backtop

Print 175 comment(s) - last by estarkey7.. on Jul 27 at 1:11 PM

Chevy Volt

Honda Insight
The Volt may be good for some "spirited" driving

There has been plenty of hype surrounding the Chevrolet Volt over the past two years. The vehicle splashed onto the screen as a concept car at the Detroit Auto Show in 2007 and is poised to hit American roads next year.

The Volt's big claim to fame is its ability to travel 40 miles on a full charge from its lithium-ion battery pack. The vehicle's battery pack can be recharged through a household outlet or trickle charged via the onboard "range extender" gasoline engine.

Although the Volt ticks all the right eco-friendly check boxes when it comes to eco-friendliness and fuel consumption, General Motors hopes to also give buyers a sportier vehicle to drive compared to its Japanese rivals. While the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight are both praised for their high fuel economy, neither vehicle is exactly a corner carver.

The Insight specifically was recently blasted by a publication which normally gives favorable reviews to Honda vehicles. Consumer Reports noted that the new Insight “Fell short in ride quality, handling, interior noise, acceleration, rear-seat, access and visibility.” The only saving grace for the vehicle was its 38 MPG test average during Consumer Reports’ testing and it ranked 21 out of 22 vehicles tested.

For its part, General Motors hopes to exceed expectations in chassis development to squash one of the main complaints leveled against hybrids. "Our chassis is much more sporty than either of the other vehicles," said Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah. While it's unlikely that the Volt will challenge a BMW 3-Series when it comes to handling, it's also not likely to bore drivers like the isolating Prius.

The Volt is expected to have a price tag of around $40,000, but a $7,500 tax credit should help soften the blow.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
well
By yacoub on 6/30/2009 8:58:08 AM , Rating: 5
We'll see how much people really want plug-in electric vehicles once cap-n-trade gets into full swing and your existing electric bill skyrockets. Are you really going to want to add the drain of charging those massive battery packs in an electric car every day when your electric bill is already costing you twice as much as it used to?
Doubtful, especially when keeping your existing gasoline-powered car would be much more cost-effective than buying an electric car and charging it at home.

It's too bad, really, because the technology is interesting and would hold merit if it wasn't for the very-same environmentalists who support electric cars also being against electric power generation sources like nuclear, which is one of the power-generating sources that would most reduce the cost of electricity, or cleaner coal, which would make best use of existing power generation infrastructure.




RE: well
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 9:29:25 AM , Rating: 5
Gas prices will also go through the roof though.

Hope people are happy with their change. Because that's about all this government wants to let you keep.


RE: well
By bissimo on 6/30/2009 10:03:48 AM , Rating: 1
Am I the only person that reads this site who doesn't doesn't feel like they need to regurgitate AM radio right-wing dribble at every opportunity?


RE: well
By GreenyMP on 6/30/2009 10:15:18 AM , Rating: 5
Really? We don't want to pay feel-good energy taxes and the only way that we could have come to this realization is from someone else telling us this? Lets not flame freedom of speech -- oh, wait, you can't help it because you are liberal! I guess freedom of speech only applies if you are liberal, right?


RE: well
By ClownPuncher on 6/30/2009 11:41:54 AM , Rating: 2
How does it have to do with freedom of speech? The guy clearly just disagrees with you and thinks you are sheep. Which is what conservatives say about liberals all the time. But freedom of speech has nothing to do with it, it's called differing opinions. He is free to call you an idiot, and you are free to call him one. Quit pretending to have your freedoms treaded upon just to try to prove a point.


RE: well
By invidious on 6/30/2009 12:28:05 PM , Rating: 4
Good point, calling someone a sheep does not have anything to do with free speach. But some liberals do tend to argue under the hypocritical assumption that because they are on the environmental advocates that their opinion is the only one that is valid.

To those people please realize that just because something is good for the environment does not mean it is morally obligatory. Have some perspective and realize that the benifits must be weighed against the costs, everything is relative. Almost every conservative is going to agree that this bill is over the line.


RE: well
By LostInLine on 6/30/2009 12:50:22 PM , Rating: 2
Since the Gov'ment is involved, I bet crap and tax actually increases C02 levels. I'm investing in huge coal fired electric plants just south of the boarder so i can sell energy to the US grid and make a fortune while completely ignoring emissions.


RE: well
By ClownPuncher on 6/30/2009 12:50:46 PM , Rating: 3
Pretty much everyone thinks their view is the only correct view. It's not liberal or conservative. Conservatives will use religion, liberals will use eco-religion, just 2 examples.

Anyway, I hate cap and trade too.


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 12:40:04 PM , Rating: 3
Luckily fact has very little to do with opinion.


RE: well
By ClownPuncher on 7/1/2009 7:54:47 PM , Rating: 2
Fact also has very little to do with politics.


RE: well
By Bender 123 on 6/30/2009 12:54:16 PM , Rating: 5
I am in for "Green", but the Al Gores and the cap and trade set make me irate!

How did Al Gore get all his money? His father was the CEO of Oxidental COAL! He got to his privileged position based on the industries he is trying to stop.

And...

What is his current income from cap and trade? He is the prime investor in several "cape and trade" carbon credit exchange brokers. This means that if cap and trade come to pass, we pay more money to the govt, we pay more to the companies and Al Gore gets to sit back and watch his money roll in as his brokers take slices of carbon trade credit exchange deals.

Then Al and ManBearPig all go live a happy life with all our green feelings and money.

No thanks...


RE: well
By randomposter on 6/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Mr772 on 6/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: well
By invidious on 6/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: well
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 11:10:11 AM , Rating: 5
How about you actually address my point? Prove to me that gas prices won't go up as a result of this. Oh wait you can't.


RE: well
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 11:15:43 AM , Rating: 2
Gas prices are going to go through the roof anyhow - just as soon as the global economy regains its footing. The sooner you accept that fact and adapt accordingly, the happier you will be as an individual.

But since this is DT I expect this post to be flagged a bright red -1 in about 3 minutes.


RE: well
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 11:19:42 AM , Rating: 2
So we should artificially inflate it even more?

I am well aware the the cost of gas can and will increase naturally as demand increases. There is absolutely no reason however to inflate it through bogus taxes designed to protect us from something we have no control over.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:27:33 PM , Rating: 3
Depending on what the taxes get used for it couldn't hurt, but as the government just misspends all its money there is no reason for a tax.


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 12:43:50 PM , Rating: 2
Demand will go up as supplies are headed down. Should lead to very, very high prices and probably cause further recessions.


RE: well
By invidious on 6/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/09, Rating: 0
RE: well
By Spuke on 6/30/2009 12:55:57 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
The sooner you accept that fact and adapt accordingly, the happier you will be as an individual.
Funny but my happiness is not based on how much the price of gas is.


RE: well
By icanhascpu on 6/30/2009 4:11:49 PM , Rating: 1
You haven't even proven it will. (not saying it wont, that's a different matter) But generally, if you're going to make a point, standing on the "well you cant disprove it!" logic doesn't go far to prove whatever point you were trying to make in the first place.


RE: well
By estarkey7 on 7/27/2009 1:11:10 PM , Rating: 2
This is one of the reasons why I stopped commenting on things for the most part. For a tech community website, you would think progression would be encouraged.

If this kind of attitude was prominent, we'd still be driving a horse and carriage.


RE: well
By Samus on 6/30/2009 7:46:57 PM , Rating: 3
The Volt has independant suspension, greatly improving handling and ride quality. That says a lot, since no other hybrids do.

I just can't believe in the 21st century we still build cars with a dead axle.


RE: well
By Bubbacub on 7/1/2009 5:51:28 AM , Rating: 2
<smug> we figured out that having an axle more advanced than a tree trunk that actually lets you go round corners may be advantageous many years ago in europe! </smug>


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 12:52:11 PM , Rating: 2
I read a review by some car magazine that got to test drive a prototype and they were extremely happy with the ride and handling. It looks like GM has managed to pull this one off, the only problem is the price.


RE: well
By Spuke on 7/1/2009 4:11:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Volt has independant suspension, greatly improving handling and ride quality.
More than likely the Volt has one simply because of its price point than any handling advantage an independent suspension would give.


RE: well
By cjc1103 on 6/30/2009 9:48:47 AM , Rating: 5
Direct operating costs for electric cars (battery recharging) is going to be less expensive than paying for gasoline (http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/d... However you have to figure in other factores, battery replacement cost being the big expense after 100,000 miles (or maybe more, some Prius cars have goone 190,000 miles on the original battery). Other maintenance is less expensive, for example mechanical brakes are used less with regenerative braking. Also electric cars are going to be more expensive to buy until battery costs come down. So it's difficult to compare total operating costs.


RE: well
By dani31 on 6/30/2009 10:07:46 AM , Rating: 1
When to many factors come into the ecuation, it's a matter of vision to move ahead.


