backtop


Print 131 comment(s) - last by goku.. on Jul 30 at 7:03 AM


Chevy Volt
GM's shining star finally get an official price

The Chevrolet Volt is undeniably the most high profile project going on at General Motors these days. The vehicle was first unveiled as a concept back at the Detroit Auto Show in January of 2007 and since that time has gone through a long gestation period.

The production version of the Volt is unrecognizable from the original concept that debuted in 2007, but its mission remains the same: to provide 40 miles of electric-only propulsion and an additional 300 miles when the 1.4-liter gasoline engine/generator kicks in.

Today, GM has announced official pricing for its Chevy Cruze-based vehicle. The vehicle will be priced at $41,000 ($33,500 net of full federal income tax credit). Fully loaded, the vehicle will run you $44,600 before the tax credit. It will also be available for a 36-month lease ($350 per month with $2,500 due at lease signing).

“The Chevrolet Volt will be the best vehicle in its class… because it’s in a class by itself,” said Joel Ewanick, vice president of U.S. marketing for General Motors. “No other automaker offers an electrically driven vehicle that can be your everyday driver, to take you wherever, whenever. The Volt will be packed with premium content and innovation, standard.”

When it comes to “mainstream” electric vehicles, the pricing of the Volt puts it a few pegs above Nissan’s Leaf electric vehicle (EV). The Nissan Leaf has a base MSRP of $32,780 before the $7,500 federal tax credit for EVs. Depending on what state customers live in, the final price of the Leaf can drop down to around $20,000 after local and state tax incentives.

According to GM's Online Order/Reference Guide, the Volt rides on a 105.7" wheelbase and measures 177.1" x 70.4" x 56.6" (L x W x H). Cargo capacity for the vehicle is listed at 10.6 cubic feet. Standard features for the Volt include a GPS navigation system (7" display), 30GB hard drive for audio storage, XM Radio/XM NavTraffic, OnStar, MyVOLT.com Vehicle Connectivity, and Bluetooth.

The Volt's 1.4-liter engine/generator also inexplicably requires premium fuel to operate. The gasoline generator is rated at 80 hp while the electric motor is rated at 74 hp and 273 lb-ft of torque. Total rated system power is 150 hp according to GM. The Volt's battery pack will come with an 8-year/100,000 warranty.

According to Green Car Advisor, the Chevy Volt can accelerate to 60 mph in about nine seconds. Top speed for the vehicle will be 100 mph.

When it comes to charging the vehicle, GM had this to say:

While the Chevrolet Volt will come standard with a 120-volt charge cord that will provide owners with the ability to charge their Volt directly from a standard home electrical outlet, a total of 4,400 Volt buyers in launch markets could be eligible for a free 240-volt charging station, including home installation.  The installations are part of a program developed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to install approximately 15,000 240-volt home charging stations across the U.S.

The Chevy Volt will be available in Silver Ice Metallic, Black, Crystal Red Metallic Tint,
White Diamond Tricoat, Cyber Gray Metallic, and Viridian Joule Tricoat.

Although customer-ready production models of the first generation Chevy Volt have yet to hit U.S. streets, GM is already brainstorming about changes it will make to the second generation model. The current Volt uses an off-the-shelf engine that it shares with the Chevy Cruze. Such a large and complex motor that is merely serving as a generator is both wasteful and expensive. GM instead wants to look at other options such as a smaller two-cylinder gasoline engine, rotary engine, or a small displacement diesel engine.

The Volt will also get a larger sibling in the form of the Volt MPV5. The Volt MPV5 trades the rather restrictive 4-passenger sedan configuration of the standard model for a crossover configuration that seats five and offers a more generous cargo area (62 cubic feet with the rear seats down). Due to the more compromised aerodynamics and heavier body, the Volt MPV5 can achieve a battery-only range of 32 miles instead of the Volt’s 40 miles.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Still too expensive
By KIAman on 7/27/2010 12:16:01 PM , Rating: 4
So best case scenario is a Volt priced around $32,000 depending on the state? Still too expensive for what it offers.

I think that quote from GM sums it up "It's only the best in class by default because it's in a class of its own."

Golfclap.




RE: Still too expensive
By Kutcher on 7/27/2010 12:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
Well said GM, by that definition it's also the worst in class.....morons.

I don't think this will be the game changer they were hoping for.


RE: Still too expensive
By Suntan on 7/27/2010 12:56:31 PM , Rating: 3
I don't know about that. Reality being disconnected from life as it is, this car is now the car you have to buy if you want to be hip and eco-trendy. That alone sold a lot of Priui in their day.

In the eyes of a lot of eco-hipsters, the Prius will be officially demoted to, "Nice, but not the one I really want."

-Suntan


RE: Still too expensive
By bhieb on 7/27/2010 1:28:29 PM , Rating: 2
Except that those same eco-hippies generally hate all things US, as we are the evil corporate oppressive nation that is all things wrong with the world.


RE: Still too expensive
By room200 on 7/27/2010 7:37:14 PM , Rating: 2
That's funny. I thought all the US bashing posters on DT hated the US and anything positive about American car companies.


RE: Still too expensive
By Cypherdude1 on 7/28/2010 11:37:43 PM , Rating: 2
It's too early to tell if the Volt will be a failure or success. There is a large pent up demand for an electric car out there. GM's EV1 had a large loyal following. There were many leasee's, you could not actually buy the EV1, who wanted to buy their EV1's but were turned down. GM wanted to get rid of the EV1 as quickly as possible. They even made a movie about it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EV1#Who_Killed_the_El...

I am glad that, this time, people will be able to keep their electric cars. This indicates things are finally changing.

I once advocated electric cars were the best option to reduce our foreign oil dependence. However, the cost and complexity of these cars are still too high. I now believe high mileage diesels are probably the best option. They're cheaper, less complex, and don't require an expensive lithium battery (which needs replacing every 10 years):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen#Clean_and_...

There is also the problem of the stress thousands of these new electric cars will induce when they are all connected to California's aging electric transmission lines. We are already have problems now. I expect we will have more overloads and blackouts once these cars reach consumers.


