A Plea to the Industry: Enough with the Acronyms!

While looking for information on the Chrysler Peapod, I landed on a hilarious article by Jim Edwards for BNET titled Why Arnell’s Peapod Electric Car Launch Will Fail.

Edwards rips the Peapod as “probably one of the worst vehicles ever conceived”. It was initially a mystery to me why he didn’t rag on the vehicle name, but maybe he’s more mature than that. Good for him. As for me, the only thing that sounds more dangerous than driving a peapod is driving a banana peel.

Well that piece led me to a Q&A with Arnell by Brandweek’s Becky Ebenkamp (who notes without a hint of a smirk that the Peapod was 10 years in the making). In it, Arnell differentiates between an NEV and a CEV.

A CEV? I ran this by both Wikipedia and AcronymFinder.com. Never heard of it. With the existing set of alternative vehicle acronyms, we don’t need another one:

  • EV ... The benchmark
  • BEV
  • CEV ... Lame!
  • HEV
  • NEV ... Peapod category
  • PEV
  • PHEV
  • REEV (Chrysler) and EREV (GM) ... Chicken-and-egg, I don’t know who came up with what first, but whoever was in second place embodies the Sorry State of the Imagination in Detroit right now.
  • CAV
  • FCV
  • PAV ... A glorious bit of inspiration—the Personal Air Vehicle
  • CORBEV

One piece of good news, FFV no longer designates the Flex-Fuel vehicle. Instead it’s now Trekkie Porn for a threesome between two chicks and a Vulcan.

This site follows the emergence, application and development of transportation innovation. Reference to manufacturers, makes and models, and other automotive-related businesses are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute an endorsement by FutureCars.com.

futurefuel