OK, I've been reading for a couple of weeks, and feel the need to post a few comments based on stuff written here....I'm not invested now, considering a position...my immediate problem is too many random comments, where to start...
All right, Chery (two r's or one?) the Bricklin connection is a wildcard, he has not had a great track record, not to say anyting wrong with continuing to try, was it Thomas Edison that said something to the effect of genius being 98% hard work - fail, fail, fail, and you will succeed one of those times. Sorry for butchering that quote.
Someone posted recently about 2007 MY SUV for distribution in US - hey, I'm sure you all realize the development cycle times for any vehicle manufacture; this is 2005, duh, Tier 1's have all been awarded business and are well into development right now for models being launched in '06 - '07. So keep smoking whatever you're smokin if you think an IVT or Iso Torque differential will show up on a 2007 vehicle.
Yes, NIV, not invented here syndrome is rampant in Detroit - and for pretty good reasons, all the manufacturers have solid engineering talent and development capabilities (don't kid yourselves thinking they don't - Dodge is definately not dumb). Naturally lots of pressure within organizations to develop their own technology and several side benefits as a result: no outside $$ spent for someone elses' technology, they can synergize heavily internally with other groups/ideas, possibly resulting in more oppurtunities for spinoffs due to high level of in house technology. Don't misinterpret, if a great idea comes along, for sure it presents an excellent oppurtunity for an OEM to make a huge leap to a new level - the hitch of course is no one wants to commit to spend the money to get it. Someone there has to make that decision to hang their hat on a new technology, the natural fear being if it doesn't pan out, they've submarined their career. And from the OE's persepective, its a pain in the ass to negotiate with a startup company, for something that may or may not be fully proven. Someone on the board recently had a good point, w.r.t. Daimler Chrysler, about working with an engineering group at an OE and up the food chain, only to reach a decision maker that nixes the whole deal, for whatever reason. Of course, that can be the reverse too, if you get the right high level person sold on your product, technology, it can fly.
Which brings the next point - question - what testing is being conducted on this Tahoe? Does anybody know? Which products (this may be somewhere on Torvec web site, maybe I missed it) Specifically, what tests? Performance testing, durability, comparison, developmental, ?? Is this the IVT or Iso Torque differential? I just checked the Resource Library on Torvec web site, do not see a white paper on Iso Torque. Does one exist?
One more open question - where does the key engineering talent reside in this company, now that the brainchild, V. Gleasman, has passed away? A whole bunch of patents are a really great thing, but someone has to be able to explain them, know them well enough to challenge their own assumptions, and be able to teach others (growth, growth, growth) so the technology can be applied.
Minor correction: I believe that the company that owns Torsen now is Toyoda not Toyota...
Enough rambling.
Off the rant.
PS - I am not short.
AI