RE: Still too expensive
By ebakke on 7/27/2010 1:31:55 PM , Rating: 1
But those eco-trendy hipsters will have a tough time justifying to themselves the purchase of a new car when their existing car works just fine (even if it's not the latest and greatest status symbol). Just think of all that carbon released during production!! Oh the humanity!!

I just can't see this thing taking off.


RE: Still too expensive
By IcePickFreak on 7/27/2010 1:35:44 PM , Rating: 2
As if that has stopped them thus far.


RE: Still too expensive
By 67STANG on 7/27/2010 1:57:53 PM , Rating: 4
Agreed. I'm a true "eco-trendy hipster" as I only buy pre-owned vehicles. It's called "recycling".

I pickup the car for 30-50% off original MSRP, and let other suckers lose their money when they drive it off the lot new. Sure, the cars I buy typically have 10-20k on the odometer, but they still have the factory warranty, and I can buy new car scent at Pep Boys.

I just picked up a slightly used Mustang GT Convertible with 19k on the odometer for just over 18 grand out the door. I have plenty of money for gas. =)


RE: Still too expensive
By sprockkets on 7/27/2010 9:11:46 PM , Rating: 1
OTOH, my Mazda3 is actually worth buying new since used ones are so close to new prices, and I couldn't find a Mazda3 for sale used with the features I wanted.


RE: Still too expensive
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 2:31:28 PM , Rating: 5
And yet I predict they'll sell every single one of them.

You don't have to be the cheapest or best product to sell them. Just ask Apple.


RE: Still too expensive
By TSS on 7/28/2010 11:36:27 AM , Rating: 2
Well that raises the whole tax credit debate again. Why is the government spending money to increase the sales of something that will be sold out regardless?

In fact, if the above is true, it's even making the problem worse by increasing waiting list time, and thus the likelyhood of people staying in their clunker untill their new car arrives or buy a temporary cheap and inefficient car?

Good for you for getting a Volt in 2 years but what are you going to drive those 2 years?


RE: Still too expensive
By S3anister on 7/27/2010 8:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
No kidding.

What I fail to understand is why GM decided to us a gasoline engine (that needs premium? seriously?) instead of a low rpm high-torque diesel engine...


RE: Still too expensive
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/2010 9:04:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, as they say that is "epic fail" on their part. I mean honestly, who made that call?


RE: Still too expensive
By sprockkets on 7/27/2010 9:14:51 PM , Rating: 2
The engine doesn't drive the car, it only charges it. Gas vs. diesel argument is irrelevant here.


RE: Still too expensive
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/2010 9:26:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The engine doesn't drive the car, it only charges it. Gas vs. diesel argument is irrelevant here.


Are you a moron? The point is that premium COSTS MORE per gallon. It doesn't matter what the fuel is used for. There is NO REASON to put an engine in the Volt that requires premium fuel for that use.


RE: Still too expensive
By sprockkets on 7/27/2010 9:41:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you a moron? The point is that premium COSTS MORE per gallon. It doesn't matter what the fuel is used for. There is NO REASON to put an engine in the Volt that requires premium fuel for that use.


If you want to call GM a moron for requiring premium fuel vs normal, go for it.

But don't be like saying they should have put in a diesel which weighs more and requires a turbo either, because that's exactly the reasons they chose not to use a diesel.

You all gave reasons such as low end torque, which again, is irrelevant since the engine isn't connected to the drivetrain.

And btw, they explained sometime ago why it requires premium, but I can't remember the reason.


RE: Still too expensive
By sprockkets on 7/28/2010 7:12:49 AM , Rating: 3
Here, someone remembered the reason why GM is using premium:

quote:
Premium gas is not just for performance engines. The primary difference between premium and regular gas is the octane rating. Octane enables higher compression of the air fuel mixture which increases performance and fuel economy. So it makes perfect sense to have a small displacement high compression engine.


RE: Still too expensive
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2010 12:53:27 PM , Rating: 2
It's a tiny engine who's only function is to recharge the battery. Tell me, does it REALLY need to be high compression? No.


RE: Still too expensive
By clovell on 7/28/2010 1:22:33 PM , Rating: 2
iirc, GM played hell getting the noise from the generator to an acceptable level - may have had something to do with it.


RE: Still too expensive
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2010 5:18:34 PM , Rating: 2
As in higher compression engines run more quiet? I have no idea, but I wouldn't think that would be a factor.


RE: Still too expensive
By sprockkets on 7/28/2010 6:17:42 PM , Rating: 2
If it saves weight, which is crucial for this kind of car, uh, YES.


RE: Still too expensive
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2010 6:44:04 PM , Rating: 2
How much weight are we talking, first off? And you still haven't demonstrated that this car needed an engine requiring premium fuel. You are just SPECULATING!

I want it, in writing from an engineer, why this was the ONLY course of action they possibly could have taken and still meet all project goals.


RE: Still too expensive
By sprockkets on 7/28/2010 6:59:08 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I'm not. I read on LLN sometime ago GM telling the press why they did it.

quote:
I want it, in writing from an engineer, why this was the ONLY course of action they possibly could have taken and still meet all project goals.


Well I can't help you there. But they gave it some thought, unlike others who just said "Hell, why not a diesel?"


RE: Still too expensive
By Hiawa23 on 7/27/2010 11:04:36 PM , Rating: 3
At that price, will stick with gasonline vehicles. Not sure how an electric vehicle saves any money & seems like you are trading one evil for another as most electricity is made from coal.


RE: Still too expensive
By Yames on 7/28/2010 1:31:58 PM , Rating: 2
I crunched some numbers looking at the Civic Hybrid vs its regular brother. Using current gas prices I looked at cost over their life and due to the higher upfront cost the hybrid was more expensive. Most electricity (at least in Texas) is made from coal and natural gas, so that kills that eco benefit as well. Once prices come down I may bite, but even 35K for this car is too much.


Premium
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/27/2010 12:55:30 PM , Rating: 4
I'm still scratching my head over a 1.4-liter, 80hp engine requiring premium. That's ridiculous.




RE: Premium
By tng on 7/27/2010 1:22:41 PM , Rating: 2
Yeh, maybe it is a bit much just as an engine to drive a generator, but how much could it cost?

