backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 207 comment(s) - last by Shadowmaster62.. on Sep 22 at 5:02 PM

Production Chevrolet Volt
GM takes the wraps of its highly anticipated Chevrolet Volt

After months of speculation, teaser shots, and spy photos taken on the set of “Transformers 2”, the production Chevrolet Volt has finally been unveiled to the public. Although General Motors made the horrible mistake of having key executives partially block the view of the Volt in every single photo available, it's still good to finally see the vehicle's final shape.

The Volt pictured to the right doesn't appear to be an actual finished vehicle, but rather a clay representation of what the production model will look like. That being said, the production Volt is noticeably "rounder" than the concept version. The concept Volt's unique glass beltline has also been replaced by what looks to be flat black paint to give the same illusion.

There were obvious concessions made for occupant comfort such as the taller roofline to accommodate a wide variety of body types. The concept vehicle's flared fenders have also given way to a more slab-sided appearance -- no doubt in an effort to maximize aerodynamic efficiency.

In its transition from concept to production, the Volt now looks more "ordinary" instead of something that drags consumers kicking and screaming into the future.

The Chevrolet Volt is estimated to have a price tag of $40,000 to $45,000 (before tax breaks/credits) when it launches in late 2010 as a 2011 model. The Volt can travel 40 miles on a charge before its internal gasoline engine (ICE) has to start to recharge the battery pack.

Taking into consideration the 40 mile battery range and the 7.2-gallon gas tank, the Volt will have a total range of 360 miles.

Updated 9/16/2008
GM recently revealed new pictures of the Volt sans the executives mugging in every shot. The new shots give a better idea of Volt's final shape. There's also a shot of the Volt's interior which looks quite remarkable.

GM also revealed a few more details about the Volt during the press unveiling. According to GM, here are a few of the highlights of the interior:

  • Driver-configurable, liquid crystal instrument display
  • Standard seven-inch touch screen vehicle information display
  • Touch screen-style climate and infotainment controls
  • Optional navigation system with onboard hard drive for maps and music storage
  • Standard Bluetooth for cellular phone and USB/Bluetooth for music streaming      

GM stated that the electric motor generates 150 HP and 273 lb-ft of torque which can propel the vehicle at up to 100 MPH. The company also noted that the average driver would save $1,500 in fuel costs per year based on an average daily commute of 40 miles per day, $3.60 gasoline, and 15,000 miles of driving per year.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Mistake?
By cherrycoke on 9/8/2008 2:00:42 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Although General Motors made the horrible mistake of having key executives partially block the view of the Volt in every single photo available


Can you call that a mistake? The original concept model looked so good.




RE: Mistake?
By masher2 (blog) on 9/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By jRaskell on 9/8/2008 2:13:21 PM , Rating: 1
My chances of purchasing one were never very high to begin with. Fuel consumption and perceived environmental issues simply aren't things that even register on my own personal radar.

That being said, I originally thought GM was making some progress here with an edgier, more interesting hybrid visual design. The underlying technology is still a potentially successful selling point, but they've just gone and thrown themselves in with the rest of the hybrids as far as asthetics are concerned. More of a follow the pack than lead the pack decision there.


RE: Mistake?
By Locutus465 on 9/9/2008 3:41:16 PM , Rating: 1
My guess is a higher up panicked given the "must must sell" nature of this project... And in the process, assuming GM really is in such a pracarious position that this car must sell to save the company, killed GM. If this turns out to be the case it would just be a damn shame to see an otherwise fine company go under due to retarded management choices like that.

But even if there's some truth to all of the above i think GM might have an "unforseen" saviour in the form of the reissued camero which I do beleive will be hitting the market in about the same time frame. Volt may now be no where on my (or many other peoples) radar, but a convertable Camero sure as hell is.

If GM is saved (with this car tanking) I hope that it wakes them up and they redesign year 2 (or 3) to match the original concept which was a brilliant design IMHO.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/9/2008 4:15:27 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
If GM is saved (with this car tanking) I hope that it wakes them up and they redesign year 2 (or 3) to match the original concept which was a brilliant design IMHO.
LOL! You'll be waiting a llllloooooooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnngggggggggggggggggggg time!