RE: well
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 11:12:03 AM , Rating: 2
You speak of a vision as if you are somehow enlightened but you can't even spell the word "equation" properly. Pardon me for not really caring about your views when looking to whats best for my future.


RE: well
By invidious on 6/30/2009 12:46:53 PM , Rating: 2
Lol, you beat me to it. Personally I don't care about his spelling but it is funny.

The bottom line is people need to stop acting like they have a crystal ball.


RE: well
By Screwballl on 6/30/2009 10:09:41 AM , Rating: 2
That is part of the problem, battery costs are not likely to go down... or it may go down for a short time but as more of the battery based alt. fuel vehicles are sold, the price is more likely to go up.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/30/beyond-pea...

What we need is research into Telsa's "power from the ether" setup...

http://keelynet.com/energy/teslafe1.htm

http://electricandhybridcars.com/index.php/pages/1...


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 1:32:09 PM , Rating: 2
It could. The batteries we have now aren't really the best for a car type application. We really need new batteries for this specific purpose. Depending on what those end up being made of and the process involved they could end up being far cheaper and easier to make than the ones we have now.

Though I'm certainly not counting on that in the near future. Perhaps when they perfect the manufacturing process of making carbon nanotubes we'll see a dramatic drop in price.


RE: well
By Keeir on 6/30/2009 1:26:47 PM , Rating: 2
On Battery Replacement.. I think one needs to remember the car is usuable for a period going forward from Battery replacement and judge whether the battery replacement is economical

Well... GM has to offer a 150,000 mile battery warranty. Since they are only using 8.8 kWh out of 16 kWh, I think they should have no issue getting 4,000+ cycles before mileage really starts to decrease (I mean they can lose more than 30% capacity before that starts). So lets figure a Volt Battery lasts 150,000 miles. Compared to a Prius, thats 3,000 gallons of gas saved. Compared to a typical 30 mpg compact car, thats 5,000 gallons of gas saved. Since a Prius may also need a battery replacement at 150,000 miles, lets just consider the typical 30 mpg compact car. If you think difference between 40 miles on gas versus electricity will stay around $2.00 per "gallon" (3/4*8.8kWH*$0.11/kWH=$0.76 --> 1 gallon of gas = $2.76), thats 10,000 dollars of savings. I personally think going forward the difference will be more like $3.00+ (4.50 gas and 1.50 electricity). Well worth buying a battery which in ten years will likely be cheaper than current prices.

For those that don't know, ThunderSky sells Lithium Ion (Phosphate type) Batteries for EV conversion. 16 kWh (Volts full battery) sells for around $10,000 (with BMS) at list. Thundersky though offers upto 40% volume discount. OEM prices would be closer to $6,000 per 16 kWh or less. So right now, I would think a high volume volt replacement battery would cost ~$8,000. Even if in 10 years no advancements have been made on cost, reliability, size, wieght, etc. A replacement battery will likely be the sound economically.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 1:41:29 PM , Rating: 2
People keep talking about how the Prius needs a battery replacement at 150k miles yet never look to see how many actually have replaced theirs. Looking at warranty info is perfectly acceptable in some cases, but this isn't one of them. I'd bet my life that 95%, if not more than that, of all Prius batteries still don't need to be replaced yet.

That being said, can't say the Volt will need to be replaced at 150k miles either. Only time will tell.


RE: well
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 2:58:13 PM , Rating: 2
Google "Prius Taxi" - some of these things are still going strong after a half million miles.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:33:39 PM , Rating: 2
I don't need to as I'm usually the one pointing things like that out to others. Others don't like to do research most of the time so they are drastically uninformed about certain things.


RE: well
By mindless1 on 7/2/2009 4:37:12 AM , Rating: 2
Incorrect. You are optimistically fantasizing about nonsense.

The battery technology is well known as for the number of cycles and degradation curve. Whether it is in a car or not is largely irrelevant, what is relevant is whether the battery continues to hold enough capacity to get people to where they need to go without having to switch to the ICE for charging.

You have not done the research on this type of battery, you are drastically uninformed. Try thinking about it as a science instead of as political nonsense.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 7/3/2009 1:36:14 AM , Rating: 2
I can see you have no idea what you are talking about.

We are talking about the Prius, not the Volt. The Prius will ALWAYS switch to the ICE. I'm sure an older and more used battery will lower mileage, but that's it. I can't say by how much either since that part by itself it difficult to test, at least at home anyway. Haven't seen any professional test like that on a Prius, or similar car, yet.

I suggest you go take a look around some Hybrid websites before you continue to post your drivel.


RE: well
By Solandri on 6/30/2009 8:51:22 PM , Rating: 2
Pure speculation, but I suspect the type of cycling has a lot to do with the life of the battery. Deep cycling a battery (which a plug-in-hybrid would tend to do) generally puts more wear on it than infrequent and low-current charging and discharging (which a gas-hybrid taxi would tend to do). In other words, don't expect the lifespan of gas-hybrid taxi batteries to provide an accurate estimate of plug-in-hybrid battery lifespan.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 1:18:15 AM , Rating: 2
While true, we weren't talking about plug-ins, now were we?


RE: well
By Solandri on 7/1/2009 3:38:37 AM , Rating: 2
I thought we were. The estimated lifespan of the battery on the GM Volt (a plug-in hybrid) was questioned. The Prius (not a plug-in hybrid) battery lifespan in practice was brought up for comparison. I'm pointing out that the Prius battery's lifespan may not be relevant to the Volt's battery lifespan, and thus the comparison may not be applicable.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 6:47:11 AM , Rating: 2
The OP might have, but I didn't. I just talked about the Prius battery.


RE: well
By mindless1 on 7/2/2009 4:45:35 AM , Rating: 2
... but you ignored that the battery degrades long term then the ICE has to cycle on more often. That the car still runs is not evidence the operational paramaters have remained the same, the battery will still need changed for the car to be functional as specified.

Further, there are additional risks of using a battery long term. Automobiles are exposed to extremes in temperature, moisture, and after aged a bit are not necessarily air or water tight anymore. These problems may not be so obvious with vehicles which travel more than an average # of miles a year but the cars have to suit all common consumer usage patterns and all weather conditions within the markets they are sold in.

The whole point is to reduce use of oil, since it certainly doesn't save money compared to other alternatives. If you let the battery get too low in capacity it may be a bit like riding a skateboard with one lop-sided wheel. You can still get where you're going but you waste more energy getting there.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 7/3/2009 1:40:50 AM , Rating: 2
You need to read my other reply to you. You have clearly not done ANY research into the Prius at all, else you'd know that even on the first gen models most batteries still have yet to need a change.

It's not that what you say isn't true, but it's very difficult to say how much JUST the degraded battery is making on mileage. I wouldn't mind seeing any data if you happen to know where some is though.


RE: well
By Keeir on 7/1/2009 3:34:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
In other words, don't expect the lifespan of gas-hybrid taxi batteries to provide an accurate estimate of plug-in-hybrid battery lifespan.


Furthermore, all current NA hybrids use a different chemisty entirely than most Plug-In electric autos.

However, Lithium Ion (Chevy Volt) has been used extensively in conversion projects and model RC. Using Thundersky's numbers for its Li-ion cells (which are suitable for auto use), provided cells are kept above 5% and at standard conditions for temperature/pressure/etc, they should get 2,000 cycles before degrading past 80% of capacity. It is currently not known how much the temperature variation and charging profile of the Volt will affect Battery life. (Volt profile will be ~80% full to ~30% "empty" and swing around 5% up and down during "extended range mode" according to the latest info on gm-volt.com).

I think its also fair to note for both current Hybrids and Plug-In type hybrids, a "dead" battery will only really occur due to manufacturing error. Likely outcome of actual usuage are a gradual reduction of battery life until its no longer "usable" because it provided only minimal boost or minimal AER. Tesla, which uses almost its entire battery and fairly un-sophisticated cells, only expects 70% life after 5 years and 50,000 miles. I hope the Volts Li cells are better than the figures Tesla expects from its Lithium Cobalt type.


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 1:02:52 PM , Rating: 2
The manufacturers are taking all this into account. They are programing the cars charging systems to get maximum battery life.


RE: well
By Alexvrb on 7/1/2009 9:46:19 PM , Rating: 2
As Keeir points out below, the Volt's battery is neither completely charged nor completely discharged, as BOTH of these would reduce the life of the battery. The battery is considered "depleted" at roughly 30% capacity, and "fully charged" at roughly 80%. So there will be no deep cycling, ever, no matter how you drive it.

Also the article has a minor mistake:
"The vehicle's battery pack can be recharged through a household outlet or trickle charged via the onboard "range extender" gasoline engine."

