1:46:33 AM , Rating: 3
UK has faired fairly well (their industrial output has actually been lowered not just the people who work in it) but they still has a shortage in exported goods, thus not a perfect trade balance. Just as US though, but not as large trade deficit. US trade deficit is going on for something like 3 decades now.

An export oriented goods-exporting nation like Sweden has faired better, we have pretty much a service oriented economy but with no deficit in the balance of goods and we've actually been able to have our industrial output grown the same time less and less people is employed in industrial jobs. Most of the service sector works for the industrial giants and it's suppliers though and we aren't really a financial center as UK is. Oddly enough though we did actually manage to have an trade surplus the same time we had our last credit crunch or mayor financial crisis in the 90's. Even though production fell and a lot of people did loose their jobs for a couple of years we actually went out of that stronger then before.

As to regarding health care, it's fully tax based and publicly run here, yet it's still costs less then what the US pays, the thing is also that a waitress making 84 SEK or costs the employer about 15 dollars an hour incl taxes still has the same health care "insurance" as a plumber making 168 SEK or costs the employer 30 dollars. As do people making no money at all. 9.2% of BNP where spent on health care 2005, in US 15.2% of BNP where spent. Yet 45.1% is spent by the government. In money per capita we spent 3 727 dollars when you spent $6 350 dollars in the US. In terms of purchasing power parity US government spent more then the Swedish. Yet our coverage is universal.

You always hear conservative people in the US even Swedes who have moved there years ago thinking that universal coverage actually costs more, but it really doesn't need to. You already has the most expensive health care system in the world. If you want privately founded health care then go to China. It's really some sort of indoctrination and most seems to know nothing about the country in which they live or the problems it has. That is really reflected in the media as those people are just as clueless as everyone else. Those who are aware of the costs just complain about the government health care and social security programs and blames UAW and others for the high costs of labor.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By tjr508 on 12/21/2008 8:03:05 PM , Rating: 2
According to consumer reports, European cars sold in the US have been dead last in reliability for over a decade when compared to Japanese and American offerings...


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Bubbacub on 12/22/2008 6:36:45 AM , Rating: 2
consumer reports are based entirely on customer expectation:

i.e. if you expect utter sh*t and get mediocrity you will score higher than a car from which you expect excellence but only obtain good results. at the end of the day one car is mediocre and one is good - the beamer isn't the mediocre one.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By nomagic on 12/19/2008 1:54:06 PM , Rating: 2
Are you kidding?

I still remember that I read a car review, in which they car reviewer said: "This Chinese Car received 1 star safety rating only because there isn't a 0 star rating."

Even Korean cars have way better quality...


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Screwballl on 12/19/2008 1:56:42 PM , Rating: 3
The top 5 quality "mid size" cars in the US according to JD Power:

5. Volkswagen Passat
4. Toyota Camry
3. Ford Fusion
2. Mitsubishi Galant
1. Chevrolet Malibu

Out of the top 10, 4 are GM products.

That sure beats the hell out of your "better than GM" Comment.

For SUVs, Chrysler holds 3 of the top 10 with the Durango at #1.

When looking at the "Big 3", these 3 combined have more top 10 vehicles in almost every class than all the other manufacturers combined (Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Mitsubishi, BMW, Mercedes, and the rest).


RE: foriegn auto makers
By SpaceJumper on 12/19/2008 3:07:35 PM , Rating: 2
They will drop down to one star 2 years later. JD Power has nothing to do with long term reliability, they rated on the initial quality. If the vehicle is well polish and clean during the assessment, it will get 5 stars. As I go to the showroom and impressed that the Japanese vehicles do have better initial quality than American vehicles.
Chinese vehicles may be like the Japanese or Korean a long time ago, but the Chinese vehicles WILL get better than the American vehicles due to the more strict engineering quality and manufacturing quality control, and no UAW. Chinese workers will suffer from a low paying job, because we are always looking for low prices.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By afkrotch on 12/19/2008 3:43:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Chinese vehicles may be like the Japanese or Korean a long time ago, but the Chinese vehicles WILL get better than the American vehicles due to the more strict engineering quality and manufacturing quality control, and no UAW.


Huh? Are we talking about the same China? You know, the ones with corrupt figures in high locations who skimp where they can, while in the process killing hundreds, thousands, if not tens of thousands of ppl?

Time after time, there are recalls on Chinese made products. Tainted baby formula, taitned dog food, etc. How about concrete structures in China that were missing rebar support. If they have more strict engineering quality and manufacturing quality control, explain these situations?

If I had the choice of being shot in the head over driving a Chinese car, I'd take the shot in the head. I'd die right away with the shot. A small wire while driving the Chinese car would probably come loose on a speed bump, fall into the gas tank, cause a fire, and burn me alive.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By rudolphna on 12/19/2008 7:28:25 PM , Rating: 2
Hear hear! chinese cars are not much better than the Soviet Cars once sold in the US. Remember the yugo? It sported a 2-stroke engine, and was made practically out of tin foil? Yeah, chinese cars may look good, but I wouldnt be surprised if they were made out of tinfoil and a few rusty screws scrounged out of someones basement.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Aries1470 on 12/20/2008 2:51:53 AM , Rating: 1
Start of Rant.