RE: Mistake?
By Chaser on 9/16/2008 1:38:23 PM , Rating: 5
I don't think I've read a more confusing, off topic, completely irrelevant paragraph of dribble like that in a long time.

How about we let the car get to the market before we issue a complete proclamation of doom for the Volt.

And another note. Not to insult your vast automotive knowledge its Camaro.


RE: Mistake?
By Penti on 9/17/2008 8:37:53 AM , Rating: 2
Dude, they only plan to make 10 000 of them the first year and 60 000 of them the second year.

Thus between 2010 and 2012 they only plan to build 70.000 vehicles and I'm sure they sell them easily.

It aren't a car that will save GM. They won't even try with it. It can only keep a few hundred assembly workers working. More importantly though is that this car with it's $16 000 US dollar battery won't sell with any profits. Yes you can buy a whole damn Saturn or whatever for the cost of just the battery. It doesn't compete against the $22 000 Prius, which already has sold over 1 million cars worldwide. So it won't gain the same momentum and recognition.


RE: Mistake?
By timmiser on 9/17/2008 5:48:18 PM , Rating: 2
In my opinion, GM screwed up the production Camaro too. Gone is the cool set of wheels we saw in Transformers. We'll be getting a narrower, taller model which killed it for me. I want short and wide in a performance car thank you very much.


RE: Mistake?
By silversound on 9/16/2008 12:27:00 PM , Rating: 4
"The Chevrolet Volt is estimated to have a price tag of $40,000 to $45,000 (before tax breaks/credits) when it launches in late 2010 as a 2011 model."

Who the hell will get this over 40k? GM should sell this max out at 25k, i dunt see this volt better than the new honda hybrid selling for 18.5k.

With 40k I rather get a BMW 335 coupe...


RE: Mistake?
By djc208 on 9/16/2008 12:42:53 PM , Rating: 2
People similar to those buying the Tesla. They could get just about anything they want for that kind of money but it wouldn't be "green".

This is Chevy's halo car for the green movement same as the Corvette is for the car lover or the Hummer is for the truck guys.

This is for those who want to be able to thumb their nose at all the Prius owners the same way most of them liked to at SUV drivers.

Besides, sounds like they're throwing in all kinds of electronics on the inside as standard, so it's not going to be a Cobalt with a really expensive drivetrain from the sounds of things. Does it justify the extra $10~15k this thing is going to cost over a "normal" hybrid? Probably not but it's about selling the technology right now, not making a big seller.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/16/2008 1:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Probably not but it's about selling the technology right now, not making a big seller.
They're only making 10k a year anyways so it can't be a big seller. These things will be fairly rare.


RE: Mistake?
By ianweck on 9/16/2008 8:56:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They're only making 10k a year anyways so it can't be a big seller. These things will be fairly rare.


They stated only 10k units the first year, ramped up after that. So we'll see.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/16/2008 1:00:11 PM , Rating: 2
GM said the target price is $35k not $40k and definitely not $45k. The over $40k price is a rumor but I won't be surprised if markups bring the price up to $45k.


RE: Mistake?
By Penti on 9/17/2008 8:46:13 AM , Rating: 2
Hum, would you sell a car with a estimated battery cost of $16,000 USD for 25k? Yes you can almost get a new parallel hybrid for just the battery cost. There's more them a slight difference between a 16 kWh lithium battery pack and a 1.3 kWh NiMH that the Prius has.


RE: Mistake?
By Tsuwamono on 9/18/2008 10:26:32 AM , Rating: 2
The battery cost isn't 16k. I'm not sure where you guys are getting this info because your the second person I have seen say this but its not true. I believe it is 8k but I know it sure as hell is under 10k.


RE: Mistake?
By AE3Wolfman on 9/18/2008 2:13:44 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, with the cost of Lithium batteries 16kwh is easily going to cost $10k unless they get the battery pack from China, in which case quality control is going to be an issue. For half the cost of this car, you could convert pretty much any vehicle you want to pure electric, a handful of companies make the kits to ease installation issues. I am looking at converting an 86 F250 to electric, the battery pack for my 45 mile commute at max speed of 65 is going to set me back about 14K, motor, controller and charger is another 6k. I could save 5k on batteries if I go lead-acid, but the weight penalty is pretty severe. If they do end up selling these cars for 30k, don't be surprised if its at a loss.