Still they are right, a small 2 cylinder could do the same function and save on weight and cost as well.


RE: Premium
By Mogounus on 7/27/2010 1:50:22 PM , Rating: 5
Premium gas is not just for performance engines. The primary difference between premium and regular gas is the octane rating. Octane enables higher compression of the air fuel mixture which increases performance and fuel economy. So it makes perfect sense to have a small displacement high compression engine.


RE: Premium
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 2:29:10 PM , Rating: 5
Exactly right. There's little doubt this engine uses higher compressin ratios. Probably in the 11:1 ballpark, which would necessitate the use of Premium fuel.

FWIW, all these engines have knock, and low octane fuel/spark tables programmed into the PCM. If you decide to run it on regular fuel, and the computer senses a problem, it will just reduce timing and use the low octane VE table, of course at somewhat reduced power.

But this is lightyears different from years past, where regular in a high compression engine resulted in damaged cylinders.


RE: Premium
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2010 5:59:29 PM , Rating: 1
How can a 1.4 liter measly 80HP engine need to be high compression?

Typical GM. When it comes to efficient compact 4 cylinders, they should have contracted a Japanese company to make the engine for them. Someone who actually knows about something besides big ass V8's.


RE: Premium
By Spuke on 7/28/2010 9:53:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When it comes to efficient compact 4 cylinders, they should have contracted a Japanese company to make the engine for them.
They do know how to make an awesome 4 cyl, it's called the LNF. I'm at a loss as to why it needs premium too when they could've added direct injection, kept the high compression, and used regular octane fuel. The LNF can run on 87 octane too even though it's turbocharged (because of direct injection) and has a relatively high compression (for a turbo car) of 9.5:1 (BMW and VW DI engines are 10:1).

Hell, I'm at a loss as to why ANY of the hybrids use the less advanced, "older" engines. None of them use the latest tech in gas engines. I was told a while ago that high compression reduces harmful emissions. Don't know if that's true and someone can correct me if they know better.


RE: Premium
By goku on 7/30/2010 7:03:57 AM , Rating: 2
Ford's hybrids use the latest engine tech...


RE: Premium
By gregpet on 7/27/2010 2:40:56 PM , Rating: 1
I have read that GM is concerned about the gas going stale. Given a work commute of less than 40 miles a day - theoretically a person could go months without using any gas at all (if charging every night)...I'm guessing that the octane of the premium can help with this...


RE: Premium
By Aikouka on 7/27/2010 3:51:38 PM , Rating: 1
Brandon, I'm scratching my head as to why you're scratching your head. I'm no expert, but I'm fairly certain the reason why the car requires premium fuel is probably the engine's compression ratio. Assuming the engine has a high compression ratio (talking 9:1 to 10:1), if you use a low-grade fuel (say 87 octane), the fuel may preignite (while being compressed). This causes knocking.

Although, honestly... I've had cars that state they need premium fuel and I've never suffered knocking while using 87 octane. I do use 89 or higher in my Altima, although I highly doubt it needs it (even though it states that it should use premium fuel).

You can read a little more about it here:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/fuel...


RE: Premium
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/27/2010 4:20:47 PM , Rating: 4
When the engine is used in the standard Chevy Cruze (with higher horsepower levels in fact) it will not require premium.

The 1.8L I4 in the Cruze (10.5:1) uses regular
The 1.4L I4 turbo in the Cruze (9.5:1) uses regular

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/11/cruze-2009...

That's why I'm scratching my head. It's a seriously neutered economy car engine...


RE: Premium
By Suntan on 7/27/2010 5:09:21 PM , Rating: 2
There is more to it than just comparing displacement to horsepower made.

Depending on the cycle used, how close they get to stoichiometric with the air/fuel mixture to promote fuel economy, etc. the desire for premium may be to promote optimum efficiency/performance even if the engine isn't set up to be a high strained powerhouse.

Alternatively, premium fuels tend to have more/better additives to minimize carbon buildup on valves/injectors, and they most likely do not have any ethanol mixed in with them, which may be desired by GM engineers due to any number of reasons based on the projected duty cycle of the engine.

*Assuming* most people use this car the way everyone expects them to be used, it would be plausible that a person would buy very little of the liquid, as such paying an extra twenty cents a gallon wouldn’t be the end of the world.

Then again, maybe they were rushed to get the car into production before they could properly calibrate the engine to deliver reliable performance on the lower test stuff... Although I doubt that is it.

-Suntan


RE: Premium
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/28/2010 4:47:13 PM , Rating: 2
AH-HAH! Autoblog is wondering the same thing I am!

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/28/2011-chevrolet-...


Pfft
By YashBudini on 7/27/2010 5:58:07 PM , Rating: 1
Calculate how many miles you have to drive to break even cost-wise over a small gas engine equivalent.

You'll never have to worry about replacing the batteries because by the time that happens the paint job will have shed and the car will look like it's ready for the scrap heap. Perhaps it will be worth something in materials alone.

There's nothing green about a car that uses less fuel to a degree but uses a ton more fuel during manufacturing. Create a rating system and show the results.

It may do well in extreme stop and go traffic, such as found in Manhattan waiting for one of the tunnels, as long as you don't need AC or heat.




RE: Pfft
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/27/2010 6:03:52 PM , Rating: 1
Someone posted this over at The Car Lounge:

quote:
some food for thought. it's general and figures you are driving the volt 40 miles per day or less so no fuel is ever boght for the volt. also doesn't factor in charging cost but as MikeNoGo pointed out for us it is pretty cheap. (thank you for that info by the way)

volt $41,000.00
gasser $20,000.00 gasser mpg 28

cost of fuel $2.99

cost difference between volt and gasser $21,000.00


gallons of fuel added cost of volt could purchase 7,023.41

miles to drive gasser before cost surpasses cost of volt 196,655.52

volt $41,000.00
tdi $25,000.00 tdi mpg 45

cost of fuel $3.25

cost difference between volt and tdi $16,000.00


gallons of fuel added cost of volt could purchase 4,923.08

miles to drive tdi before cost surpasses cost of volt 221,538.46
< br />


RE: Pfft
By Sibuna on 7/27/2010 8:00:01 PM , Rating: 1
Isn't he forgetting the $7,500+ rebate though?

