TheEEStory.com

Chevy Volt deemed safe by NHTSA:


http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases...


Now let's see if this gets as much play as the overblown coverage from the battery fire started under extreme conditions and no pro-active safety measures after the crash.

Gov't Motors gets clean bill of health from a Gov't Agency. Anybody see a conflict of interest here?

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

student wrote:

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

Oh- you mean the same automakers that fought tooth and nail against almost every safety and environmental requirement enacted by law? And this testing does make it hard for any new car company, those here and abroad- this is a good thing. Our cars may cost a bit more because of it, but they are a lot safer and cleaner now because of it.

Let me guess- China is complaining about how stringent these requirements are, and is finding it difficult to crack the car market here because of it? Well- perhaps it is time to take some lessons from the Japanese- or more recently the Koreans- they have not had too much trouble with these harsh standards.

tvillars wrote:

Gov't Motors gets clean bill of health from a Gov't Agency. Anybody see a conflict of interest here?

LOL! Very funny, Tom! But not really- the Volt has been taking hits from multiple sides ever since it rolled out, and the concerns raised by the NHTSA were way overblown. There are many groups, for one reason or another (though I find such opposition singularly lacking in reason), that want to squash EVs. Funny how you never hear about the hundreds (or is it thousands?) of deaths caused by the quarter-of-a-million ICE fires every year here in the US. Talk about biased reporting!

Yes, I am biased in favor of EVs- they are our future. But I also want them safe and well-made. I would never, for example, suggest someone buy a Zap EV. But for those that are well-made and safe- well, they are a hard sell as it is right now- too expensive, too little range, too few recharge cycles- but we need cars like the Volt and the Leaf to sell now, even in small numbers, to pave the way for our future.

student wrote:

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

Paulcummings55 wrote:

Oh- you mean the same automakers that fought tooth and nail against almost every safety and environmental requirement enacted by law? And this testing does make it hard for any new car company, those here and abroad- this is a good thing. Our cars may cost a bit more because of it, but they are a lot safer and cleaner now because of it.

Let me guess- China is complaining about how stringent these requirements are, and is finding it difficult to crack the car market here because of it? Well- perhaps it is time to take some lessons from the Japanese- or more recently the Koreans- they have not had too much trouble with these harsh standards.

I have several reservations with many articles on wikipedia but here's the one on the NHTSA: wikipedia.org

I don't follow auto news very often and currently have no idea of how many Chinese automakers are interested in the US market. BYD's autos are in US fleets already and many US citizens drive Volvos. Your post seems reactionary and void of thought. You seem to be largely saying, "I don't like what you have to say and will therefore ignore it."

Last edited Sat, 21 Jan 2012, 7:41am by student

student wrote:

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

"They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements"
______
odd requirements? In this Country we call it safety because we have a multigenerational collective history of "car-nage".
All things being close to equal we will compete and likely win. Local markets also have their advantages.

student wrote:

student wrote:

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

Paulcummings55 wrote:

Oh- you mean the same automakers that fought tooth and nail against almost every safety and environmental requirement enacted by law? And this testing does make it hard for any new car company, those here and abroad- this is a good thing. Our cars may cost a bit more because of it, but they are a lot safer and cleaner now because of it.

Let me guess- China is complaining about how stringent these requirements are, and is finding it difficult to crack the car market here because of it? Well- perhaps it is time to take some lessons from the Japanese- or more recently the Koreans- they have not had too much trouble with these harsh standards.

I have several reservations with many articles on wikipedia but here's the one on the NHTSA: wikipedia.org

I don't follow auto news very often and currently have no idea of how many Chinese automakers are interested in the US market. BYD's autos are in US fleets already and many US citizens drive Volvos. Your post seems reactionary and void of thought. You seem to be largely saying, "I don't like what you have to say and will therefore ignore it."

Volvos? What in the world are you talking about Volvos for? There are autos from many European car makers here, as well as Asian. And that is my point- there are many, many car makers from other countries that have no problem meeting our safety standards to sell their autos here.

And, by the way, BYD has yet to sell a single car here- but it has leased a total of 7 hybrids to a single fleet, the Los Angeles Housing Authority.

Paulcummings55 wrote:

Volvos? What in the world are you talking about Volvos for?

A better question is why you brought up Chinese cars for the US market instead of acknowledging the NHTSA's apparent role as a trade barrier.

Paulcummings55 wrote:

There are autos from many European car makers here, as well as Asian. And that is my point- there are many, many car makers from other countries that have no problem meeting our safety standards to sell their autos here.

And, by the way, BYD has yet to sell a single car here- but it has leased a total of 7 hybrids to a single fleet, the Los Angeles Housing Authority.

Volvo is a brand owned by Geely, a Chinese car company. Obviously BYD's vehicles were designed to meet NHTSA standards.

ricinro wrote:

"They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements"
______
odd requirements? In this Country we call it safety because we have a multigenerational collective history of "car-nage".
All things being close to equal we will compete and likely win. Local markets also have their advantages.