The Volt does not trickle charge the battery once it is "depleted". That would be stupid, as you'd be burning extra fuel to generate extra electricity to trickle charge the battery. What the Volt actually does is maintain a partial charge (approx 30%) using the engine-generator and regenerative braking. Keeir also pointed this out.

So, if the battery is at 30% when you pull up to your house, you can charge the "full" 8kWh. If it trickle charges while you drive, and you're at 50%, you have used additional gasoline to accomplish some of that charging. That would ruin the point of an E-REV, and that's why the Volt does not do this.


RE: well
By Starcub on 7/2/2009 8:46:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Volt does not trickle charge the battery once it is "depleted". That would be stupid, as you'd be burning extra fuel to generate extra electricity to trickle charge the battery. What the Volt actually does is maintain a partial charge (approx 30%) using the engine-generator and regenerative braking.

The point of using the engine to charge the battery is to maintain the minimum charge level in order to maximize battery life, not to maximize efficiency. This isn't new in the Volt, the Prius does the same thing. Thus, I interpreted "depleted" to mean that the engine hits the 30% efficiency mark. If I'm not mistaken the "engine generator" you mention uses gas to charge the battery, though not that much -- probably in a special low HP, high rpm firing mode while idling, which might put just a little more gas than normal. The engine force charging mechanism would disable itself when the battery charge level increased over 30% to maximize efficiency.


RE: well
By Alexvrb on 7/3/2009 8:09:13 PM , Rating: 2
I just said that it maintains 30% - I'm not saying it doesn't do any charging, I'm saying it charges and then stops charging. As opposed to charging it back up while you drive. If you read the DT article, you'd get the impression that once it hits "depleted" (which again I already said is rougly 30%) that it charges up the battery. It does not. The engine kicks on and off as needed for to maintain roughly 30% +/- 5%. Yes, the generator burns gas, as it periodically kicks on and off as needed. But it only charges the battery just enough to keep it around that area, it does not bring the battery back to "full" 80%.

Also "special low HP, high RPM firing mode by idling" makes no sense. In computer terms idling = no load, high rpm = heavy load. Besides, it generates more horsepower than you would think, as it has to power a fairly beefy generator. It's also not coupled to the wheels directly or through a traditional drivetrain. So they are free to maximize efficiency by running at fixed RPM range(s) for which it has been optimized. Unlike parallel hybrids which have to run the full range of RPMs.

To recap, saying that it trickle (slow, low amperage) charges the battery implies that the engine stays running once the battery is depleted, and that it slowly charges the battery back to full while you drive. I pointed out that this is NOT what it does, and that doing so would be stupid, because it would burn extra gasoline. I'm not saying it burns NONE, but charging up the battery full as you drive would burn MORE, and this ruins the point of charging it from ~30% to 80% when you get home, using the grid. Few people actually understand how the Volt operates....


RE: well
By Starcub on 7/16/2009 9:09:13 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't arguing with you, I was just pointing out that the purpose of the force charging was to extend the life of the battery by keeping the charge within a fixed range. It could be that he meant "range extender" referring not the range of the vehicle, but rather the life of the battery.

Both the brake and gas generated form of charging would use the same generator. When I said "low HP, high RPM", I meant that engaging the generator probably engages a motor driven by the main drive shaft which rotates through a gearing system at a significantly higher RPM than the drive shaft rotates at given that it is RPM that generates the charge in an electric motor and not force of rotation.


RE: well
By Starcub on 7/17/2009 4:39:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's also not coupled to the wheels directly or through a traditional drivetrain. So they are free to maximize efficiency by running at fixed RPM range(s) for which it has been optimized. Unlike parallel hybrids which have to run the full range of RPMs.

I just realized that the Volt isn't any kind of hybrid drive. It uses it's gas engine solely for charging the battery -- so it's a range extending motor in every sense of the word, but an ineffecient one since there are multiple energy conversions taking place before you get the power to the wheels. I wonder why they didn't just ditch the gas engine and put more batteries in.

Even though there is no drive shaft for the gas engine, there has to be some connection of the electric generator to the drive system in order for there to be regenerative breaking, so I'm guessing there is some gearing system in place to convert the horsepower into RPM.


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/2/2009 12:28:45 AM , Rating: 2
ixquick "prius taxi"


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 12:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
No transmission, the engine running less frequent and always running at optimal level, regenerative brakes, if you ask me these things should be super reliable. That being said when its time to replace the batteries it really going to hurt the wallet.


RE: well
By namechamps on 6/30/2009 10:57:20 AM , Rating: 2
Gasoline emits more c02 per mile than electricity generated by any method (including coal).

So if hypothetically crap&tax raises electricity rates 20% expect it to raise gas rates 30%.

Still a net win for electricity.

Based on the size of the battery pack and estimate range the Volt gets about 3 mile per KWH. That works out to around $0.04 per mile.

The Prius = 50mpg. So $4.00/gallon gas = $0.08 per mile.
Typical "25mpg car" = 25mpg So $4.00/gallon gas = $0.16 per mile.

Gas would have to be less than $2.00 per gallon for a Prius to be "cheaper per mile than an EV".

Gas would have to be less than $1.00 per gallon for a typical 25mpg car to be cheaper per mile than an EV.

C&T is likely to make that difference even larger.


RE: well
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:30:19 PM , Rating: 2
CO2 isn't the only greenhouse gas my good man. Not that I know how coal plants and such compare to cars on other gases. I'm just saying you can't look at just ONE piece of the pie.


RE: well
By Ratinator on 6/30/2009 11:30:52 AM , Rating: 4
How much power do you use? I would happily double my electric bill right now in place of what I spend on Gas.


RE: well
By adiposity on 6/30/2009 12:48:15 PM , Rating: 2
Not that I agree with him, but he was saying your electric bill will double under cap-and-trade, BEFORE you start plugging in an electric vehicle. Once you start charging a car on your electric bill, the consumption could easily quadruple or even more. So no, he's not saying that for 2 times your current bill you can pay for all your mileage. That would be an extremely conservative estimate.

My electric bill is about $60 right now. My gas bill for the month approaches $200. So there's one piece of data to play around with.

-Dan


RE: well
By Spuke on 6/30/2009 12:57:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How much power do you use? I would happily double my electric bill right now in place of what I spend on Gas.
Would mind paying my electric bill?


RE: well
By Keeir on 6/30/2009 1:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
Rather than vague statements, let me be clear

Chevy Volt Battery is 16kWh large. However, the charging and discharging system do not use this entire capacity to prolong life. The current design is to use ~8.8 kWh to acchieve 40 miles on 2008 EPA city. Early projects for EPA Highway are more in the 35-40 miles range. Presuming you use the entire usuable battery each time you drive, recharge should be around 8.8 kWH.

Your cost for this 8.8 kWH can be drastically different based on where you are...

My electricity rate (~$0.09/kWh) would need to multiply by 6 so they cost of the electricity was equal to the equilavent I spent on gas currently. Even if I had a Prius, my electricity rate would need to triple to get equal cost.


RE: well
By Jedi2155 on 6/30/2009 11:42:25 AM , Rating: 2
My electric company (Southern California Edison) and probably many, offer a special lower rate specifically for EV vehicles during off peak charging.

So if you have a EV, you can be paying less for your electricity.


RE: well
By MrPoletski on 6/30/2009 11:48:33 AM , Rating: 2
yet another reason for investment in fission power and more research into getting fully operational fusion power.


RE: well
By Chudilo on 6/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: well
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 12:22:46 PM , Rating: 5
I would be happy to. Hell I'll have a mini reactor in a closet if I'm allowed to. Nuclear power is safe, efficient, and cheap.

I believe GE is now manufacturing reactors that communities can purchase which are buried a few hundred feet down, require no maintenance, and provide power for 50 years.


RE: well
By adiposity on 6/30/2009 12:50:10 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have any problems with nuclear power, but I don't know about a mini reactor. What happens the day you forget to go buy coolant? :)

-Dan


RE: well
By nct on 6/30/2009 1:02:08 PM , Rating: 3
It bathes you with radiation and you become a mutant superhero (or villain, if you prefer). What's not to like about that?


RE: well
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 4:19:30 PM , Rating: 2
That sounds like a win win to me. Maybe I'll get the superpowers of the dude from Infamous.


RE: well
By Solandri on 6/30/2009 9:00:50 PM , Rating: 2
Dunno about GE. I know Toshiba has applied to have their microreactor design approved for sale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S

Do note that these were designed for things like remote African villages in mind. If your town already has significant power infrastructure in place, it's cheaper to build one big power plant (coal, nuclear, hydro, geothermal, whatever).


RE: well
By FITCamaro on 7/1/2009 9:15:57 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah that's what I was referring to. Thought it was GE. Point is that kind of technology is out there.