RE: Mistake?
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2008 2:21:06 PM , Rating: 4
Shame really. I thought the concept looked bad ass. This thing looks again just like a Prius with a Chevy front end.


RE: Mistake?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/8/2008 2:22:27 PM , Rating: 3
WTH? FITCamaro saying something that doesn't put GM in a positive light??

**falls off chair**


RE: Mistake?
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2008 2:25:06 PM , Rating: 5
What? I never said everything they do is great. The Pontiac Aztec? Easily the ugliest car ever produced. The Honda Element being a close second.


RE: Mistake?
By cherrycoke on 9/8/2008 2:38:23 PM , Rating: 3
I agree..

http://autos.aol.com/article/general/v2/_a/top-10-...

GM has a couple in there, I usually think GM does ok.
I just wish we had the Corvette and Camaro stylists work out the production vehicle and keep that aggressive look.
I can't think of too many other reasons than possibly aerodynamics, cost of production for special components (ie. door glass)

I was surprised not to see the Element not in the link.


RE: Mistake?
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 9/9/2008 12:21:26 PM , Rating: 2
In the end they have to make lots of money on this puppy, and that is going to mean appealing to the run-of-the-mill GM buyer (who let's face it, doesn't have any styling taste to speak of, except for the above mentioned Camaro and Corvette, and then the interior styling is highly suspect), so they have to keep costs down and market appeal way up.

No room for a niche market here. They will make tons on this car, though, I predict. 6 figure annual production runs easy.


RE: Mistake?
By Penti on 9/17/2008 8:51:02 AM , Rating: 2
Eh, they will just use this vehicle as a platform to develop future electric drive-trains. They will probably loose tons of money on this car. And it would only be 70000 of them around in mid 2012.


RE: Mistake?
By 67STANG on 9/8/2008 2:47:00 PM , Rating: 2
You, sir are wrong. The Subaru Baja ( http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2003/03/11/1571... ) is by far the ugliest vehicle produced.


RE: Mistake?
By masher2 (blog) on 9/8/2008 2:58:54 PM , Rating: 1
I rather like the Baja. I think a 70s-era VW "Thing" beats it hands down. But both pale compared to either of these two:

http://www.carsandtuning.org/wp-content/uploads/20...

http://allworldcars.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploa...


RE: Mistake?
By 67STANG on 9/8/2008 5:47:24 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, I was containing it to current U.S. production vehicles. I guess that cannot be the criteria however as Subaru has discontinued the Baja due to lackluster sales... imagine that.

Lets be honest, if we're going back to the 70 through the mid eighties-- the list gets quite long. I attribute that to car designers listening to disco music.


RE: Mistake?
By masher2 (blog) on 9/8/2008 6:19:19 PM , Rating: 2
That car in the first link is still made by Fiat.


RE: Mistake?
By ebakke on 9/8/2008 7:10:10 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Lets be honest, if we're going back to the 70 through the mid eighties-- the list gets quite long.

Nope, the list of "Ugliest car ever" remains the same length. 1.


RE: Mistake?
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 9/9/2008 12:24:16 PM , Rating: 2
Um, the Thing is a 1940's era design. See the Kübelwagen on which it was based.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_K%C3%BCbel...


RE: Mistake?
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2008 2:59:40 PM , Rating: 3
Nah I don't find that nearly as terrible.

http://www.edmunds.com/media/reviews/top10/05.truc...

The Subaru just looks like an Outback with the roof of the tailgate cut off.


RE: Mistake?
By borismkv on 9/8/2008 5:08:49 PM , Rating: 2
They look a lot better in person. And in a color other than yellow. And without the two-tone cladding. But then, I'm biased. I own one :D And it's fun as hell beating the pants off those idiots in their coffee can cruisers.


RE: Mistake?
By Ratinator on 9/8/2008 3:32:17 PM , Rating: 2
I have the Element and Scion as 1,2. Aztec is 3.