If you count the volt at $33,500 the numbers become much smaller.

Simulation 1-
volt $33,500.00
gasser $20,000.00 gasser mpg 28

cost of fuel $2.99

cost difference between volt and gasser $13,500.00

gallons of fuel added cost of volt could purchase 4515.05

miles to drive gasser before cost surpasses cost of volt 126421.40

Simulation 2-

volt $33,500.00
tdi $25,000.00 tdi mpg 45

cost of fuel $3.25

cost difference between volt and tdi $8,500.00

gallons of fuel added cost of volt could purchase 2615.38

miles to drive tdi before cost surpasses cost of volt 117692.31

Charging, if I remember anecdotally, costs ~1% the price per mile than if using gas, which, as already stated, would be very minute and wouldn't change the numbers too much.


RE: Pfft
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/27/2010 8:05:36 PM , Rating: 1
Even with the revised numbers, it still doesn't make much financial sense.


RE: Pfft
By Sibuna on 7/27/2010 8:08:10 PM , Rating: 5
Yeah, but that somewhat sets up a gen 2 or 3 of the volt for being somewhat beneficial if they can get the cost down. I'm all for new things, but usually the first generation is the one I skip.


RE: Pfft
By DougF on 7/28/2010 9:23:08 AM , Rating: 2
Neither does a Corvette, or a Hummer, or a Bentley, or Porsche, etc, and people commute to work in those as well. For at least the next few years, this will be about status and "I'm more eco-minded than you" attitudes. Let them be the lead-in market and subsidize the follow-on generations that will be more appealing to the cost-conscious.

That said, you still have to pay GM $41K for the car. The flip side of this equation is that the Volt may be attractive to those who need a tax break of $7,500 to $12,500. And if you're gonna buy a new car, why not get one that helps out with the taxes?


RE: Pfft
By YashBudini on 7/27/2010 11:29:25 PM , Rating: 2
"miles to drive gasser before cost surpasses cost of volt 126421.40 "

And shall we factor in the cost of replacement batteries at this point, and if not soon?

Compare that to my gas power car, 260,000 miles never been towed, no engine or transmission work, and insurance for a worthless car (14 years old) is pretty cheap too.


RE: Pfft
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 11:45:37 PM , Rating: 2
Batteries in the Volt are warrantied for 10 years, so nice try.
And one of the reasons for the Volts cost is the factored in cost of the replacement batteries.


RE: Pfft
By superflex on 7/28/2010 12:16:20 PM , Rating: 2
I guess you think the electricity to charge that ugly ass thing is free. Nice try.
The comparison also only assumes you drive the Volt for less than 40 miles only on battery. Add gas to the mix and the Volt is a fail.
Again, nice try.


RE: Pfft
By Yames on 7/28/2010 1:42:43 PM , Rating: 2
120,000 miles is also around 10 years, so at this point of driving the batteries would need replacing, and at 10 years the owner will be the one responsible for replacing the batteries, while the owner of the "gasser" will still be ahead in cost.


RE: Pfft
By jthistle on 7/28/2010 11:44:25 AM , Rating: 2
Revise those numbers again the tdi also gets a tax rebate. I believe the Jetta gets a $1300 tax rebate.


RE: Pfft
By bigdawg1988 on 7/28/2010 4:54:12 PM , Rating: 2
But what if you lease cars every three years, wouldn't the Volt come out on top (or close) then?
Assuming the lease prices are similar (which I doubt) then you'd save whatever the fuel cost for the tdi would be.
I wonder what the resale cost of a Volt would be if you rarely used the gas engine after five years? Is there some sort of hour meter to indicate how much the gas engine has been used?

Of course I doubt it will be nearly as much fun to drive. Those vw folks sure know how to make a car feel good. Sigh, I miss my Jetta....


RE: Pfft
By YashBudini on 7/27/2010 11:32:19 PM , Rating: 1
"miles to drive tdi before cost surpasses cost of volt 221,538.46"

Given how many years it will take to get that kind of mileage some of GMs best cars may still look decent at that point, but if this is an economy car (referring to how it was built) then I'd wouldn't expect it to look like much of anything.


How bout some performance numbers?
By stm1185 on 7/27/2010 1:14:15 PM , Rating: 2
So it can go for awhile without using the gas engine, but how well is it going to run on a sub 100 hp electric engine. I would like to be able to merge to highway speeds without making everyone behind me slam on the brakes.




By Gungel on 7/27/2010 3:02:07 PM , Rating: 2
The engine works as a generator only, hence the name range extender. When the batteries drop down to 30% of remaining power the range extender kicks in and reloads the batteries and holds the charge at around 35%.


By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/27/2010 4:21:41 PM , Rating: 2
0-60 in 9 seconds
Top speed of 100mph


RE: How bout some performance numbers?
By bobsmith1492 on 7/27/2010 4:38:54 PM , Rating: 2
Electric motors are beasts compared to a gas engine and transmission. Full torque over the whole speed band, more or less (probably drops off at higher RPMs).


By Spuke on 7/28/2010 10:01:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Electric motors are beasts compared to a gas engine and transmission. Full torque over the whole speed band, more or less (probably drops off at higher RPMs).
With a 0-60 of only 9 seconds, this car is no beast. I'm still waiting for a car with this mystical electric car torque. Oh yeah, while your at it, find me some tires that can handle huge torque right of idle. If gas engined cars come with traction control and have a hell of a lot less torque off idle, you can believe ALL of these electric cars are limited too.


Can someone tell me why are we giving money
By corduroygt on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: Can someone tell me why are we giving money
By AssBall on 7/27/2010 1:23:47 PM , Rating: 5
Three words:

Freedom
Of
Choice

Leave me and my paychecks out of your wealth distribution scheme please.


By gixser on 7/27/2010 3:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
Could you tell me which "wealth distribution scheme" you are referring to? (a) Cutting welfare check to the poor or (b) Cutting tax credits to the to the buyers of the Volt? Perhaps both?


By Yames on 7/28/2010 1:48:47 PM , Rating: 2
I bet Marlboro and Budweiser would agree with you.