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 1:09:20 PM , Rating: 2
Africa with nuclear power, what could possibly go wrong? :)


RE: well
By callmeroy on 6/30/2009 1:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't want to only because of the eye sore factor, just like any thing --- a cell tower, a wind mill, etc....not because of a safety factor.


RE: well
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 1:32:24 PM , Rating: 2
Personally I think that coal and nuclear power plants look cool. Now a cell tower or a wind mill in my backyard, that's a different story. I'm a light sleeper so I think the constant drone of a wind power plant near me would keep me up at night.


RE: well
By SuperFly03 on 6/30/2009 7:50:59 PM , Rating: 1
I have to say that is one of the dumbest reasons to vote against something meant to help society.


RE: well
By elgueroloco on 7/1/2009 8:33:57 AM , Rating: 2
Just because something is meant to help society doesn't mean it will.

Communism was mean to help Russian, Cuban, and Chinese society. Prohibition was meant to help American society. Hitler's final solution was, ostensibly, supposed to help European society. That doesn't mean any of those things actually helped anyone.

And no, I'm not saying C&T is as bad as the holocaust or anywhere close, just illustrating the difference between stated intent and actual effect.

And I think the fact that someone thinks something won't help society is as good a reason as exists not to vote for it.


RE: well
By Solandri on 6/30/2009 9:09:54 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If you think nuclear power is so great , would you personally live next to one, or withing like 5 miles of it? I didn't think so!

The fear is completely irrational. By number of deaths per gigawatt generated, the most dangerous power plant to live nearby is a hydroelectric plant. Worldwide, dam failures have been particularly devastating. Nuclear is actually the safest power source, even including the deaths from Chernobyl.

http://gabe.web.psi.ch/pdfs/PSI_Report/ENSAD98.pdf
Figure 7.2.6, page 240


RE: well
By ianweck on 6/30/2009 9:14:30 PM , Rating: 1
I'd live next to one. Hell I used to sleep thirty feet from one, no big deal...


RE: well
By Ammohunt on 6/30/2009 2:00:40 PM , Rating: 2
this winter i plan on heating my home with.....WOOD if electricity gets out of hand i will go amish for lighting Oil lamps(seriously). Hell this is what Obama wants anyway to turn America into a third world country.


RE: well
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 12:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
My electricity comes from natural gas, so the price potentially can go down. Coal power companies will have to buy CO2 credits from clean plants like natural gas, if it works how I think it does. Although there is a lot of Obama bashing over this it does make clean electricity profitable, and I think natural gas is already pretty cheap.


Big claim
By SublimeSimplicity on 6/30/2009 10:11:33 AM , Rating: 5
Sportier than a 98hp car? Those are some mighty big claims... if they were unveiling the car during the 1900 World's Fair in Paris.




RE: Big claim
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 10:26:49 AM , Rating: 1
There's more to life than horsepower.


RE: Big claim
By austinag on 6/30/2009 10:46:19 AM , Rating: 4
Why would you say such a mean hatefully thing about sweet innocent horsepower?


RE: Big claim
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 11:05:43 AM , Rating: 1
... because I'd much, much rather drive a nimble, well-balanced car with telepathic road manners that happens to have 125hp, than a clumsy, numb car with a bullshit suspension that happens to have 250hp.


RE: Big claim
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 11:12:55 AM , Rating: 2
Why not have both? Oh right it kills the planet...


RE: Big claim
By randomposter on 6/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Big claim
By jRaskell on 6/30/2009 11:35:15 AM , Rating: 3
Fallacy of logic. Attack the person, not the statement. Fail.


RE: Big claim
By Ranari on 6/30/2009 11:54:43 AM , Rating: 2
What are you, 16 years old and just got your first car? I don't see him insulting your preference of car now, do I? The fact is, some people like the fury and honesty of a powerful motor under the hood, like a Pontiac Trans Am, while others prefer the agility and lithe handling of something more nimble, like an S2000. Truth is, they're all fun to drive. I've driven both, and have had a lot of fun with them. Believe me, I've gone out and had my fair share of driving around in Mustangs and fast cars, video taping all the stupid shit we could think of.

Secondly, people's preference of automobile has a lot to do with their geographic location of where they live on a world map. I live in Florida, and there are huge Mustang and Corvette clubs located around my area. Gee, I wonder why? Maybe because, oh wait a minute, there aren't any mountains in Florida, perhaps? Heck, the highest point in my county is actually the county garbage dump, and I'm not about to go driving around that.

Thirdly, we're talking about hybrid vehicles here, haha. Small motors; big, heavy batteries. If it were the difference between 300hp and 340hp, I don't think many people would be sold on a "peppier" sales model. But car buffs or not, most people know what it's like driving a car where you can fit in a nap, a meal, and maybe a shave/makeup before you hit the speed limit. Try considering GM's market reach with hybrid vehicles.

So please, take your "brawn vs agility" car argument elsewhere.


RE: Big claim
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 1:17:11 PM , Rating: 2
I prefer neither, I have a V6 prerunner Toyota Tacoma. Its not fast, doesn't handle very well compared to cars and I love it.

P.S. I plan on running it until the wheels fall of(probably around 2017), so I wont be buying the first generation of any of this electric stuff. I will be buying the second generation volt after all the bugs have been worked out. But I will be thanking all of you first generation buyers for working out all the headaches for me.


RE: Big claim
By Spuke on 7/1/2009 4:22:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
so I wont be buying the first generation of any of this electric stuff.
I don't plan on buying one at all. I think there will be enough used cars on the market for me to continue buying what I really want until I die. Of course, I could always change my mind.


RE: Big claim
By jRaskell on 6/30/2009 11:34:01 AM , Rating: 2
And I'd rather drive a nimble, well-balance car with telepathic road manners that happens to have 250hp (or hell, 500hp).

Your inference that you can't have both is just plain false.


RE: Big claim
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 11:38:56 AM , Rating: 2
Sure, you can have anything at a price. But in this world of free market economics, it's all about tradeoffs. Do I treat myself to a 500hp track car that I use maybe fifteen times a year, or do I sock some money away for my kid's college education?

Easy choice on that one. Real easy.


RE: Big claim
By ClownPuncher on 6/30/2009 11:45:18 AM , Rating: 3
It is easy, you can have more kids whenever you want, it's not every day you can afford a nice car. :)


RE: Big claim
By jRaskell on 6/30/2009 11:53:58 AM , Rating: 2
Still thinking a little too binary. There are always other options, but I get the distinct impression you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.


RE: Big claim
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 11:59:58 AM , Rating: 3
What else is the internet for?


RE: Big claim
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:39:44 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps, but I don't think anyone is going to argue that if given the option to have it all they'd rather have only part of it. Problem is we NEVER get to have it all. And I include price when I say all.


RE: Big claim
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 12:24:04 PM , Rating: 2
So what if you don't have kids?


RE: Big claim
By Spuke on 6/30/2009 12:52:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And I'd rather drive a nimble, well-balance car
I drive one of those and it has 260hp to boot. Only cost me $30k. You can get used one's in the low 20's now. An even better bargain.


RE: Big claim
By BailoutBenny on 7/1/2009 1:40:28 AM , Rating: 2
I'd like to know what you are driving.


RE: Big claim
By Spuke on 7/1/2009 4:24:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'd like to know what you are driving.
Pontiac Solstice GXP.


RE: Big claim
By Andrwken on 7/2/2009 11:20:55 PM , Rating: 2
So you don't want a mustang?


RE: Big claim
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 6/30/2009 11:16:24 AM , Rating: 3
True, but the headline did claim it was "Sportier." (In quotes) Of course, GM could fool its patrons with such a claim. "Sporty," based on what they can afford. The Corvette has been the only truly sporty car GM has ever made. All the others are wobbly death traps in sport trappings.

So when compared with other cars that are CLEARLY not sport oriented, sportier is easy to achieve. You can do that with styling alone for GM fans, but I see they didn't even do that here. And if Volt owners drive the thing as if it were sporty, then they will end up with much lower mileage. Jeremy Clarkson got 17mpg out of a Prius driving it all sporty like.


RE: Big claim
By Rob Pintwala on 6/30/2009 12:50:40 PM , Rating: 2
What in God's name are you talking about?

The CTS-V, and frankly, any Pontiac G8 are plenty sporty. I've driven in both, and they are both phenomenal machines. It's really quite sad that the G8 was killed. It was one of (if not, the best) Pontiac branded car, ever - at least, in GT/GXP trim.


RE: Big claim
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 6/30/09, Rating: -1
RE: Big claim
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 3:51:23 PM , Rating: 2
Your ignorance makes even the Dark Side look like a promising pursuit.

If by loud you're referring to the exhaust its SUPPOSED to be loud. You have absolutely no clue what the f*ck you're talking about.


RE: Big claim
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:43:23 PM , Rating: 2
I fail to see the difference. Sound doesn't magically change just because something else makes it. Loud is loud, no matter what makes it. He obviously prefers a quite car, and frankly so do I. Just because you want to label it a plus doesn't make it a plus.