International testing standards make sense. Your post makes no sense.

Last edited Mon, 23 Jan 2012, 2:34pm by student

student wrote:

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

lol, you're an idiot. They're there to reduce the number of dead Americans.

and your recollection is 100% wrong (surprise!), US automakers have been very consistent in opposing every single safty mandate. ever.

supamark wrote:

student wrote:

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

lol, you're an idiot. They're there to reduce the number of dead Americans.

and your recollection is 100% wrong (surprise!), US automakers have been very consistent in opposing every single safty mandate. ever.

OK, Bruce. Surprisingly, other countries manage a high safety standard without the NHTSA. I wonder how that happened . . . Lucky I guess.

There is sometimes a difference between the intent of voters calling for legislation and the effect the legislation actually has. Occasionally this is detrimental to the economy.

student wrote:

supamark wrote:

student wrote:

Just to point out, the safety standards are basically there to make it more expensive for foreign companies to sell autos in the US. If I recollect properly, they were lobbied for by US automakers. They are pretty easy to meet but require a lot of tests and odd requirements, giving an advantage to the car brands of automakers with an already large stake in the US market.

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

lol, you're an idiot. They're there to reduce the number of dead Americans.

and your recollection is 100% wrong (surprise!), US automakers have been very consistent in opposing every single safty mandate. ever.

OK, Bruce. Surprisingly, other countries manage a high safety standard without the NHTSA. I wonder how that happened . . . Lucky I guess.

There is sometimes a difference between the intent of voters calling for legislation and the effect the legislation actually has. Occasionally this is detrimental to the economy.

US sets the standard.

US sets the standard.

RmW, that would be true if all cars were designed to meet US standards. However, many of them are designed for other standards.

So no. US does not set the standard.

The US sets a trade barrier. Joining with other countries to set a broadly used international standard would be 'setting the standard,' and a good thing for the US economy. The US has yet to do so and is thereby failing US citizens.

US Sets the standard. China makes them. Pretty much with everything.

Sorry to hurt your delicate ego.

Nothing to stop the EV revolution now lens eh?

student wrote:

What was the last car deemed not safe by the NHTSA?

Was it one of the cars made by Chinese automaker BYD, which that company tried but failed to market in the USA?

Oh, right, I forgot; one of your bits of propaganda is your claim that this is an unfair trade practice intended to keep Chinese cars off the U.S. market.

Couldn't possibly be that the quality of Chinese cars is not yet up to American standards, or that y'all are making cars with stolen technology you have no right to sell.

Nah, that couldn't have anything to do with it.

And a citizen of China accusing the USA of unfair trade practices! Wow, that's almost like irony.

student wrote:

US sets the standard.

RmW, that would be true if all cars were designed to meet US standards. However, many of them are designed for other standards.

So no. US does not set the standard.

The US sets a trade barrier. Joining with other countries to set a broadly used international standard would be 'setting the standard,' and a good thing for the US economy. The US has yet to do so and is thereby failing US citizens.

soooo.... all those trade barriers we put up, how did the following companies get in:

Honda
Toyota
Fiat
Mazda
Volvo
Jaguar
Saab (RIP)
Land Rover
Daimler-Benz (Mercedes)
VW
Audi
Porsche
Pugeot
Subaru
Rolls Royce
and many others...

maybe the problem is, chinese cars (like everything made there) are crap. too much corruption, too low quality standards.

Lensman wrote:

Was it one of the cars made by Chinese automaker BYD, which that company tried but failed to market in the USA?

Oh, right, I forgot; one of your bits of propaganda is your claim that this is an unfair trade practice intended to keep Chinese cars off the U.S. market.

No. It wasn't anything I've stated. You lying piece of shit.

supamark wrote:

soooo.... all those trade barriers we put up, how did the following companies get in:

You didn't know car companies design cars specifically for the US market? It adds to the cost (through different requirements) and reduces the number of models they offer in the US. US citizens and the US economy lose out.

student wrote:

Lensman wrote:

Was it one of the cars made by Chinese automaker BYD, which that company tried but failed to market in the USA?

Oh, right, I forgot; one of your bits of propaganda is your claim that this is an unfair trade practice intended to keep Chinese cars off the U.S. market.

No. It wasn't anything I've stated. You lying piece of shit.

supamark wrote:

soooo.... all those trade barriers we put up, how did the following companies get in:

You didn't know car companies design cars specifically for the US market? It adds to the cost (through different requirements) and reduces the number of models they offer in the US. US citizens and the US economy lose out.

Student - When in Rome do as the Romans do.

When the US was trying to make inroads into the Japanese markets in the late 80s - 90s we made the same complaints as you. Japan told us to make what they want and we can sell it there. In our heart we knew that they were right. So we had to adapt or get out. I leave you with the same advise.