Too Expensive
By GruntboyX on 7/27/2010 12:40:02 PM , Rating: 4
I wish this car was more affordable. Like a 20k price without the need of a rebate. At a 32K price, I dont think the economics work out. At the current price of gas, the 12K difference from a Prius or Fiesta or civic you would never make the money back.

Its just not going to be a popular vehicle. Especially with the increased cafe ratings. Non Hybrid vehicles are going to get more efficient to the point that it will eat away the savings.




RE: Too Expensive
By Stoanhart on 7/27/2010 1:47:31 PM , Rating: 1
In time. I'm sure the 3rd generation Volt will be much cheaper, take regular fuel, and run 100 miles on battery. Give the technology time to mature. The core idea is sound - I'm very confident that electric + range extender will be the future of vehicles. It allows full electric 90% of the time, with no range issues and makes use of existing infrastructure. It's going to win by default, more or less.


RE: Too Expensive
By mlmiller1 on 7/27/2010 2:45:58 PM , Rating: 2
The Volt has an added draw for California commuters. California recently removed the Pris and Civic hybrids from the allowable carpool lane vehicles. The Volt, Tesla, and Leaf are still eligible for carpool lane access. Carpool lane access in it's self will be a big draw to these electric vehicles, at least in the congested cities.


MPV5 Link
By KillerNoodle on 7/27/2010 12:24:10 PM , Rating: 2
The last link in the article is a bad link to a file that is local to the writers computer...




RE: MPV5 Link
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/27/2010 12:27:57 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks. It's been fixed.


RE: MPV5 Link
By quiksilvr on 7/27/2010 12:36:36 PM , Rating: 2
Is that what it looks like? I'd rather get the LEAF.


Overpriced Status Symbol
By Dr of crap on 7/27/2010 12:41:01 PM , Rating: 2
Many years would have to pass until you recoup the extra cash for this so called "battery powered car".
I can't buy one. It gets to -30°F here. The batteries can't take that low a temp.

I wouldn't want one if they were availalbe here.
I can buy and drive 4 cars priced under $10,000 for over 10 years each and be dollars ahead of this thing.

It's not Tesla status symbol, but not for the average working class either. I'd buy a Fiesta over this any day!




RE: Overpriced Status Symbol
By lelias2k on 7/27/2010 1:05:23 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, people said the same thing about those who bought $10-20k computers 30 years ago, but they forget that those people are the reason why we have our $300 computers nowadays. :)


hmm
By Tigerwraith on 7/27/2010 2:04:33 PM , Rating: 1
Lets see, 41k for a car that can go 340miles, i paid 12k for my 05 sunfire, and I can get 380 miles per tank on it. Now granted that my drive to work is 35miles unless i can charge this at work, I would still need the engine to get back home.




RE: hmm
By scavio on 7/28/2010 12:35:19 PM , Rating: 2
Who in the world would even think miles per tank is a valid measuring stick for fuel economy? Well, my F150 gets 500 miles to a tank... that makes it an even better deal than your pathetically inefficient Sunfire and Volt.

Ack.


The car has grown on me
By Lord 666 on 7/27/2010 12:20:42 PM , Rating: 2
Styling and concept, its not bad. Even the price is more like a generation 1 early adopter premium, but even then its not that much more money than regular car. Compared to the rebadged Prius/Lexus, these should sell well.




can't wait
By RU482 on 7/27/2010 12:21:39 PM , Rating: 2
I can't wait to drive one




By IcePickFreak on 7/27/2010 1:33:25 PM , Rating: 2
I believe GM is only producing something like 10k of these the first year. Should be interesting to see how the dealers handle that since they usually like to jack the price up on limited-availability vehicles. I have a feeling the government wouldn't be too happy about that in this case.




looks
By Gunbuster on 7/27/2010 1:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
41K for a space Malibu? Ha-ha, it looks like a plastic toy. I saw one on I275 yesterday. Thumbs down.

I cant even say Space Cruze because the sedan that should have been out to compete with a 2004 Mazda 3 is still not for sale.




Don't worry...
By gregpet on 7/27/2010 2:25:03 PM , Rating: 2
I love the technology of this car but I'm not an early adopter or rich. There are plenty of both out there!

GM will sell every one of the 10,000 they are building...

The second generation will have a more appropriate gas/diesel generator and less 'belt & suspenders' that I'm sure GM put in to Gen 1. The next version will be better and cheaper...Everyone calm down!




Gotta start somewhere.....
By priusone on 7/27/2010 2:34:57 PM , Rating: 2
I am glad that GM is producing the Volt. Much like how I was glad that there were $2,000+ dollar notebooks 17 years ago. I sure wanted a notebook back then, but I ended up waiting 6 years and getting one for $900. Fast forward 10 more years and I picked up a new netbook for $250. Man, I am sure glad that someone started making notebooks. And I am sure glad that GM is sure pushing hard to promote an Electric Vehicle. I'd sure like to have an EV, but I'm going to be waiting for quite some time before I get my first EV.




Planning ahead.
By Icehearted on 7/27/2010 3:29:25 PM , Rating: 2
I say this price makes perfect sense! They make a fancy car to prove they're green and charge a price that proves the economy is perfectly fine.

Then they play the "We didn't see this coming!" card when the sales fail miserably, and get more bailout cash because Uncle Sam is a gullible imbecile with deep pockets and a whole lot of love for big business that try hard.

I'm poor folk, so I suppose in this case (as with most cases) my 2¢ isn't really worth 2¢ since I can't even afford a bicycle.

:/




Engine Design 101
By Shelbino on 7/28/2010 9:58:48 AM , Rating: 2
"...The Volt's 1.4-liter engine/generator also inexplicably requires premium fuel to operate..."

Very easily explained: efficiency.

An internal combustion engine can use a relatively high compression ratio to improve its power output. To prevent premature detonation, high-compression engines require the use of high-octane gasoline.

And as always, YMMV.