RE: Big claim
By Keeir on 6/30/2009 5:31:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I fail to see the difference. Sound doesn't magically change just because something else makes it. Loud is loud, no matter what makes it. He obviously prefers a quite car, and frankly so do I. Just because you want to label it a plus doesn't make it a plus.


Reading the whole thread can make a difference. While your point is valid if discussing cars as a group, when discussing "performance" based cars, a rather large part of the market segment enjoys a certain amount of exhaust noice. Disqualify a "performance" car because it makes large exhaust noise is backwards as disqualify the Prius as an economical car because when you drive like a crazy person you can reduce its MPG.


RE: Big claim
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 1:27:34 AM , Rating: 1
I do read the whole thread, but you don't. I said the poster obviously doesn't like noise, and neither do I. As such if a car is loud, regardless of what the noise is or where it's coming from, except for maybe the speaker playing music, that it's not a plus.

Perhaps if you'd stop insulting me and actually argued my points you'd be better off. Unfortunately for you, you can't really argue opinions.

So sit down and STFU.


RE: Big claim
By Spuke on 7/1/2009 4:29:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Just because you want to label it a plus doesn't make it a plus.
And just because you say something is so doesn't make it so. I can understand that you and other posters like quiet cars. I have no problems with that as that's your business but others DO indeed see a loud car as being a plus. If those people enjoy that sound, regardless of where it's coming from, then it's a plus for them. It's just loud to you so it's NOT a plus FOR YOU.


RE: Big claim
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 8:13:42 PM , Rating: 2
And that is all I was trying to say in the first place. Well said.


RE: Big claim
By Keeir on 6/30/2009 2:11:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So when compared with other cars that are CLEARLY not sport oriented, sportier is easy to achieve. You can do that with styling alone for GM fans, but I see they didn't even do that here. And if Volt owners drive the thing as if it were sporty, then they will end up with much lower mileage. Jeremy Clarkson got 17mpg out of a Prius driving it all sporty like


Wow... lots of anger here. Lets start nice and easy. The Volt (since release of production intent version) would fit into the category of Ulta-MPG/practical cars. As such, why is it a surprize to compare the car to its actual compeditors? Isn't it a reasonable point to say you car is sportier with the same size/mpg/etc? Now, question will be whether its sportier than a Jetta TDI.

Of course when driven "sporty" the Volt will get less MPG. Because -ALL- cars get worse MPG when driven "sporty". The Volt though should suffer significantly less hit than the Prius. The Volt will be using an electric motor which has a Wide band of High Efficiency, which means the gasoline motor should be insolated from the extreme ends where efficieny really tailors off.

quote:
Jeremy Clarkson got 17mpg out of a Prius driving it all sporty like.


This really means nothing. What did an similar car get driven the same way? Did Clarkson push the car to its limit alot? (Unreasonable RPMs and speeds). I mean, I am all for sporty, but who really gets to go 100 mph, run through turns at 60 mph+, or go 20-60-20-60-20-60 all the time?


RE: Big claim
By Spuke on 6/30/2009 3:10:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I mean, I am all for sporty, but who really gets to go 100 mph, run through turns at 60 mph+, or go 20-60-20-60-20-60 all the time?
I did when I lived in VA. Where I live now, there aren't any fun roads on my commute. So only occasionally do I get to have fun like that. On Sunday, I took a drive down Sunset Blvd (LA) followed by a run up (and down) Sepulveda Blvd. God I wish I could afford Malibu.


RE: Big claim
By echtogammut on 7/1/2009 12:38:29 PM , Rating: 2
Top Gear compared the Prius to a BMW M3 which got 19.4 being driven at the same performance level.

Speaking of the Prius, I just drove one in SF the other day and have to say the car handles so bad it is almost scary. It seemed to get pretty good gas mileage when was I was out of the city, but I wouldn't want to drive one on a daily basis. On the hand, I drove an EV1 for a couple of weeks while a friend was out of the country and that car was awesome. Handling wise, I would say a TDI wins across the board, but the EV1 definitely won the "feels like your driving a star fighter at night" contest. Plus the amount of torque off the line, felt comparable to my C6.

I really want to see money spent on developing better diesel engines. Electrical cars are cool and may be the wave of the future, but I have yet to see them offer a significant advantage over a diesel engine.


RE: Big claim
By mezman on 6/30/2009 3:11:14 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
There's more to life than horsepower.


Perhaps. There's also women. But women and horsepower are strongly correlated.


RE: Big claim
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:45:08 PM , Rating: 2
I can't help but laugh at this comment.


RE: Big claim
By PlasmaBomb on 6/30/2009 11:14:26 AM , Rating: 2
Last time I checked 150 hp (Volt) > 111 hp (Insight - 98 hp gas + 13 hp electric motor assist). Plus the Volts hp is wholly derived from its electric motor so there should be plenty of torque to make the car feel 'sportier' than its hp rating suggests.


38 mpg?
By transamdude95 on 6/30/2009 10:37:38 AM , Rating: 2
I get 36-38mpg average from my '90 Honda Civic with 182k miles on the ticker. And I've gotten 48mpg from a tank before. They can do better than this.




RE: 38 mpg?
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 11:09:14 AM , Rating: 3
Weight is the killer. How much did your '90 Civic weigh? How much does a modern car weigh with all the airbags, safety accessories, and convenience accessories that have come to be thought of as "normal" in an entry-level vehicle?

I agree though, carmakers should be doing much, much better than they are.


RE: 38 mpg?
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 11:14:58 AM , Rating: 1
And who mandated that cars have all those safety features that weigh so much? That government you seem to adore.


RE: 38 mpg?
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 11:25:45 AM , Rating: 2
Ummm ... where did I mention anything about my like or dislike of government?

You're chasing phantoms dude.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Hyperion1400 on 6/30/2009 11:27:31 AM , Rating: 3
Sorry brosef, airbags don't add 650 lbs. to the curb weight of a car. The addition of crumple zones actually reduces the overall weight of the car be weakening the structure at certain points.

Nope, almost all the extra weight comes from your beloved "free market" ;)


RE: 38 mpg?
By Spuke on 6/30/2009 1:17:47 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Sorry brosef, airbags don't add 650 lbs. to the curb weight of a car.
The combination of these features has indeed added all of this extra weight. Hell, a sunroof adds nearly 50 lbs to a car. A typical leather seat (just one) adds 30-40 lbs. These nice sounding stereos with navigation adds another 30 lbs. The big 17 to 20 inch wheels add 25-30 lbs on each corner of the car. The chassis stiffening adds a LOT of weight (varies but think 200, 300 lbs plus). The near sound proof, safety glass adds a 100+ lbs. The extra sound deadening adds 20 lbs. Add ALL of that adds up. The cars we drive today are nothing like the posters 1990 Civic which had none of that stuff (ok, safety glass).

None of this is top secret information. If you've read a car magazine for the last 10 years, you know exactly what the differences are.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:50:31 PM , Rating: 2
You don't need to read a car magazine to realize this. You just need a brain and some logic to go with it.

I would be quite curious to know how much my car would weight without all these added safety features and what my mileage would be. Of course it matters little since that'd never happen.


RE: 38 mpg?
By SuperFly03 on 6/30/2009 7:55:48 PM , Rating: 2
That's why they call it modding ;)


RE: 38 mpg?
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 2:55:06 PM , Rating: 2
If you don't care about safety and want high mileage buy a motorcycle. 10 times more fun than any car you can buy, cheaper MSRP, and great mileage. The only disadvantage is death and disfigurement, oh and weather of coarse.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 3:18:50 PM , Rating: 2
That's about the same reason I'll never look at a convertible, weather.

Motorcycles just aren't my thing. Might look into a scooter sort of bike though. Tons of those in Taiwan and they can be just as fun to drive, provided you don't get some family models. One my GFs brother has is basically a motorcycle, but with a far less powerful engine. He actually has the biggest engine without moving up to a motorcycle.

Course scooters mean you can't go on the highway in Taiwan, not that you'd want to. Just like a motorcycle it's a death trap waiting to happen.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Spuke on 7/1/2009 4:34:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's about the same reason I'll never look at a convertible, weather.
They do have tops you can put up, you know.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 8:10:38 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, but that's highly inconvenient to me.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 1:25:43 PM , Rating: 2
Try picking up an airbag unit, I used to change them in Nissans frequently and I have to tell you they are probably less then 5 lbs each.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Hyperion1400 on 7/6/2009 7:02:07 PM , Rating: 2
All it is, is some fabric, a sensor and a gas canister and nozzle.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Keeir on 6/30/2009 2:36:10 PM , Rating: 3
Your 90 Honda Civic (Chevy Volt)

Dimensions
WheelBase 98.4 in (105.7)
Length 166.6 in (177)
Width 65.9 in (70.8)
Hieght 53.5 in (56.3)

Curb Wieght 2,300 lbs (3,500 lbs)

Chevy Volt has to push 14% more cross section and 52% more wieght. It will do so with 30% greater MPG efficiency. Your "one time I got 48 mpg while traveling at 60 mph downhill on the expressway" is not a good comparison point.

