Ok, one last time. They were not tooting their "Clean Car Name", in fact that phrase does not appear ANYWHERE in the article. I don't know where you are quoting it from.
They were tooting their FCV and in passsing mentioned (in one paragraph) their "history of automotive environmental leadership" (that IS a direct quote from the article). The EV+ is not a FCV and does not demonstarte their "history of automotive environmental leadership". It was not the first EV, it was not the only EV, it's not even a revolutionary EV. Finally Honda would never have built them if California hadn't forced them too. I'm not saying it wasn't a very good EV, just that it doesn't demonstrate "leadership" in the same way that the rest of the paragraph did (at least not in their eyes). Lawrence Rhodes wrote: >They were tooting their "Clean Car Name" horn and mentioned every clean >vehicle they made except their pure electrics. Sounds like they want to >change history to me. Just my opinion. Lawrence Rhodes... >----- Original Message ----- >From: "VanDerWal, Peter MSgt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "'EV List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:26 AM >Subject: OT(?) Re: LA is 1st to get future technologies > > >>Why would it mention the EV+? Read the article and then go back and red >> >it > >>again. >> >>The article was about their new FCV and mentioned the fact that they have >>"history of automotive environmental >>leadership" and cited examples of some of their 'firsts' >> >>They weren't the first company to develop an electric car. I'll grant you >>that the EV+ was a really nice EV, but there was nothing really ground >>breaking about it. They were forced to develop the EV+ along with a 1/2 >>dozen other companies that were forced to build EVs for California, not >>exactly something worth bragging about. >> >>There are only a couple companies selling EVs right now and Honda isn't >> >one > >>of them, why would they point that out? >> >>>I thought the list declared any electric vehicle on topic. This certainly >>>fits. They mentioned the cvcc, cng and hybrid vehicles with no mention of >>>the EV+ something stinks. They are omiting pure electrics in the article. >>>This is getting nasty. They are so afraid of Li Ion. Lawrence Rhodes.... >>> >>> >>>>The EV List users asked that if there was a major item/milestone, >>>>I was to alert them. See: >>>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fuelcellvehicles/message/69 >>>> > > >