RE: Mistake?
By MrBungle123 on 9/8/2008 4:13:17 PM , Rating: 2
you forgot to put the honda insight on that list.


RE: Mistake?
By Doormat on 9/8/2008 8:18:54 PM , Rating: 2
The original insight? Yes, the new one, eh, its OK, it falls into the same category as the Prius and other cars that go for the aero over everything package.


RE: Mistake?
By timmiser on 9/17/2008 5:53:16 PM , Rating: 2
My ex wife loved the Aztec.

Haha... Sorry, I just had to post that out into the public domain for the record. :)


RE: Mistake?
By hydmoghul on 9/17/2008 3:13:11 AM , Rating: 2
RE: Mistake?
By onwisconsin on 9/8/2008 3:05:50 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed...this design is kinda vanilla. Looks too much like a Cobalt to me.

Then again, if the Volt sells a lot (consistently, not like Chrysler who has occasionally sells a ton of one model for one year then steeply drops off the next few) GM and their employees should be happy....


RE: Mistake?
By ajfink on 9/8/2008 3:34:28 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, but the back end is fugly.


RE: Mistake?
By Mitch101 on 9/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/8/2008 4:02:58 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it's supposed to be around $35k with a $10k tax credit or something. At least, that's what GM is shooting for.


RE: Mistake?
By mcnabney on 9/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/8/2008 7:10:31 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Right now you can buy a Prius and spring an extra $12k and have it modified into a plugin hybrid with a huge battery pack that will get over 100 miles to a charge.
None of which is covered by a warranty. BTW, the all battery range of those conversions are NOT 100 miles. Try a max of 30 miles and the price is closer to $15k for the 30 milers. Nice try. And, like all electric cars, range is dependent on driving style and environmental conditions. Sometimes you'll get more, other times you get less.


RE: Mistake?
By Samus on 9/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: Mistake?
By Totally on 9/9/2008 11:40:26 AM , Rating: 2
Just in case you didn't get it the first time around.

GM owns Daewoo.


RE: Mistake?
By FITCamaro on 9/9/2008 7:52:57 AM , Rating: 2
The EV1 was also the size of a Geo Metro. This is much larger.


RE: Mistake?
By Jedi2155 on 9/10/2008 10:30:03 PM , Rating: 2
My current opinion on the volt is that they are following the right steps except for the price although that is due to the fact that they EXPECT the battery to die and require to be replaced within the 10/150k mile year warranty, so they included the replacement battery into the cost of the vehicle.

My guess is that they are trying to cut into the high efficiency market where Toyota currently reigns supreme and get the green moniker, that they seem to be greatly lacking. If they had designed the Volt to compromise on efficiency and stick with the original style in which many of you love, it would merely cannibalize users which GM probably already have thus cannibalizing a market they don't need to. They need to get market share AWAY from Toyota/Honda which is what the Volt is aiming to achieve.

I know they certainly got my attention with the Volt and has swayed my purchasing decision from an almost guaranteed Toyota Prius to the Volt.


RE: Mistake?
By Jimbo1234 on 9/16/2008 1:32:35 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, at $40K I'll take an A4, 3 series, G37, or even a C-class over a Chevy every time.


RE: Mistake?
By maverick85wd on 9/8/2008 4:39:00 PM , Rating: 3
while the Prius is, admittedly, one ugly car, it was also designed that way for a reason. You realize that when trying to maximize your mileage it's important to lower your drag coefficient, right?

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


RE: Mistake?
By randomly on 9/8/2008 6:23:39 PM , Rating: 3
Weight is also extremely important. If you are just concerned with drag area you have a lot more flexibility in your design looks, but add in extreme measures at weight reduction and still retain the internal volume you end up with the Prius, Insight, Volt look as a fairly optimal shape.

Personally the concept car looks too much like the Dodge Magnum, which after two weeks of driving I got to loathe for it's terrible visibility. I prefer the look of the production Volt. That's just me though.

If they can significantly bring the cost of the batteries down this has the potential to really start a sea change in what we drive and our consumption of automotive fuel.


