backtop


Print 20 comment(s) - last by Mint.. on Jan 15 at 9:10 PM

The Voltec platform gets some fancy clothing

The Chevrolet Volt is definitely a technology powerhouse, but it surely won't win any beauty contests. While the concept version of the Volt had a low-slung, angular vibe to it, the production model came out looking neutered and "blobbish". The $40,000 plug-in hybrid can travel roughly 35 miles on battery power before its 1.4-liter gasoline engine/generator kicks in to keep the vehicle moving.
 
General Motors is now looking to take innovative powertrain of the Volt and place it under sheet metal that will make people stand up and take notice instead of fall asleep from boredom. What once started out as the Evoq concept car has transformed into the ELR production model.


 
Like the Volt, the ELR is a four-seater -- a portion of the vehicle’s battery pack runs right down the center of the vehicle which makes a center rear seating position impossible. However, the two passengers in the back are treated to some comfy seats nonetheless.
 
Unlike the Volt, the ELR pretty much went from concept to production unscathed design wise. The chiseled straight edges and overall design aesthetic is all there. The interior looks quite luxurious and carries with it Cadillac’s CUE touch-based infotainment system.

 
We’re still waiting to get the full details on the powertrain and driving range/fuel economy, but we’ll update this story as soon as those numbers are available.

Source: GM



Comments     Threshold


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

By SAN-Man on 1/14/2013 6:34:18 PM , Rating: 0
GM is going to kill this tech by trying to recoup development costs on the front end when they should be worrying about building the market which would take care of the costs on the back end.

The Volt should be a $20,000 car plain and simple. This car, obviously nicer is fitting of a larger $40,000 price tag.




By Mint on 1/14/2013 6:44:22 PM , Rating: 4
There isn't a car on the market that will give you the features and ride quality of the stock Volt for only $20k.

You're wrong about strategy, too. Entry level luxury is where GM will earn the largest margins. It's downright stupid for GM to leave that to Tesla uncontested, particularly when they'll be the only PHEV (i.e. unlimited range on gas when needed) in that price range.


By Mint on 1/14/2013 8:22:08 PM , Rating: 2
Almost none? They have 13,000 reservations. There are plenty of $50-100k cars are on the market with lower sales volume.

GM sold 15,000 Volts in the second half of the year, and they're on an upward trajectory. Once again, there are plenty of models on the market with lower sales volume. They're building this market faster than Toyota built the hybrid market. Have some patience.


By Nfarce on 1/14/2013 9:03:28 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Have some patience.


Well John & Jane Q. Taxpayer are getting fed up with their tax dollars going to "green" technology promises that haven't panned out and/or met the sales and return on investment expectations. And don't get them going on still being on the hook for GM's stock.

The Volt has yet to even come in the ball park of meeting sales forecasts. And the taxpayers also wonder if the Volt would be selling as well is it is if there wasn't up to a $7,500 tax deduction for buying one (yet another subsidy on that car).

If the government (ie: taxpayers) weren't behind the Volt, and instead it relied on profitability as traditional vehicles have to do, it would have already been killed.


By Keeir on 1/14/2013 9:36:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Volt has yet to even come in the ball park of meeting sales forecasts.


Mostly because people don't understand what the sales projects are/were.

GM's original projection stated in 2012 they believed they could move 60,000 Volts/Ampera's worldwide if gasoline remained at 4.00 dollars a gallon or above.

In 2012, GM moved ~30,000 Volts/Ampera's worldwide with average gasoline price of 3.62 dollars a gallon.

No matter how "green" some people pretend to be, there is a noticable market reaction to Hybrid/etc technologies based on availablity of "perks" like Carpool lane access and price of gasoline. Not surprizing given that less pollution/etc is a cost not directly felt by the consumer.

Considering:
A. The economy
B. The price of gasoline
C. The price of the Volt
D. Negative Press on Volt/Hybrids/GM

I'd say GM is doing -okay- on Volt sales. Its exceeding the initial sales of the Toyota Prius, but it should given the greater level of public subsidy. (You know, that Prius that sells 150,000 units a year now? It took -4- years of US availablity AND one major redesign to match the the US sales of the Volt in 2012)


By FishTankX on 1/14/2013 10:56:36 PM , Rating: 3
I think most of the 25% americans would like to be green. And according to the 2009 figures, the top 25% contributed to ~85%+ of the income tax load.

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxe...

Thus it's fitting that the people who can afford the cars and drive them are the ones shelling out most of the taxes to subsidize them. I don't think it's a bad proposition at all, especially since the volt's battery pack probably accounts for about 1/4 of it's production cost, so if anyone's going to get a break for going green, it should be the people making that subsidy possible, the upper level tax payers.


By Nutzo on 1/15/2013 10:56:13 AM , Rating: 2
Sell a car that cost $100,000 to make for $20,000 insead of $40,000 ?

Guess they will make up for the extra $20K loss with volume....

The $100K cost per car is from a study based on how many Volts where projected to be sold, and included the money spent developing the Volt. Since they are not hitting the projected sales numbers, the actual cost per car would actually be higher than $100K


By Mint on 1/15/2013 1:02:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The $100K cost per car is from a study based on how many Volts where projected to be sold
No it isn't. It's a study based on how many Volts were sold, assuming no more would be sold.

That's right. This "study" spread development costs over current sales. Fox News was initially pedaling such nonsense to say they cost $250,000 each. Then it became $100,000. Then it was $30,000 loss per vehicle.

Use some critical thought when reading such BS.


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber














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