AD #3315 – GM Denies Spark EV Battery Rumors; Hyundai Showers Munoz with Promotions; Dealers Need Cyber Training

May 2nd, 2022 at 11:52am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #3315 – GM Denies Spark EV Battery Rumors; Hyundai Showers Munoz with Promotions; Dealers Need Cyber Training” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 11:58

0:07 GM Denies Spark EV Battery Rumors
0:35 Hyundai Showers Jose Munoz with Promotions
1:27 Car Dealers Need Cyber Training
1:59 Thieves Go After Scooter Batteries
2:41 Automotive CEOs Paid Handsomely
3:46 China EV Startups Stumble in April
4:13 NIO Readies ET5 for Production
4:35 Weak Yen a Bonanza for Japanese OEMs
5:13 F-150 Lightning Gets Power & Range Updates
7:45 BMW 4 Series Heavier Than Tesla Model 3
8:35 Jeep Grand Cherokee 4xe Review

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone, Intrepid Control Systems and Schaeffler.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

15 Comments to “AD #3315 – GM Denies Spark EV Battery Rumors; Hyundai Showers Munoz with Promotions; Dealers Need Cyber Training”

  1. Lambo2015 Says:

    Sean; When giving EV (HP) ratings is that just like ICE and measured at the motor or perhaps at the wheels? Curious if that includes any gearing?

  2. Lambo2015 Says:

    The scooter battery thefts brings up a concern with swappable car batteries. Any attempt to make then easily removeable also makes them an easy target for theft. At the price point the thieves can afford to get highly technical.

  3. Albemarle Says:

    Glad to read that GM are not orphaning Spark EV owners as announced. If their dealers had known the facts, this misunderstanding would have been avoided.

    We keep hearing about how EV specific cars are more efficient than modified ICE ones, now because of scar tissue. So exactly what’s the secret sauce that GM put into the Bolt? It’s got an ICE base but after 5 years, is still one of the most efficient EVs on the market. It shows that ICE based EVs can be efficient.

  4. Kit Gerhart Says:

    3 They did a decent job with the Bolt, but it’s only 300 pounds lighter than the significantly larger Model 3. The Bolt has almost as much cabin space, though, even being 22 inches shorter.

    It seems that high riding body-on-frame trucks convert to EV more efficiently than cars, with the Ford F-150 Lightning being a little lighter than Rivian, as mentioned in John’s linked youtube video.

  5. Albemarle Says:

    I think owners of these new EV pickups, with their large batteries and high power are going to hoover up lots of electricity to keep them going. Interesting to know what the break even mileage is (extra purchase cost versus lower running costs).

  6. Kit Gerhart Says:

    5 With the Ford supposedly starting at $40K, it should be cost effective for those who would use it locally and charge it at home. I’ll believe it when I see them actually selling for $40K, though.

  7. Bob Wilson Says:

    To add context, our 2019 Tesla Model Std Rng Plus weighed in at 3800 lbs with the original tires and rims. Knowing it was a single rear drive, I subsequently replace tires and rims saving about 100 lbs. Using Bridgestone ECOPIA tires, these low-rolling restance tires are wear rated at almost twice the original.

    FYI, 3 years and 67,000 miles, the 7.5% battery degradation gives 222 miles vs original 240 miles. SuperCharger expansion has been faster than my battery, range loss.

  8. Kit Gerhart Says:

    7 Are the new tires the same size as original?

  9. Bob Wilson Says:

    #8 – There are three, slightly different sizes, meet the load requirement. But the largest diameter based on lowest revs/mile interferes with the front kingpin joint. It works fine in the rear. All of them are slightly narrower than the original tires.

    Up to 45 mph, the new rims and tires have lower rolling drag. Above 45 mph, the aerodynamic drag slightly increases. I could not find hubcaps to reduce aerodynamic drag but have plans to make my own.

  10. wmb Says:

    Way to go Jeep, with the GC 4xE!