RE: Mistake?
By Fireshade on 9/16/2008 8:35:23 AM , Rating: 2
Judging from the Transformers 2 spyshots, I would have to say that the Volt looks much better and sportier than the Prius.
However, somehow this doesn't carry over at all with these ugly "Public Disaster" shots.
Weird, but perhaps it only looks cool from a distance :)

http://www.dailytech.com/Update+Chevrolet+Volt+Int...


RE: Mistake?
By Alias1431 on 9/16/2008 4:39:42 PM , Rating: 2
You got that from a digg.com comment.


RE: Mistake?
By albundy2 on 9/16/2008 5:28:43 PM , Rating: 2
actually the front looks like a 2009 acura tl with the rear end looking like a prius... also if you've seen a riced out cobalt it looks alot like a 93-97 civic... chevy is really in love with hondas' designs. it's starting to creep me out.
car's are really starting to look alike.

seriously though, if you doubt it compare some photos for yourselves. my brother almost puked when i proved it to him.


RE: Mistake?
By Davelo on 9/16/2008 7:55:40 PM , Rating: 2
I thought it looks okay. Definitely nicer than a Prius. Looks a lot like the Acura TSX.


RE: Mistake?
By djkrypplephite on 9/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By helios220 on 9/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By therealnickdanger on 9/8/2008 3:16:59 PM , Rating: 1
Yup... I'll reserve final judgement until I actually see it in person and drive it, but I think it should be submitted to failblog.org immediately.


RE: Mistake?
By omnicronx on 9/8/2008 3:20:45 PM , Rating: 3
Cmon people.. look at the field of view that the concept windshield has. There was no way in hell that something like that would have passed safety regulations.

The Insight/Prius look the way they do for a reason, aerodynamics..


RE: Mistake?
By Ringold on 9/8/2008 5:41:55 PM , Rating: 2
The point I think people would make is that hippies have their models already. People who like a harder, old-school look to a car had nothing. The market catered entirely to whatever the industries marketing people found that hippies and bra-burners would find appealing.

And now, thanks to GM, the pool of people willing to buy these types of things will remain the same. I won't touch one of these things now. I'll give up a little in looks for performance, but not that much.


RE: Mistake?
By maverick85wd on 9/9/2008 6:32:13 PM , Rating: 2
I find your argument of aesthetics over functionality idiotic.

The marketing people found that people buy cars with higher MPG on the sticker, so they made the car more aerodynamic to boost that number. You can always go buy a hummer or something if you'd prefer more drag.


RE: Mistake?
By bhieb on 9/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/8/2008 4:01:11 PM , Rating: 3
I think it looks pretty good but I'll reserve judgment until I actually SEE one. Pictures hardly ever do any car justice. I'd also like to see the interior.

I'm not really in the market for a new car (yet) but I'll take a trip to the dealer once the car is actually available and check it out.


RE: Mistake?
By Chadder007 on 9/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By Ringold on 9/8/2008 5:51:52 PM , Rating: 1
They can definitely blame UAW on the cost side in general.

But when people go in to the show room and shake their head at this bland-but-expensive hippy car, they'll have nobody to blame but themselves. If they made good enough cars, they'd still be disadvantaged but not fatally wounded.

I think the blame falls squarely on Bob Lutz at this point. He should've been on top of this.


RE: Mistake?
By masher2 (blog) on 9/8/08, Rating: -1
RE: Mistake?
By Alexvrb on 9/8/2008 10:37:09 PM , Rating: 3
If you saw the prototype in person, you'd immediately realize that the design had to change drastically for a production model. The prototype was a cool attention getter, but everything about it screamed "can not mass produce". $500 difference? "Moulding"? You're way off here, which is uncommon for you.

The interior was inappropriate, the proportions were wrong both inside and out. It would not have been a comfortable commuter car. The doors were cool but insane, an obvious flare that would not make it to the production model. Go dig up some more detailed shots. The whole front end is less costly to produce, lighter, and more aerodynamic. There's more to it, although some things that they changed did NOT need to be changed. I guess they didn't want it to look like two cars merged, to have it clash with itself. So they smoothed the whole thing. They could have at least kept the headlights and tail a bit closer, perhaps.