Not a game changer
By btc909 on 7/28/2010 11:49:30 AM , Rating: 2
So now I have to run Premium fuel, the gas tank size is estimated between 6-10 gallons & I have a total range of 340 miles. If I had a daily work commute of 40 miles round trip this car would make some sense but otherwise no. If GM thinks this is a new pricing model for vehicles of this type isn't going to work long term. Once the Federal & State tax credits dry up the sales will tank at 41K. I also know many dealers will price gouge the death out of this "new thing". Dealer: Oh well you know times are tough, limited inventory, blah, blah.




A lot of good comments here
By wempa on 7/28/2010 12:53:38 PM , Rating: 2
There are a lot of valid points being made here. I agree that it's not starting out as a very economical vehicle. It's going to be more of a status symbol. You have to admit that it would be pretty damn cool to own a car that you rarely have to fill up with gas. Looking at my own situation, I rarely make trips > 40 miles .... maybe once a month on average. As for the economical aspect, we'll have to see how things play out over time. If battery capacity/technology improves, along with vehicle design and the electrical infrastructure, then things could be different in the future. In the worst case, it will just remain the same and appeal only to a select group.




By sorry dog on 7/28/2010 1:52:57 PM , Rating: 2
I like it. First of all it's one of GM's better looking cars, and I think that they are on the right track with setup. I wouldn't want one yet, but 2 things would make me want it.

1. More powerful electric motors...enough for a 7 sec 0-60 and a 120 top speed (even if only in short bursts)

2. More flexible generator package. Such as giving the driver different recharge modes like if you park it at the mall for an hour your can put it in a mode to keep running the genset until a preset cutoff percentage or once almost out of batt power telling it to keep at least 50% for more performance reserve. Another potential mode would be a econ mode for reduced performance an more batt usage or a performance mode for for max power and genset running nonstop.




Danger Will Robinson!
By YashBudini on 7/29/2010 1:55:45 AM , Rating: 2
"The Chevy Volt will be available in Silver Ice Metallic, Black, Crystal Red Metallic Tint,
White Diamond Tricoat, Cyber Gray Metallic, and Viridian Joule Tricoat."

Holy cow 3 word names for paint colors. No wonder the car is so expensive. It's the same thing as when real estate investments use such words as "luxury," or even worse, "exclusive."




Whenever, Whereever?
By thrust2night on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 12:44:49 PM , Rating: 2
Uh,
Actually yes.....this can.

Something that the LEAF can't do, at least can't do in less than several weeks.


RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By acer905 on 7/27/2010 12:45:03 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize that you simply refill the generators gas tank, and continue your trip. With this car you never actually have to plug it in. You just have the option to if you want the 40 electric only miles.


RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By EasyC on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By priusone on 7/27/2010 2:42:38 PM , Rating: 1
Long distance traveling on a $41,000 electric vehicle? I'm sure an owner of a VOLT will also have a secondary vehicle.

When I bought my laptop, it came with an extra box to wireless sync my TV with it, which has come in handy, a few times. Since we as a culture are not used to plugging in a car, having the ability to fall back on a generator will come in extremely handy, plus, the few times that the EV may be taken for a 350 mile trip, hey, I'm glad I got that generator, eh.


RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By Gungel on 7/27/2010 3:06:55 PM , Rating: 1
Dude really? Why should the electric motor suddenly slow you down when the gas generator reloads the batteries?


RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By clovell on 7/27/2010 3:28:00 PM , Rating: 1
Acceleration is slated to be on par with the Civic Si.


RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By Spuke on 7/28/2010 11:27:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Acceleration is slated to be on par with the Civic Si.
Actually, no it's not. 0-60 in 9 seconds.


RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By clovell on 7/29/2010 4:47:44 PM , Rating: 2
Ah, yeah - 8.9 was what I turned up. Si does it in... 7.1? 7.9?


RE: Whenever, Whereever?
By namechamps on 7/27/2010 1:45:11 PM , Rating: 5
Idiot.

How about you read about the Volt.

quote:
Can it take me from Arizona to Florida? How many charging stations are there in that route?


Yes & 0.

The volt has a gasoline generator that recharges battery bank for extended driving. I mean I am not saying the Volt if for everyone but if you are going to have an opinion is it too much to ask that it be an informed opinion?


50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: 50 grand..
By The0ne on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/2010 12:52:14 PM , Rating: 4
Well I could almost understand it if they had to recoup the costs of R&D to develop the Volt with each sale. But the taxpayer already absorbed that cost. So what's the deal with that sticker price?

The National Gas Average price is $2.74 a gallon right now. Less in my area. But think about how much gas you could buy with 10 or more grand. Then tell me how the Volt, priced at 41k+, is saving you money on gas?


RE: 50 grand..
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 12:55:58 PM , Rating: 3
Depending on your driving habits, the Volt can save you close to $2000/yr on fuel over your Lancer (based on 15k miles per year).

Over 5 years that means the TCO of your Lancer will be $48,500 (36k + 5 x 2500). The Volt will be $36,000 (41k - 7500 + 5 x 500).

I'm not suggesting the Volt is great, or for everyone for that matter. Just that you are trying to compare two completely different cars to skew your argument.

The real punchline here is that you actually paid $36K for a frickin turbo'd Lancer.


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: 50 grand..
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 1:31:35 PM , Rating: 3
I eat them on tracks monthly, and yes I have driven them. I have a lot of respect for the performance that they get out of them, but let's face it, they are Lancers that have an obscene turbo'd engine but not much else.

If GM stripped a base model car and put a 300hp engine in there, the internet would be all over about how Government Motors can't innovate and what a POS it is. But the Japeneese do it and it's such an innovation.


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: 50 grand..
By cruisin3style on 7/27/2010 4:32:08 PM , Rating: 1
Showing how little you know: GM had the Cobalt SS up until MY 2008 or so and it is pretty much what you described (a base model front wheel drive car with a turbo charged engine) and from what I saw (I briefly thought about buying one) it got rave reviews.


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/2010 6:48:28 PM , Rating: 2
What about the Neon SRT-4?? Same deal. Hell the Buick Grand National is one of the hottest collector cars to this day, and by his definition is just another "turbo'd" Buick. I mean, he's just so thick.

He just comes off as some bitter or stubborn American V-8 guy to me. Claiming some kind of pro-Japanese bias while at the same time ignoring all relevant American examples to the contrary.