    The thing I think is interesting with the Lightning and the R1T, while the both use a heavy amount of aluminum in there construction, the Ford is lighter, has simular power and range, but only uses up to two motors and not four; all while being a true fullsize pick-up and not a tweener. Here is the rub, even though Ford switched to aluminum for the F-150, to reduce its weight, it was still heavier in most applications then the GM twins and the Ram! Since the F-150 went to an alloy body, the twins and Ram added a lot of lite weighting to their fullsize pick-ups, using a matrix of steel, high strength steel and aluminum panels. So, even though Ford had to remove the radiator, engine, transmission and driveshaft(s) from the F-150 and then install a heavy battery into the Lightning, that might not have added as much weight as we might think (in relationship to what it lost). The question becomes, could Chevy/GMC and Ram do the same thing to their current pick-up architectures and be just as competitive to the Lightning and R1T? Adding to that, and as contemplated by John McElroy in that scar tissue report, with Ford and Chevy using a ground up, clean sheet, unibody approach to the EV Silverado and next gen Lightning, it will be exciting to see just how much more each have come in moving the needle in the race to BEV pick-up efficiency!

  11. Kit Gerhart Says:

    10 Maybe not too related to the EV discussion, but, as tested by CR, the F-150 was 60 pounds lighter than the Silverado, and 285 pounds lighter than the Ram. The Chevy and Ram were V8, and the Ford, 2.7 V6 turbo. All were crew cab, 4WD.

  12. Dave Foley Says:

    The long and the short of it was, GM got caught being just another “Corporation”.

    The fortunate part is, even though there was no economic reason to do it, they ‘suddenly’ clarified that the Spark EV battery was only going through a ‘temporary’ disruption. Way late, but hilarious cover! Haha!

  13. Dave Foley Says:

    On your story about identity theft, and unscrupulous sharing in it, there’s this.

    I was recently at a self-serve junk yard and had not only my photo taken without my knowledge, they had me ‘sign in’ on a digital platform. The company I’m talking about it Pick-N-Pull, an international used auto parts supplier. They operate in the US and Canada.

    I’ve only gone there the once since things happened, and haven’t been back there since.

    The ‘cover’ story is, because they have a base charge of $1, and a waiver everyone has to sign, a digital solution is “Simpler”. They have you ‘sign in’ on a laptop, and then later pay the buck to get access. What they don’t tell you is that at some point, the take your photo. The ipad still has its camera operating.

    As for the dollar charge, sure, it’s simpler. But this is a junkyard. There is no overriding reason for them to have a photo of my face, just to get a buck out of me.

    I feel the real reason they’re doing this is to sell that information in some facial recognition and tracking system, that they’ve sold to someone else.

    The other bad part is, they have a ‘rewards’ program there that you sign up for to waive the $1 fee for entry. But to gain entry, you’ll still need to have your photo taken.

    So by hook or by crook, they now have a photo of your face (that you weren’t being told they were taking) And subsequent to that, all your purchase habits, AND your credit card information is available to them too.

    Given Pick N Pull is just a junkyard, this seems like there are more players in the background on this move. I see no justification for this, other than greed.

    Folks need to remember. This is just a junkyard (used auto parts self serve yard – to be clear). But there seems to be no top to their comfort with profit. If they can sell your information AND your face, there’s no reason for them to not do it.

    And even if whoever they sell the data to only scams a tiny portion of their customers, that’s sill a very large number.

    Given where facial recognition has already gone, there is no reason for a literal junkyard to collect your photo. Just sayin.

  14. Lambo2015 Says:

    13 I understand your concern and agree that selling peoples info is a problem. However I would guess that the junk yard has issues with people paying a $1 scouting for parts and coming back later after hours to retrieve them. So with a photo and ID of everyone that comes in they can identify thieves and protect their business.
    Besides just about every business has security cameras Walmart, Meijer, Home Depot, Lowes could easily tie your photo to your ID.

  15. Norm T Says:

    The Spark EV battery is made in Brownstone, Michigan, along with Volt, ELR, CT6 2.0E plug-in’s and Bolt with LGChem. The Spark EV 2014 battery was made here in thr U.S. by A123 which went bankrupt before production and then sold to China auto company. These are most likely the batteries Spark EV owners have had to replace but are no a LG battery with lower kw, lighter weight, but the same range.

    In 2009, A123 was awarded $249 million in federal stimulus grants. The money was included in $2.4 billion in grants announced by the Obama administration, with $1.5 billion of the total going to the battery industry.

Leave a Comment