Do I like the changes? No. Hell no. But I KNEW they were coming, after all, the Volt as a high efficiency vehicle HAD to become less flash, more substance. You don't buy one of these things if you want a killer sports car or muscle car! That's what things like the Sky, Corvette, Camaro are for. This isn't a high performance vehicle.

Also, I highly doubt the price is going to be $40-45K, even before tax rebates. Probably closer to the $35K mark pre-tax rebates. I could be wrong, but if we're all going to speculate, I might as well throw in my two cents.


RE: Mistake?
By Totally on 9/9/2008 11:17:19 AM , Rating: 2
I do agree it was a bait and switch. Two prototype and production models seem to have different wheelbases.

Doors, insane? No very doable, in fact, they did somewhat with the suicide door in the Saturn SC2, it is possible just need to do it on both sides.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: Mistake?
By Totally on 9/9/2008 6:05:26 PM , Rating: 1
You're mistaken. Concept vehicles are exhibiton pieces that are built in the spirit of oneupmanship to be shown at auto shows. They rarely see for production without external influences i.e. a collective 'BUILD IT' from the automotive community, and usually, if green-lighted, these are most likely to be shit-canned late into development cycle should market conditions go awry. These are concepts that made it off the drawing board and into the prototype stage, as a showcase never meant to see a dealership lot:

Cadillac: Cien, Sixteen, Ecojet, Imaj, Vizon, Provoq;
Chevy: SS, Orlando, TX2;
Chrysler: ME412, SR 392, Firepower, Imperial, Nassau, Java, Citadel, Howler, ESX3, Airflite;
Dodge: Copperhed, Tomahawk, Super 8 hemi, M80, Sling Shot, Hornet, Zeo, Power Wagon;
Ford: 427, Shelby GR1, Shelby Cobra, Interceptor, Verve, Vignale, Iosis, Reflex;

Now, the progression of things go CONCEPT > PROTOTYPE > PREPRODUCTION > PRODUCTION. The problem I am having is that the Volt was purpose built was never a concept that got green-lighted. Roof line, General Shape, layout, Overall size all should have had been fleshed out on paper

quote:
The main reason for the production look was that the concept's coefficient of drag was terrible.
You think the engineers and designers wouldn't have known that from the outset, You got to give them a little more credit. Anyone who knows the least bit about cars knows that a blunt nose will work "wonders" when it comes to drag. They could have shown us this or something very close when they released it. Instead Mr. Lutz himself drives a vehicle with styling that borrows heavily from the Camaro which incidentally was being redesigned at the time, announces goals set that the Volt will achieve. In hindsight, probably laughing to himself and a couple GM heads "What were we thinking". How do you get something to go from Camaro-esque to Honda Civic other than an attempt to garner attention from those who wouldn't be interested is why I call shenanigans.

quote:
Also, the people buying these aren't interested in the look of present cars. They want something that looks like a hybrid. The Prius may be a hot selling car but its sales figures are half of the Camry, Corolla, Civic, and Accord separately.


You do realize that the Civic, Prius, Fit, Sentra all share the same body shape. I'd think it's safe to say that it isn't looks alone that drives sales. I'm pretty sure price, size, performance come to play.


RE: Mistake?
By Alexvrb on 9/9/2008 6:29:43 PM , Rating: 2
I understand concept cars well enough. I was saying that when you look at the concept up close, it was obvious that there have to be some serious changes in order to keep it light, compact, aerodynamic, and keep it from costing even more than it already does.


RE: Mistake?
By Alexvrb on 9/9/2008 6:27:54 PM , Rating: 2
Dude... look at the doors.

First of all, the door has a very unique hinge mechanism because of the very tight gaps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJhl8Vf_D-4

Second, the GLASS on the DOOR.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/2070108.001/photo1/ele...

http://www.i-car.com/graphics/about_icar/current_e...

A lot of you really never got to look closely at the prototype.