RE: 50 grand..
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 1:41:34 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Don't you think you're being just *slightly* best-case in favor of the Volt?

I stated depending on driving habits. You could certainly not see those savings, but it will always be signifigantly less cost than the Lancer, even if fully on gas engine.

quote:
You aren't "saving" anything when you start at a MUCH higher initial buy-in. Total value needs to be assessed, not just gas savings

But you don't start at a higher buy-in. 41K (for most the base options are quite sufficient) less the hated tax credit starts you at 33.5K. Fully optioned out starts you at 37k, same ballpark as the Lancer mentioned earlier.

quote:
Sorry but it doesn't work that way in real life.

And why not. For most, it is entirely possible they won't use any gas at all for normal commuting. Please enlighten me on how my numbers don't work in real life. And be specific.

If you commute more than 40miles a day, then the Volt may not be for you (or maybe it still will be since it gets very good mileage even with the gas engine).


RE: 50 grand..
By hyvonen on 7/27/2010 2:18:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The real punchline here is that you actually paid $36K for a frickin turbo'd Lancer.


LMAO

Yeah, no kidding


RE: 50 grand..
By kfonda on 7/27/2010 2:47:32 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Depending on your driving habits, the Volt can save you close to $2000/yr on fuel over your Lancer (based on 15k miles per year).


Does that include the cost of electricity to charge the Volt?


RE: 50 grand..
By clovell on 7/27/2010 3:22:30 PM , Rating: 2
Driving Habits... and the price of electricity, and the money saved on interest paid or earned on the $$-delta.

Still - I like the punchline.


RE: 50 grand..
By Shadowmaster625 on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: 50 grand..
By kfonda on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: 50 grand..
By The0ne on 7/28/2010 11:09:57 AM , Rating: 2
Yea, damn me and my rally cars. What was I thinking! Urgh, I need to get something that goes fast on straights and has absolutely no racing history to back it up! Hell, my rally cars are all cheap cars with turbo's attached like you said, nothing special. Hey, I'm a car noob, but I'll stick with my rally cars.

I just pray Tommi isn't on this pathetic blog reading idiotic threads, he'll be dead from extreme laughter.


RE: 50 grand..
By The0ne on 7/28/2010 12:34:41 PM , Rating: 2
So here is a bit of history on my pathetic rally car choices. Please forgive this dumb fck of a vehicle owner, I'm so noobish.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Lancer_Evolution
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subaru_Impreza_WRX_STI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_206#206_in_rallying
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Focus_WRC

And here's the poor slob that drove those crummy "lancers."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommi_M%C3%A4kinen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRwSkDojNbo

So as you can see, I totally blew it when I decided on them rally cars because what I should have done was bought cars that were fast in a straight from 0-60. Gosh darnit! Urgh, makes me so mad! Forget that I love driving on country roads, mountain roads and valleys...which have little to no straights.

Can some knowledgeable person here advise me on my next vehicle purchase. Please list all cars you think I need to go in a straight line. OBVIOUSLY, I'm too fcking dumb as I'm sticking with rally breed cars. Maybe I can just buy a small old civic, gut it out, turbo it and run a few nice times on the straights. Oh wait, then I be consider a rice boy eh? LMAO.

Yea, the real punchline it surely is LMAO

HAHAHAHAHHAAHHAAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHA


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2010 8:43:13 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah he's just ignorant. The simple fact of the matter is, for the money, the amount of value and performance packed into the Evo, STI, and similar vehicles are astounding. Those "rally" cars are awesome.

Also notice he laughs at your vehicle choice, and makes several degrading comments about your "Lancer", but never says what he's driving. Makes you wonder, eh?


RE: 50 grand..
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 12:48:23 PM , Rating: 5
Nice try, but even the fully loaded model doesn't come anywhere near $50k.

Sorry to interrupt your GM rant.


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: 50 grand..
By lelias2k on 7/27/2010 1:01:07 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
The vehicle will be priced at $41,000 ($33,500 net of full federal income tax credit). Fully loaded, the vehicle will run your $44,600 before the tax credit.


RE: 50 grand..
By MrTeal on 7/27/2010 1:01:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The vehicle will be priced at $41,000 ($33,500 net of full federal income tax credit). Fully loaded, the vehicle will run your $44,600 before the tax credit.


The base is only $41k, it's the fully loaded version that's priced at $44.6k


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
RE: 50 grand..
By ebakke on 7/27/2010 1:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And yes, I'm none too happy about the massive rebate that each purchase of this car the taxpayer will be fronting.
Finally someone's looking out for me!


RE: 50 grand..
By theArchMichael on 7/27/2010 1:30:45 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Have any of you actually bought a car in your life? That might be their list price, but without a trade in or money down, you will NOT be driving these off the lot for 41k or 44k.


I hope your talking about taxes and delivery and destination, because if you're regularly paying more than MSRP, I hope your at least getting free oil changes or an occasional hand job.
I understand that there will be initial rush to get one of these right away but when production ramps up and other options become available, dealer invoice is gonna be the price to shoot for.


RE: 50 grand..
By MrTeal on 7/27/2010 1:47:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have any of you actually bought a car in your life? That might be their list price, but without a trade in or money down, you will NOT be driving these off the lot for 41k or 44k.

Yeah, I have. While it might be different for the Volt given the niche market it will be serving, pretty much everything GM sells goes for list or less unless you let them sucker you into undercoating and the like. If you're paying extra service fees because you're financing 100% with no money down, you probably shouldn't be buying a Volt. GM products have so many discounts and cashbacks that it's hard to take their MSRP at face value, but the cars are usually cheaper than listed. Employee pricing for everyone! Wooo!

quote:
The Volt’s MSRP will start at $41,000 ($33,500 net of the full federal tax credit, which ranges from $0-$7,500) including a destination freight charge of $720.


Freight is included in the MSRP. Taxes obviously aren't, but that will depend on where you are.

Now, I do agree the Volt is too expensive to ever get market penetration. It won't be until they have a serial hybrid version of something like the Cobalt that people will think about buying these in quantity. Of course, I said that about the Prius too. I was wrong there, and could be here.