Wow! Where did you get that from?! Soviet cars? Are you dreamin! Get real. They would not have been allowed in the U.S.!
Yugo was the MODEL it was made by Zastava in the country once called Yugoslavia. Shees, what some people write. And hey, no one FORCED anyone to buy them.

Sovet cars actually were spartan/ utilitarian, but would RUN in winter without much of issues. Same as the OLD VW Beatle, that would run in Germany when a Merc or a Beamer would fail to start due to cold back in the 80's....

Now go and educate yourself 1st, before ppl start believing the crap you dish out.

End of Rant


RE: foriegn auto makers
By afkrotch on 12/19/2008 3:29:26 PM , Rating: 2
You do know that these "quality" reviews are based off only 90 day testing. Also they don't test every car that's sold in the US either.

I take anything JD Power says with a grain of salt.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 4:46:21 PM , Rating: 2
They also have 3 year statistics too (Vehicle Dependability Study).

Top brands
1. Lexus
2. Mercury
3. Cadillac
4. Toyota
5. Acura

http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pdf...


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 4:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah. Half of the top 10 are American brands.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By rudolphna on 12/19/2008 7:30:22 PM , Rating: 2
hmm, to people that dont know much about cars... Mercury is Ford. Yeah, Ford is in the top 5 when it comes to reliability.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By kmmatney on 12/19/2008 7:50:35 PM , Rating: 2
??? Mercury is ranked #2, while Ford is #14 - but they are the same cars!


RE: foriegn auto makers
By dubyadubya on 12/19/2008 5:45:33 PM , Rating: 2
JDP ratings mean nothing.
Example: The Volkswagen Passat is rated #1
Volkswagen's vehicles seem nicely built when new but are scrap metal long before almost other manufactures. European vehicles in general are way less reliable than the Big Three's offerings and have been for years. BMW and Volvo are the only exceptions IMO. They still make a decent product though not the best.

Rant, I can't believe how blind the American public is. Years ago Toyota and Honda made vehicles that were twice the quality as the big three. This is not the case any longer. The big three make way better Vehicles now than they ever have before. Toyota and Honda still make good vehicles but they are not nearly as well made as they once were.

How do I know this? I work on them for a living and have for close to 30 years.

Now this may piss off some people but I rate the manufactures reliability so. Top down, I may have forgot to mention some minor players so forgive me if I have.

Toyota, Lexus, Scion
Ford, Lincoln Mercury, Mazda, Volvo
Honda, Acura
Hyundai
Nissan, Infinity
GM all divisions
Chrysler all divisions
Other Japanese offerings
European offerings except below

And way at the bottom Mercedes and Volkswagen. Pure Junk IMHO

Feel free to flame me if you like but I call them as I see them. The American public has their heads up their ass.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Spuke on 12/19/2008 6:53:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
JDP ratings mean nothing.
And your anecdotal evidence means more than industry accepted, statistical evidence?

PS - LOL!


RE: foriegn auto makers
By dubyadubya on 12/19/2008 11:28:41 PM , Rating: 1
Statistics can say anything they want them to. Because of this statistics are of little use in real life.

A vehicle better be near trouble free for the first 5 years not counting normal maintenance or its junk.

The only way to tell how reliable a vehicle will be is over an extended time with many miles driven. JDP does neither it's all smoke and mirrors. Drive a vehicle for 10 years and 200K or more. Then take a look at the cost to keep it running and how many times it has let you down. The better Japanese vehicles will have no problem passing this test. Nether will the better part of the big three.

You will not find many if any European cars that pass this test. Main reason being parts cost and serviceability. The European manufacturers seem to make the easiest repairs hard raising labor costs. They also have no clue what road salt can to to fasteners etc. Take a Volkswagen with a 100K on it. It would be easier to replace all 4 suspension corners than it would be to remove the brake calipers to replace the brake pads and rotors. It's the backward engineering that uses 6 mm allen heads on a 8 mm bolt. Seems the European's can fuck up the simplest things.

Drive what you like. If its junk its no skin off my nose.
There is no way I'm going to blow smoke up my customers asses and tell them to buy vehicles that are unreliable. Reason being I make more money maintaining vehicles than I could ever make bolting more unreliable parts on unreliable vehicles.


RE: foriegn auto makers
By rudolphna on 12/19/2008 7:47:30 PM , Rating: 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5SRyG6UR2A

Thanks to yahma for finding this video. Credit for the vid finding goes to him. Chinese cars, better than GM? HAHAHA. dont make me laugh. Too late..

Chevy Malibu Crash test

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bippxNeIuig&feature...

Ford Fusion Crash test

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTCVjh8BgUQ&feature...

Ok. Now, which one would you like to be in an accident in? Which one would you not for a million dollars drive in?


RE: foriegn auto makers
By rudolphna on 12/19/2008 7:50:53 PM , Rating: 2
oh and for comparison, this is a test of the 03 expedition, which is what I drive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxJAABeFeUE&feature...


RE: foriegn auto makers
By Radnor on 12/19/2008 2:58:41 PM , Rating: 4
Chinese cars here in Europe ? Few, far-between and people ussually don't touch them with a 10 foot pole.

Anyway, they ussually don't pass the emissions and security tests to be sold here in Europe anyway.