The Chevy Volt will have
#1 More Interior Space andMore Trunk Volume (Unless you have the wagon or the hatch?)
#2 Faster 0-60 times (I betting you have 1.5 L I4)
#3 Emits singificantly less pollution per gallon burned
#4 Heated Seats, GPS, etc etc. A world of difference in passenger comfort
#5 Be a heck of a lot safer on US roadways. More (better) airbags, door stiffening, much better scores on every single safety standard.

Overall, the Chevy Volt is faster, safer, bigger, less polluting, more comfortable, AND more efficient than you '90 Civic. True, its alot more epensive, but since your '90 Civic would not be legal for (new) sale in the US, at some levels this is a moot point.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 6/30/2009 4:51:59 PM , Rating: 3
And probably cost 3x as much as his Civic, but I suppose you left that one out for a reason.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Keeir on 6/30/2009 5:11:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And probably cost 3x as much as his Civic, but I suppose you left that one out for a reason.


Maybe you should read the whole post eh?

I am really tired of the notion that "My old tin can gets better milage than todays car, it must be engineer/design/managements fault!" In truth, today's cars are significantly safer, have significantly more "comfort" features, have significantly more usuability, reduce pollute per mile to fractions of the old cars, all at prices that have not significantly risen.

Since you brought up the notion of price, a Civic EX sedan (closest possible to the trim the Volt is expected at 40,000) was originally priced at 11,000 plus dollars. Thats roughly 21,000+ in today's dollar figures. So its more like 2x the price... For a Large, More Powerful, Safer, More Efficient, More Featured Car.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 1:21:51 AM , Rating: 1
Wow, 2 posts where you insult me saying I don't read. I actually have read EVERY WORD in EVERY COMMENT.

I'm sorry you got mad at me pointing out the fact that the Volt costs MUCH more than the Civic. Heaven forbid you put all the facts in there.

And I have yet to say anything about older cars getting better mileage than what we have today, so how about you go and read all my posts you little bitch.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Keeir on 7/1/2009 3:08:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Wow, 2 posts where you insult me saying I don't read. I actually have read EVERY WORD in EVERY COMMENT.


How about you prove it by showing reading comprehension. Multiple posts within this article you have deliberately seemily overlooked statements made within the post to which you are replying or directly preceding ones. For example, this one with you replied to...

Original Post

"...True, its [The Volt] alot more epensive, but since your '90 Civic would not be legal for (new) sale in the US, at some levels this is a moot point."

Your reply

"And probably cost 3x as much as his Civic, but I suppose you left that one out for a reason."

::Blink:: I did leave cost out for a reason, its not really applicable since a 1990 Honda Civic is not legal for sale, although I point out The Volt is a lot more expensive.

So you see, I a quite confused how if you read every single word you could miss that statement. I mean, its the very last statement in the post. Usually a space reserved for the most important point in a arguement.

Now if you really could read you would see that no where did I accuss you or quote you on your personal feelings regarding mileage. I seperated the two ideas (one about people discounting new mileage results and one about reading skills) with a blank line which typically indicates the start of a new paragraph. I then further go one to clearly show pricing figures, something you were apparently too lazy to accomplish, which would have added actual value to your comment rather than your pointless 'its realy expensive' (paraphrase)

quote:
And I have yet to say anything about older cars getting better mileage than what we have today, so how about you go and read all my posts you little [Profanity removed].


I'd rather not, judging by your current comments in this article, you rarely add anything of value using source data or logical thought.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 6:53:18 AM , Rating: 2
It's almost not even worth replying to your post. Only thing I'm really gonna say is that the price in this case does make a difference. You're basically comparing an average joe's car to a luxury car.

And I may not back up things I say about the Prius with links because I get tired of posting the same links in every car article in which the Prius comes up. If you don't want to believe what I say that's fine, but you could also do some research into what I say before totally discrediting it.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Keeir on 7/1/2009 11:51:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Only thing I'm really gonna say is that the price in this case does make a difference.


And where did I say it did not? I never did, I simply said comparing the price of a non-legal car to a legal car is a bad comparison.

quote:
You're basically comparing an average joe's car to a luxury car.


Not really. The Aim of the Volt project is to develop a "Prius-like" car. I think GM has been very clear about that from Lutz interview "Cd will be better than the Prius" to the target of 50 mpg in extended range mode. The Prius is an "average joe's car" right? Yes, becausethe Volt will be very expensive at the begining, GM plans to throw in all the extras. However, it the Volt was to be a true luxury car, wouldn't it make more sense it be a Caddy? I

Furthermore, the 10 year costs of actually owning the Volt will be less than a V6 Accord (with no government subsidy taken into account) and less than a I4 Accord when the government subsidy is taken into account. Those that will use 30-40 miles of the Chevy Volt electric range each day will see dramatically lower operating costs. This is similar to how Elon Musk of Tesla believes his 50,000 + Model S is similar to a "35,000 luxury sedan". Personally I would call the Accords "average joe's cars" as well. I could give a much longer list of cars, but when it gets right down to it, how you use a car determines your end cost of ownership. The Volt is ideally for people who drive 30-50 miles a day, 250 days a year.

quote:
And I may not back up things I say about the Prius with links because I get tired of posting the same links in every car article in which the Prius comes up. If you don't want to believe what I say that's fine, but you could also do some research into what I say before totally discrediting it.


And where did I say your knowledge about the Prius was not infinate? I will say that if your really not going to say anything factual, funny, or on topic, I am confused about why you say anything at all.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 3:43:50 PM , Rating: 2
Because opinions matter.

While never specifically saying price doesn't matter, it was certainly downplayed. You specialize in marketing, cause you'd be good at it.

Buying a Prius new is right on the edge of being an average joe's car. If I recall, the MSRP of the 2010 Prius is over $23k, and that's before mark-ups. Around the $20k price and lower are average joe cars. And it doesn't even matter if GM made the Volt to be a Prius-like car. Sure, it succeeds in the fact that it gets great mileage, but the price puts it out of reach for most people, much like the Tesla.

And you keep comparing apples to oranges. You compare a mostly EV car with a gas vehicle. You'd be far better off comparing the Volt to any hybrid car, since they'll have most of the same parts and problems. A Prius has a pretty low cost of ownership as long as you don't drive it like a Corvette. You should go check out the dozens of people on PriusChat who do 10k mile oil changes. Many of them send in for UOAs and find that they could actually have even longer oil change intervals. And while many of the people on there do get the regular maintenance, like 60k miles, they find after doing them that it's not really needed at the time.

If the Volt is mostly driven in EV mode, ie less than about 40 miles each trip, then I'm sure it probably will cost less in the long run. Assuming things stay the same of course. If battery prices or electricity costs go up then it may not work out. And if you drive out of EV mode most of the time, depending on distance of course, then it couldn't possibly ever work out.

So as you say, the Volt is ideal for people who won't leave EV mode on their daily commute. Paying that much money up front will be difficult for most people, hence why I call it a luxury car, even if it turns out to be cheaper in the long run. It matters not that they aren't trying to market it as one. And why should they, the masses aren't going to be buying too many luxury cars, especially at this point in time.

As far as insulting my knowledge, you did that in the last sentence of your post. Saying I state nothing factual. Ohh, and to respond to your last reply, you did insinuate that I was one of those people who say "My old tin can gets better milage than todays car, it must be engineer/design/managements fault!" as quoted right from your post. I call that an insult, as would most people, when I never say things like that.

Just because I've actually read about both cars and use real life facts instead of just what I read in articles doesn't mean it's not factual. I'd take real life data over EPA or company data any day.

And for the record I suppose I should say that when we get some real-world data on the Volt that things may change drastically. I personally don't hold much confidence in GM making a lasting car, but we'll see how this new design fairs.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Keeir on 7/1/2009 6:21:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Buying a Prius new is right on the edge of being an average joe's car. If I recall, the MSRP of the 2010 Prius is over $23k, and that's before mark-ups. Around the $20k price and lower are average joe cars. And it doesn't even matter if GM made the Volt to be a Prius-like car. Sure, it succeeds in the fact that it gets great mileage, but the price puts it out of reach for most people, much like the Tesla.


Why is that the edge of average joe car? Because its your opinion? Based on what?

"A new car is second only to a home as the most expensive purchase many consumers make. According to the National Automobile Dealers Association, the average price of a new car sold in the United States is $28,400. That’s why it’s important to know how to make a smart deal."