RE: 50 grand..
By lelias2k on 7/28/2010 8:08:31 PM , Rating: 1
You are never happy unless we're talking about gas guzzlers. :|


RE: 50 grand..
By theapparition on 7/27/2010 1:25:21 PM , Rating: 2
No,
Try reading again. That's fully loaded at 44K.

41K for the base model, and that's pretty well equipped. I would definately call that no where near 50K. If pricing got closer to 48K-49K, then I'd agree with you. But now you're just stretching.


RE: 50 grand..
By Spuke on 7/28/2010 11:20:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would definately call that no where near 50K. If pricing got closer to 48K-49K, then I'd agree with you.
My guess is with the small production numbers and appeal to the eco-trendy crowd, the Volt more than likely will see dealer markups. Expect to see only loaded cars on dealer lots and don't be surprised to see ~$50k sticker prices either.


RE: 50 grand..
By LRonaldHubbs on 7/27/2010 1:23:00 PM , Rating: 1
I agree, $41+K is obscene.


RE: 50 grand..
By marvdmartian on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: 50 grand..
By marvdmartian on 7/27/2010 8:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
And it seems the posers are busy marking down anyone who calls them a poser! **SIGH**

Okay, here's my figures. My car gets ~34mpg. The Volt gets 340 miles out of a tank of gas, which is 7 gallons. My car will do the same number of miles with 10 gallons.

My car cost ~$20,000.00, while the Volt Costs ~$33,000 after the tax rebate. Still with me?

If we take the price of gas, currently ~$2.50/gallon, it would cost me $7.50 more to fill up every time. And that's NOT counting the cost of the electricity to charge the Volt's batteries.

At a price difference of $13,000, divided by $7.50, I'd have to gas up the Volt 1733 times, just in order to break even.

At 340 miles per fill-up (again, discounting the recharge cost), you're looking at almost 600,000 miles I would have to drive the Volt, just in order to break even.

If that doesn't spell POSER, I don't know what does!


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/27/2010 9:01:22 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah this is just really absurd. I don't know who this person with multiple accounts is, but the pattern is too regular to be anything else.

None of these posts deserve 0's or -1's. Nobody is trolling or resorting to personal attacks. I feel sad if they come across facts or viewpoints they can't argue with, they need to resort to rating spammage.

quote:
If we take the price of gas, currently ~$2.50/gallon


Actually the gas engine on the Volt requires premium!! So it's MUCH more than 600k miles to break even. And who, honestly, keeps a car that long in this day and age?

Good post man. I applaud that, even in the face of such irrational immature downrate spam, you further drove home your point and backed it up with solid math.


RE: 50 grand..
By theapparition on 7/28/2010 12:00:50 AM , Rating: 2
Your math and logic is skewed.

You are trying to compare you car running constantly to a Volt running constantly. (340 miles per tank, etc). Long distance trips are not what the Volt is suited for, it is for short commuter travel, ideally under 40miles/day.

In that scenerio, you could conceivably never gas the Volt up at all. So now your little math experiment has fallen apart.

I don't care if people like the Volt or not (personally I'm appathetic towards it). It is not a car for everyone. But for those with an average commute, it could save them money in the long run.

And LOL about your comparison to a $20k car. The Volt is the size and would compete with larger cars, such as the Accord. It's not a tiny econobox like the LEAF is. Accords/Camry/Fusion have prices that approach 30k. So this (after the credit) is close in price and ammenities to the competition.

Don't like, fine, don't buy it. Simple as that.


RE: 50 grand..
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/28/2010 12:32:08 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And LOL about your comparison to a $20k car. The Volt is the size and would compete with larger cars, such as the Accord. It's not a tiny econobox like the LEAF is. Accords/Camry/Fusion have prices that approach 30k. So this (after the credit) is close in price and ammenities to the competition.


Uhh, it is a "tiny" econobox. It's a Chevrolet Cruze in "green" clothing, which is an EPA classified compact car (the Volt and the Cruze share the same 105.7" wheelbase). The Accord is classified as an EPA classified large sedan.

In addition, due to its battery pack and packaging, the Volt even has 1.5" less rear legroom than the Cruze. It also has a smaller trunk (10.6 cu ft for the Volt vs 15.4 cu ft for the Cruze). And let's not forget that it only seats four people versus five for the Cruze and the rear seats don't fold down on the Volt.

So the Volt can't even compare with its sibling when it comes to passenger space/cargo capacity, let alone a larger vehicle like an Accord, Camry, Sonata, or Altima.


RE: 50 grand..
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2010 2:06:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Long distance trips are not what the Volt is suited for, it is for short commuter travel, ideally under 40miles/day.


Nobody makes a car for "short trips". In fact their main selling point is that you can drive this anywhere for any period of time, as apposed to electric vehicles. So what the hell are you talking about?

quote:
Don't like, fine, don't buy it. Simple as that.


Yeah well you can't say this. The American taxpayers were raped to bail out GM, and then we're further being raped by this insane subsidy of each purchase. So sorry, but you don't get to shut us up. We're well within our rights to express our outrage at this absurd vehicle. We ARE buying it, weather it ends up in our driveway or not. And that's bull.


RE: 50 grand..
By marvdmartian on 7/28/2010 9:06:33 AM , Rating: 2
Hate to burst your bubble:
quote:
And LOL about your comparison to a $20k car. The Volt is the size and would compete with larger cars, such as the Accord. It's not a tiny econobox like the LEAF is.

My car is a Hyundai Sonata, which seats 5 (versus the Volt's 4), and I'd bet has considerably more interior and trunk room. You know......like an Accord.

And if this was designed for the short commuters, you know:
quote:
ideally under 40miles/day

then why did they put a gas tank and engine in it? They could have used that weight for more battery, giving it a longer range.

Oh, and as I stated, I didn't even account for the cost of recharging the batteries on the Volt, which would increase the number of miles you'd have to drive it before it pays for itself.

YOUR logic fails, sir.


RE: 50 grand..
By mattclary on 7/27/10, Rating: 0
RE: 50 grand..
By jthistle on 7/27/10, Rating: -1
"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki