You could have said the same thing about Apple at one time. The iPod had been out for about a year, it was selling great, better than Apple expected, and they were projecting lots more growth. The stock went nowhere, couldn't get over 25. I know, I was waiting. Couldn't take it after holding Apple for years. Sold because I figured if the iPod sales up to that point weren't going to impress the market, nothing would. Then ONE wall street anaylist said, 'gee Apple's on to something, I'm raising my target price.' It went in a diagonal line to 85 in a year.
The market sees movement, I'm not so sure they can spot trends. Here you have a tiny company saying they can beat the WORLD wide OEM engineering staffs. Even though they DID it before with the Torsen. You have a system entrenched to the point where the EPA jerryrigs a goofy test to make the OEMs look as good as they can, for years, and everybody plays along. UNTIL you get a Prius that is suppossed to get 60mpg and buyers see 40mpg. NOW they want a real world test and the EPA really gets heat for the first time. That's going to be a problem for the EPA because the test they have has all these shift point curves built into it. Now they are busy trying to figure out what the new 'average' driver is. How many RPMs here, how many shift points to get to what speed in what amount of time.
Not being smart enough for the EPA, I'd do something like take a sample of drivers around the country, figure out course of 10 miles city, 10 miles suburbs, 10 miles country, and make THAT the course. Put the vehicles on that circuit and then do it under different seasonal conditions. Use the average American weight for one driver, and Bob's your uncle, as Bert Munro would say.
OOps, the Torvec IVT doesn't have shift points. Instead of curves, it's a straight, diagonal line from 0 to 60mph. Guess it falls outside of the EPA testing curves. BTW, if you ever wondered why the Ford 500 doesn't get better milage with it's belt drive, CVT, they have to use a torque converter with it. Which kind of negates the whole point of using it, which makes you wonder why they even bothered.
In a world where a major car company releases a two steps forward, two steps back, technology and where a giant government agency can't figure out what kind of mileage most drivers get, is it really a shock to find that very few understand what is really different about all things Torvec?
At this point I really don't give a damn what wall street people who haven't been to Pittsford think. They can continue to wait for Ford engineers to deliver, but meanwhile the FTV does loops around 4 wheel drive Jeeps, the IVT contines to be refined to become stronger and smoother, the unique CV joint is working, Nissan axles are being fitted with Iso-Torques, and politicans would like to retrofit NY state's school buses. One of those would be news for anyone paying attention, together they are enough good stuff to change an industry that was happy to keep slapping on new sheet metal over the same basic car for years. An industry so afraid of risk, they scream when anyone asks them to get 10% better milage over 10 years.
We can slam the brothers for what they did or didn't do, but Torvec is not on the ropes moneywise, they didn't have to sell the company's future to make the hardware. Oil is at an ALL time high, and they have a LOT of WORKING solutions that are not only more efficient, but CHEAPER to make, as well as being more durable. Sounds like a pretty good business plan to me, as well as a good business to invest in.
Just my opinion. We will see if I'm right. EOM.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