RE: Mistake?
By Totally on 9/9/2008 8:19:39 PM , Rating: 2
I understand why the glass had to go as it isn't practical, and was purely eye candy. Gaps had nothing to do with it, the hinges were designed because of the dramatic angle that the leading edge of the door sweeps inward, they easily could've kept if they didn't shorten the wheel base.


RE: Mistake?
By Ringold on 9/9/2008 3:36:20 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for putting up a smoke screen on behalf of GM, but at the end of the day it's crap. They know how to make sporty looking cars; they've got some similar looking Cadillac's, they've got long experience with the Corvette.. All GM need to do to understand how to shape a car like the Volt is to walk through their private heritage car museum and take a look at some of their old school cars.

What you describe is on a scale similar to taking the last model Corvette and giving it the new headlights, etc. What happened in reality was more like taking the Corvette and making it in to a Civic.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/9/2008 4:46:59 PM , Rating: 1
Why do some of you think this car was supposed to be sporty? It's friggin hybrid and, currently, NO ONE wants a sporty hybrid! They want a hybrid to look different than current designs. The new fad/trend is to LOOK like you're efficient, right down to your car. And ALL of the hybrids have this fad/trend in mind. People that are actually buying these cars have already spoken AND the automakers are doing their bidding. Capitalism!

People that are into sporty cars buy sporty cars, not hybrids. To twist another persons words, people that want sporty cars already have them! Currently, GM is going with the sure sell. Makes perfect sense from a business standpoint.


RE: Mistake?
By Totally on 9/9/2008 6:17:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
NO ONE wants a sporty hybrid!

Yeah and wanting to look poor is why people don't buy designer clothing. You are wrong on so many levels, that is probably one of the biggest reasons why they aren't taking off, aside from a higher entry cost of a comparable vehicle. You probably own an Iphone and all you use it for is make is to calls/text.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/16/2008 1:07:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yeah and wanting to look poor is why people don't buy designer clothing
Say what you want but the hybrid OWNERS have already spoken with their wallets and determined the hybrid market. Not some dude on the internet that claims he'll buy one if it were this price with this look but in all reality wouldn't buy it at ANY price.

You can live in denial but the Prius, Camry Hybrid, Civic Hybrid sales are through the roof. Not to mention, people WANT their hybrids to look like hybrids. They WANT that goofy look. And the automakers are responding in kind by giving them what they want.

The whiners on DT aren't in that market. Therefore, you keep seeing the styling that you see. Until you count, you don't.


RE: Mistake?
By Alexvrb on 9/9/2008 6:56:59 PM , Rating: 2
I never said I liked the new design. I even said that I DID NOT like the changes. But if you look at the concept, there was a whole lot of things about it that had to be ditched in the name of cost, weight, and efficiency. Do I think they could have done better? Hell yes. But you're comparing this little hybrid with a vette? The Volt doesn't have the handling or punch to really pull off sports car, nor is that what it is for. The target audience for this car doesn't even care. Heck, make it too sporty, give it a tight suspension and sporty interior, and they'll complain about the ride and uncomfortable seats and crap.

Long story short, the production model looks really bland, but compared to the concept it has some improvements in terms of visibility, interior room/comfort, and it doesn't look like it will be a rough ride. Its also lighter and more aerodynamic, without relying on expensive materials like carbon fiber. I'm hoping that they'll eventually come to their senses and release a more aggressive looking model, and maybe put out an SS model with a more powerful e-flex system, possibly with a 2-speed if they can build it strong enough and cheap enough.


RE: Mistake?
By Polynikes on 9/8/2008 7:01:00 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like a Honda Civic. What a disappointment.


RE: Mistake?
By chhimp on 9/9/2008 12:45:05 AM , Rating: 2
It's more practical to drive, easier to find parking, and it does take less space on the road than the concept car. I like it, but I have to test drive it before making any criticisms. I know the new Malibu (rental) looks like a TSX, but drives worst than a civic (power wise, possibly from the extra weight compared to a civic). I own a Honda Civic and an Acura TSX, I hope this car brings the company out of the gutter. Good luck to them.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/9/2008 12:05:39 PM , Rating: 2
The Malibu isn't in the Civic's class, it's in the Camry/Accord/Altima class.