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut...

There is a difference between Median and Mean, but given the above Mean, clearly the "Average" person in the United States has above 25,000 to spend on a new car.

quote:
As far as insulting my knowledge, you did that in the last sentence of your post. Saying I state nothing factual.


You don't. You mostly say opinions. Often they are reasonable opinions, but you never provide facts to back them up. For example, Opinion - Less than $20,000 is average joe's car. Fact- X number of people or Y percentage pay less than 20,000 for thier automobile. Facts are observable and verifiable.

quote:
Just because I've actually read about both cars and use real life facts instead of just what I read in articles doesn't mean it's not factual. I'd take real life data over EPA or company data any day.


Real Life Facts, otherwise known an anecdotal evidence? I'd take independately verified statistical evidence. Anecdotal evidence is not wrong, but since there is no way to prove its right or wrong, I wouldn't really call it "factual", though since it was observed by you, it would count as a fact to you I suppose, but its has not been observed by me and is not verifiable by me. Which leads nicely into this statement

quote:
Paying that much money up front will be difficult for most people, hence why I call it a luxury car, even if it turns out to be cheaper in the long run. It matters not that they aren't trying to market it as one.


So the Volt's a Luxury car, becuase you have decided 40,000 upfront says its a luxury car? Maybe you meant that the Volt as a car is a luxury. I guess maybe to most of the world a car better than the Tata Nano is a luxury car. I would image that we should stick with the basics of the marketplace which the car is sold in making that description.

quote:
You should go check out the dozens of people on PriusChat who do 10k mile oil changes


What does this have to do with anything?

quote:
My old tin can gets better milage than todays car, it must be engineer/design/managements fault!" as quoted right from your post.


See, thats what the OP poster of this thread was essentially saying. Its seems logical to me this is to whom I was refering with this comment (and the hordes like him who insist things such a Geo Metro prove engine technology has not advanced in a decade). I can't see to recall where in a post you said "My tin car gets..." or I said "Alexstarfire blames..."

So let me show you more clearly what I am talking about.

Opinion supported with Fact:

The Volt is a car out of most people's reach. The average income in the United States is less than 50,000 dollars (pre-tax). Clearly, most people can not afford to spend (nearly) a whole year's pay on Transportation.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/02/10/opini...

Assuming the Volt costs 50,000 over 10 years, thats more than 5,000 a year for single car transportation. Out of reach of the lowest and next lowest fifth, and really only acceptable for the middle fifth who have only 1 car need. Clearly, only around 40% or less of the market can afford the Chevy Volt, which puts it more in line with a "luxury" item rather than a basic item.

--Break--


RE: 38 mpg?
By Alexstarfire on 7/1/2009 8:20:51 PM , Rating: 2
Not that I would dispute the facts you have put out there, but they simply aren't specific enough. If you include all of the US, which includes those who and rich and buy several very expensive cars, then the average price is going to be higher than if you only included the average joe.

And just because something can be repeated doesn't give it real world value either. That's why the EPA was blasted over it's old ratings and new ones were made to replace them. This certainly didn't apply to me since I got better mileage on my old car than the EPA said I would.

And I'm sorry if you were referring to the OP in that one instance. It's easy to get confused when you reply to my post and never mentioned the OP at all.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 1:30:36 PM , Rating: 2
Solution to 1990 civic not being legal for new sale in US = 2009 civic. :)


RE: 38 mpg?
By Keeir on 7/1/2009 2:02:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Solution to 1990 civic not being legal for new sale in US = 2009 civic. :)


Very true, a 2009 Civic equiped similar to the best knowledge of the 40,000 Chevy Volt is around 26,000 MSRP. (Leather, Navigation, Fog Lights, 16"+ Wheels, etc, etc). 2008 EPA testing gives 29 mpg average combined.

Over 10 years and 150,000 miles, the Civic will require approx 5,200 gallons of gas, 30 oil changes, 3 Major ICE services. Gas=4.00 per gallon average. Oil Change=40 dollars. Major ICE=300 dollars. 10 year cost=49,000 dollars. (45,000 for my neighborhood prices as of today)

Volt MSRP ~40,000 dollars.

Over 10 years and 150,000 miles (75% electric), the Volt will use 24,600 kWh and 800 gallons of gas, 10 oil changes, 1 Major ICE Service. Electricity=0.20 per kWh. 10 year cost=50,000 dollars. (46,500 for my neighborhood prices as of today)

Other factors such as re-sale, product quality/dependability are not factored in because these are total unknowns due to drastic change of Volt make-up. Your numbers will vary for the total cost I am sure.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 3:03:48 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot to add the additional finance charge for buying a car with a higher sticker price. Most people finance cars so this really shouldn't be left out. This would make the civic additionally cheaper in the long run.


RE: 38 mpg?
By Keeir on 7/1/2009 6:38:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You forgot to add the additional finance charge for buying a car with a higher sticker price. Most people finance cars so this really shouldn't be left out. This would make the civic additionally cheaper in the long run.


Totally true. Although I also left out the 7,500 government subsidy. For the sake of completelness, if an extra 14,000 is financed at 6% interest on a 5 year loan its approx 2,750 dollars a financing charges. Still clearly with the 7,500 dollar subsidy, the ten year cost of the Volt is not out of line with other "premium" compacts.

For completeness, a similar Prius (IV + Navigation) Runs 28,500 MSRP and has a ten year cost of ~43,000 using my early numbers.

A Volt with financing charges, but has the 7,500 removed from the Ten Year cost comes in more around ~45,000.


RE: 38 mpg?
By BailoutBenny on 7/1/2009 1:36:20 AM , Rating: 2
1992-1995 Honda Civic VX is a little known gem. It had a gas engine capable of 55+ mpg. It was only 92hp, no acceleration, but still. Curb weight was ~2300lbs. I had a 1992 Honda Civic CX hatchback with a transplanted SI motor and a more aggressive JDM transmission with a higher final drive ratio and STILL was able to get 36mpg out of it with normal (non sporty) driving. As far as I can tell, the abilities of gasoline engines haven't been maxed out yet.


Better idea
By Chris Peredun on 6/30/2009 10:03:48 AM , Rating: 2
Rather than buying a "sporty" Volt, how about buying an Insight, and using the twenty grand or so you have left to pick up a used Miata, MR2, or other tiny RWD roadster?

And you'd still have change for gas, insurance, and a day pass to your local racetrack.




RE: Better idea
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 6/30/2009 10:07:53 AM , Rating: 4
Or how about buying a BMW 335d (diesel) and having the best of both worlds? Great handling and great fuel economy... oh, and we can't forget the TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORQUE :)


RE: Better idea
By Hyperion1400 on 6/30/2009 11:09:57 AM , Rating: 2
Pfft, screw that! If I am going to drop 40K on a car I am picking up an Evo X! When I am taking 90 degree turns doing 40 MPH, fuel economy will be the last thing on my mind.

If I were going get a car for pure fuel econ though, I would get a Jetta TDI. Great power and handling with fuel econ and cash to spare!


RE: Better idea
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 6/30/2009 11:19:32 AM , Rating: 3
Cash to spare for repairs! Viva la Volkswagen!


RE: Better idea
By Hyperion1400 on 6/30/2009 11:30:07 AM , Rating: 1
I'll take a car made by Germans over a car made by Mexicans or Canadians any day.


RE: Better idea
By randomposter on 6/30/2009 12:19:39 PM , Rating: 2
Big difference between where the company's corporate headquarters are, and where the car is made ... especially in the case of Volkswagen.

Trust me, I know all about mexican-built VWs. I can describe the waiting room at my local VW dealer in exquisite detail.


RE: Better idea
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 6/30/2009 2:12:39 PM , Rating: 2
It took me months and months to get a single part for a Mexi-built VW. My VW parts manager told me he would NEVER buy a Volkswagen based on his experience with them. He used to laugh every time I showed up checking after the part (a door lock barrel - which break all the time) since he thought I was being naive. In the end, after I installed the part, I had to remove it because it disabled the car. I had to take it to the dealer to have it installed so they could reset the electrics to work with the new door lock. It wasn't even remote entry.


RE: Better idea
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 1:38:26 PM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty sure Volswagens are made in mexico. And from everything I have heard they have big time reliability problems which is not uncommon for German cars. The only German car I know of with decent reliability is the 3 series beemer.


RE: Better idea
By Spuke on 6/30/2009 1:06:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Or how about buying a BMW 335d (diesel) and having the best of both worlds?
No manual or dual-clutch transmission offered for the US market AND it's a sedan only. I also consider the aftermarket when buying a car too (car guy) and although the potential is there, I don't see 335d owners wanting more than some new wheels and tires.


