DIY Electric Car Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is a great article about the impending resurrection of the Think:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/08/01/100138830/index.htm?cnn=yes

Rich

_________________________________________________________________
http://newlivehotmail.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
On 30 Jul 2007 at 9:11, Richard Acuti wrote:

> This is a great article about the impending resurrection of the Think:
>
> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/08/01/100138830/index.htm?cnn=yes

Very interesting. I think they are doing a lot of things right.

1. They are leasing the battery, which in one leap eliminates about 95% of
the consumer concerns with every previous EV offered.

2. If range drops they will either replace the battery or give you a discount.
This leaves open the door for offering different batteries for people with
different range needs.

3. It knows how to speak Wifi, meaning it can tell the battery leasing
company when it needs help.

4. They're selling it online.

5. They're building to order. EVDLers my age or close to it will recall when
Detroit built cars to order; every option was sold separately, rather than in
silly packages. You didn't have to buy $500 worth of goofy fake plastic
spoilers to get cruise control (At least I >hope< that's what Think are talking
about.)

6. They're hooking up with Google.

I'm not so sure about this mumbo-jumbo about Dean Kamen's Stirling engine
as an APU, but I'll wait and see.

One minor but interesting point I noticed - Think seems to have lost its bang
(!). It used to be "Th!nk." Has anybody seen it? ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I don't care for the think because it suffers from stereotype problems.
it's unattractive and feeds the impression that EVs are fugly.
what I do like about it is the Kamen stirling motor, at least in theory.
probably cost too much, never arrive and be too weak in reality but a
small clean range extender we sure could use. if it works he might even
sell to the big boys too if they ever make phevs. we could get lucky and
he could be the wild card big oil didn't count on :)

Dan

Richard Acuti wrote:
> This is a great article about the impending resurrection of the Think:
>
> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/08/01/100138830/index.htm?cnn=yes
>
>
> Rich
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> http://newlivehotmail.com
>
>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I think the think is not bad looking and makes a great city car, so
much so I bought one of the first and it will be here in the states
in a couple weeks. It is the original body style and has a new saft
pack (was on display with no pack).


Mark


Dan Frederiksen wrote:

> I don't care for the think because it suffers from stereotype
> problems. it's unattractive and feeds the impression that EVs are
> fugly.
> what I do like about it is the Kamen stirling motor, at least in
> theory. probably cost too much, never arrive and be too weak in
> reality but a small clean range extender we sure could use. if it
> works he might even sell to the big boys too if they ever make
> phevs. we could get lucky and he could be the wild card big oil
> didn't count on :)
>
> Dan
>
> Richard Acuti wrote:
>> This is a great article about the impending resurrection of the
>> Think:
>>
>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/
>> 2007/08/01/100138830/index.htm?cnn=yes
>>
>> Rich
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> http://newlivehotmail.com
>>
>>
>
>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
It's not ugly and it has a lady bird cuteness to it but it won't make
the masses think twice.
we need normal cars or great looking cars or cheap super fast cars to
make a dent in the impression.
why Think doesn't make an oem deal with an attractive car maker like
Audi and mass convert those I do not know. that would be thinking,
ironically.

besides, aren't you the one converting a Yaris to electric drive?

Dan

Mark Dutko wrote:
> I think the think is not bad looking and makes a great city car, so
> much so I bought one of the first and it will be here in the states in
> a couple weeks. It is the original body style and has a new saft pack
> (was on display with no pack).
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
Dan Frederiksen wrote:
>
>> I don't care for the think because it suffers from stereotype
>> problems. it's unattractive and feeds the impression that EVs are fugly.
>> what I do like about it is the Kamen stirling motor, at least in
>> theory. probably cost too much, never arrive and be too weak in
>> reality but a small clean range extender we sure could use. if it
>> works he might even sell to the big boys too if they ever make phevs.
>> we could get lucky and he could be the wild card big oil didn't count
>> on :)
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> Richard Acuti wrote:
>>> This is a great article about the impending resurrection of the Think:
>>>
>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/08/01/100138830/index.htm?cnn=yes
>>>
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> http://newlivehotmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Yes- I took it for a test drive over the weekend- after starting the
conversion process I had the opportunity to get this Think- it was
one of their firsts and in fact used on display so it has very little
use, it was fitted with a new pack and through much work over the
last eight months I have managed to bring it as well as another into
the country. This EV will give me a great 50 mile usage for longer
trips. I would not have converted the Yaris if I knew about the think
but the Yaris is far more powerful and with a small advanced pack it
would be a even better. Even with the lead pack it's seems to feel
and go quite well. I posted a quick video with some parts of the
build and I will post another with the finished product in the next
week or so.


www.electricyaris.com under videos, its a big file so wait a few
seconds for it to buffer..



Mark


Dan Frederiksen wrote:

> It's not ugly and it has a lady bird cuteness to it but it won't
> make the masses think twice.
> we need normal cars or great looking cars or cheap super fast cars
> to make a dent in the impression.
> why Think doesn't make an oem deal with an attractive car maker
> like Audi and mass convert those I do not know. that would be
> thinking, ironically.
>
> besides, aren't you the one converting a Yaris to electric drive?
>
> Dan
>
> Mark Dutko wrote:
>> I think the think is not bad looking and makes a great city car,
>> so much so I bought one of the first and it will be here in the
>> states in a couple weeks. It is the original body style and has a
>> new saft pack (was on display with no pack).
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> On Jul 30, 2007, at 9:36 AM, Dan Frederiksen wrote:
>>
>>> I don't care for the think because it suffers from stereotype
>>> problems. it's unattractive and feeds the impression that EVs are
>>> fugly.
>>> what I do like about it is the Kamen stirling motor, at least in
>>> theory. probably cost too much, never arrive and be too weak in
>>> reality but a small clean range extender we sure could use. if it
>>> works he might even sell to the big boys too if they ever make
>>> phevs. we could get lucky and he could be the wild card big oil
>>> didn't count on :)
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>> Richard Acuti wrote:
>>>> This is a great article about the impending resurrection of the
>>>> Think:
>>>>
>>>> http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/
>>>> 2007/08/01/100138830/index.htm?cnn=yes
>>>>
>>>> Rich
>>>>
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> http://newlivehotmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
David> One minor but interesting point I noticed - Think seems to have
David> lost its bang (!). It used to be "Th!nk." Has anybody seen it?
David> ;-)

It's still on their website: http://www.think.no/

Skip
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top