RE: Mistake?
By AlmostExAMD on 9/9/2008 6:52:41 AM , Rating: 2
I totally agree with you, I know they have to adjust for aerodynamics and the like to improve efficiency, As with most of these cars ending up bubble shape, But that is just not a Chevy at all.
Was hoping for a more square looking muscle car shape like the concept even if they have to sacrifice some mileage or performance, Chances of me purchasing are now nothing! :(
Bahhh now need to win lotto and get one of those sports models,British one has the looks and class, Reminds me of an Aston Martin.

http://www.tuvie.com/lighting-gt-first-uks-electri...


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/9/2008 12:08:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Was hoping for a more square looking muscle car shape like the concept even if they have to sacrifice some mileage or performance, Chances of me purchasing are now nothing!
This is a hybrid and mileage is king with hybrids. And hybrids are only interested in mileage. The style they're interested in is the hybrid style. Granted, this car looks FAR better than the Prius even from the pics but I'll reserve final judgment until I see the thing.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/9/2008 12:08:54 PM , Rating: 1
Hybrid OWNERS are only interested in mileage. Ack!


RE: Mistake?
By 67STANG on 9/16/2008 11:01:17 AM , Rating: 1
I already emailed them to let them know I'd like to be removed from the waiting list. Would have been the first Chevy I would have bought in years.


RE: Mistake?
By ciparis on 9/16/2008 11:10:20 AM , Rating: 1
This is disappointing.

It's like the good design wouldn't fit through the car-shaped cut-out in the factory exit wall, so this is what we get.


RE: Mistake?
By zshift on 9/16/2008 12:42:28 PM , Rating: 2
They totally screwed up the design. The concept would have been such a cool car to drive. but no, they have to make it as ugly as every other hybrid (not as ugly, just close enough so people can still say, "yeah, that butt-ugly car is a hybrid"), and then the cost is just ridiculous. if people can't afford gas costs, why are they going to pay 40-45K for a car that "saves" money, and the maintenance is going to be ridiculous on that thing. custom/premium parts = premium price. it all goes against "saving money". anyone smart enough to not fall into the hybrid trap can do the math and realize you'll save money only in the long run, but initially the costs will be high.


RE: Mistake?
By Spuke on 9/16/2008 1:10:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They totally screwed up the design.
You totally can't read. The reasons for changing the design are in this thread but you STILL had to make your ignorant comment anyways.


RE: Mistake?
By EglsFly on 9/17/2008 10:20:46 PM , Rating: 2
I was very interested in this car and was strongly considering purchasing one. But at $40K, I am not purchasing one. I also do not think that this car or any cars like these should be subsidized just to make them affordable. Why should John Doe down the street and other Americans have to have there tax dollars help pay for your car!

If GM cannot release this car at an affordable price point ($25K seems to be the range of competitors in its class), then as far as I am concerned it can fail. They can bury them next to the EV's for all I care.


RE: Mistake?
By tastyratz on 9/8/2008 2:27:25 PM , Rating: 2
So much for a real ground breaking appearance. The concept was hot and people wanted to buy it just by how smoking it looked. The new one? Olive drab bland. Completely disappointing exterior that will blend with the crowd.

The concept volt was just the head turner Chevy needed.

But hey, I'm sure someones grandmother will love it.


RE: Mistake?
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2008 2:33:47 PM , Rating: 5
I will say that I think it does look better than a Prius. But not by much. It just looks a little sharper than the Prius which is one limp wristed wave away from having a Gay Pride sticker come standard on it.


RE: Mistake?
By cherrycoke on 9/8/2008 2:46:41 PM , Rating: 2
Looks better than a Prius, maybe about the same as the new Honda Insight 2 that was unveiled. Could anyone tell me if that unveiled Honda is how the actual production model will look? Was it just a pre-production teaser?


RE: Mistake?
By 67STANG on 9/8/2008 2:56:37 PM , Rating: 2
Difference is, the Insight will cost less than half as much. This thing just went from hero to zero.

This car was supposed to be GM's saving grace...
If anyone has stock in GM: SELL.

What's next, the production Camaro is a performance version of the Saturn ION?