RE: Better idea
By BailoutBenny on 7/1/2009 1:47:50 AM , Rating: 2
Traded in my 335i coupe for a Porsche Cayman S. I don't have the money to buy Italian and I refuse to buy American. I love Japanese cars for day to day reliability and practicality but I love the Porsche for fun!


RE: Better idea
By gregpet on 7/1/2009 2:07:56 PM , Rating: 2
douche


RE: Better idea
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 3:05:00 PM , Rating: 2
lol


RE: Better idea
By Spuke on 7/1/2009 5:18:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Traded in my 335i coupe for a Porsche Cayman S.
A Cayman S is tentatively my next car. I really like my present car and it's cheaper to mod plus more bang for the buck with performance mods than the Cayman. It will probably be quite a while before I let my car go. But the Cayman S is number one on my list.


RE: Better idea
By retrospooty on 6/30/2009 9:40:06 PM , Rating: 2
"Rather than buying a "sporty" Volt, how about buying an Insight, and using the twenty grand or so you have left to...."

Exactly... The article and/or the idiots quoted within it seem to imply that the 40k Volt is a direct competitor to the 20k insight. Duh...


Not working for me
By fishbits on 6/30/2009 10:34:38 AM , Rating: 5
"The Volt is expected to have a price tag of around $40,000, but a $7,500 tax credit should help soften the blow."
An anemic $40,000 subcompact? You usually need government involment to put together that much fail. Oh wait, it's baked right in. Each and every one of these needs a forced massive infusion of Other Peoples' Money to get down to the low, low $30k price range.

Funny how every time we turn around, the Gaia cult policies that were sold as saving us money require towering subsides to come close to functioning. Apparently the "green" is the cash that has to be shoveled into a hole to create viability. Heck, next thing we know "free" health care that will save us all money will somehow require tax increases. To pay for the... savings.




RE: Not working for me
By drothgery on 6/30/2009 11:11:49 AM , Rating: 3
Yup.

Still, if GM still stood for General Motors, not Government Motors, I'd probably at least take one for a test drive the next time I'm in the market for a new car (and if it's got the fit and finish of a $30,000+ car, I'd consider getting one). If I'm employed, I can afford one, and I suspect I'd need gas about once or twice a year given my driving patterns (almost all short-distance local in San Diego, maybe one or two trips up to LA a year; if I go farther than that, it's on a plane).


RE: Not working for me
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 6/30/2009 11:23:06 AM , Rating: 1
That $7,500 tax credit was worked out during the last "hands-off" administration. Of course they believed in giving their buddies the cash, so GM gets cash from you that the government gives you back. Take out the middle man, and the Gov is giving GM $7,500 per vehicle. That subsidy was worked out by the Bush administration, not Obama.


RE: Not working for me
By theapparition on 6/30/2009 12:48:11 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
That subsidy was worked out by the Bush administration, not Obama.

Correction:
That subsidy was worked out by Congress under Bush, which happens to be pretty much be the same Congress under Obama.


RE: Not working for me
By KnightBreed on 6/30/2009 12:43:10 PM , Rating: 2
Subcompact? No, the Volt is based on the delta II platform which underpines the new Cruze and happens to be bigger than the current Civic and Corolla. The Volt won't be that small.


VW TDI = 45MPG or more
By cetrespeo on 6/30/2009 11:08:16 AM , Rating: 2
I'm getting 45MPG from my 10 year old TDI with 140bhp and 310Nw/m of torque... so I guess all this is not a real improvement but a waste of our money. Sorry to read that this is going to be the future to all the invested money.




RE: VW TDI = 45MPG or more
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 11:18:08 AM , Rating: 2
All the more reason why I say we need to invest in algae based diesel and switch to that instead of this retarded electric sh*t. It allows for cars that are both fun to drive and "green" as any CO2 produced by the car was removed from today's atmosphere to create the fuel in the first place.

Just goes to show though that these idiots don't care about what's best.


RE: VW TDI = 45MPG or more
By Hyperion1400 on 6/30/2009 11:32:29 AM , Rating: 2
Pfft, you don't need algae blooms. Go raid a Mexican restaurant!


RE: VW TDI = 45MPG or more
By kerpwnt on 6/30/2009 1:17:34 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot our "addiction to foreign oil."
Instead of totally ditching the "electric sh*t," why not diesel-electric? It has been used in trains for nearly a century, right? Keep the engine running at its most efficient RPM and store extra electricity in a large capacitor or battery for stop lights and such. Unless I'm mistaken and gasoline-electric is more efficient.


RE: VW TDI = 45MPG or more
By FITCamaro on 6/30/2009 1:36:10 PM , Rating: 1
I don't mind that being an option for those that want it as well. But for guys like me who want a high performance car, a turbo-diesel is gonna be better. Sure electric motors get you off the line quick with their max torque at 0 rpm, but diesels make plenty of torque down low too and can maintain power a lot higher.

But against electric, I'm far more against the extreme terrain pollution of battery manufacturing facilities in China than I am worried about CO2 ending the world.


RE: VW TDI = 45MPG or more
By Keeir on 6/30/2009 2:48:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All the more reason why I say we need to invest in algae based diesel and switch to that instead of this retarded electric sh*t.


Although I agree to a certain point, you do realize the most efficient use will likely be to dump the Algae based Diesel right back into a CC plant (and use most of the CO2 to grow more Algae Diesel)? A high efficieny CC plant can produce ~20kWh off a single gallon of #2 fuel oil (very similar to current diesel fuel). Provided the Algae diesel is similar in natural, a gallon of Algae Diesel might be able to deliever 16-18 kWh of electricity to your house. That will get you alot further than buring that gallon in your car...


RE: VW TDI = 45MPG or more
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 1:54:53 PM , Rating: 2
"All the more reason why I say we need to invest in algae based diesel and switch to that instead of this retarded electric sh*t. It allows for cars that are both fun to drive and "green" as any CO2 produced by the car was removed from today's atmosphere to create the fuel in the first place."

Yes, if this works out to be practical it would be a very nice solution indeed. CO2 neutral, can keep driving the type of cars we are used to, provide farming type of jobs with much less land usage than corn to ethanol(which is ridiculous), it can use the current fuel distribution system, its got my vote. Who knows which is going to be the winning tech, fuel cells, batteries, bio-fuels, its all up in the air at this point. Its going to suck to be the company the invests a ton of money in the wrong technology.


By someguy743 on 6/30/2009 3:58:44 PM , Rating: 2
I think the designers and engineers at GM are working VERY hard to make the Volt as successful as possible. I think the goal is to make the best all around car that just happens to use very little gasoline per month if you simply plug it in every night. Volt owners will have the peace of mind to not have to think about GAS PRICES much at all.

I think GM probably is HELL BENT on making better cars than Toyota and Honda these days. That's what happens when your back is against the wall. You come out swinging. That's what I'm hoping anyway. I hope the Chevy Volt becomes an award winning car that wins the awards with the car magazines like Motor Trend and Car & Driver. I hope JD Power and Consumer Reports also give it rave reviews.

I hope the Volt turns out to be an all around good car ... independent of the powertrain under the hood. Cool exterior styling, nice interior materials and design. Above average handling on curves with little body roll, etc.

People are going to be surprised at the torque and acceleration with the Volt. It will get up and go pretty quick at stop lights. It won't be a Corvette, but it'll have enough power for most people. I've heard rumors that in a "sport mode" it might go 0-60 mph in 7.5 to 8 seconds. Not too bad. Hopefully, they will program the powertrain for several modes so everyone will be happy like climbing a mountain, highway cruising, crowded city driving, sport mode, etc.

Maybe they will be able to program the suspension too for a highway cruising mode, a bumpy city road mode, a tight "sport mode" for going around curves, etc.




By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2009 2:00:50 PM , Rating: 2
I saw that they are making a prototype for a Cadillac version too. Very cool


By gregpet on 7/1/2009 2:19:11 PM , Rating: 2
Yep, and GM will sell every car they can produce in the first year. The real question is how many they will sell once they get production fully ramped. If gas prices go up like everyone seems to think GM could be selling 100s of thousands of these.

And if you think $40k is such a barrier (actually $32.5k with rebate) - How much did you spend on your last cell phone? Early adopters always pay a premium. The batteries will get cheaper and so will the Volt (and follow-on models). I've got a $1000 cell phone and $5000 laptop for sale - I take Paypal!


Sounds like more proof...
By strikeback03 on 6/30/2009 2:24:10 PM , Rating: 2
that Consumer Reports shouldn't be making any statements in regards to the dynamic performance of cars. Given these results from a publication that actually knows how to review cars: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_tes...

Not saying the Volt won't be sportier than the Insight or Prius, but CR has long shown that they can't test vehicle performance.




WTF is a CR?
By kondor999 on 6/30/2009 8:37:27 PM , Rating: 2
Terrible headline. Had to read halfway through to figure out it was Consumer Reports they were talking about.




"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki