AND 
Diesel Volt?
[flash http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXA22Q0qXNM]
From the point of introduction of the Volt in January one of it’s strong selling points, after the beauty of the electric engine, is the fact that the ICE could potentially run on gas, E85, or diesel. Not to mention the fact that a hydrogen cell could substitute for teh ICE altogether. This is the flex(ibility) of the E-Flex system.
Many of the enthusiasts here and around the internet are strong proponents of diesel and biodiesel. Mainly, this type of combustion engine is more efficient, allowing for overall better mpg ratings. Indeed, in Europe, there are deisel cars which can hit 70 mpg. So many people are enthusiastsc that the Volt might have a diesel engine.
We are indeed at a point in history of great change in environmental awareness, and recognition of the limited supply of oil. General Motors, under Rick Wagoner’s leadership has begun steering into the alterative fuel direction, with the Volt as it’s flagship.
However, Vice-Chairman Bob Lutz has posted a video blog (vlog) seen above in which he appears less enthusiastic about diesel in the U.S. Primarily he cites the stringent standards applied to burning diesel in the U.S. and how differrent they are than the more lenient Europe. He also mentions that to meet these U.S. standards, a few thousand dollars of gear will have to be added to each car, to do such things as inject urea for example. He also laments about the fact that different states in the country have further different standards, making mass production difficult.
So, it seems to me, we may not see a diesel Volt here in the U.S. But I think the European variant under Opel will likely be diesel. It should be O.K. though, using gas (or E85) in the Volt, as the great lion’s share of the efficiency is due to it’s battery powered engine, and not the ICE, which if you drive under 40 miles won’t be used anyway.
34 Responses to “Diesel Volt?”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
July 14th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
I would much prefer those extra thousands to not be spent on a diesel but to expand the battery pack and an extra cost option.
With a 40 mile electric range, I wouldn’t have had to use the range extender motor more than around 25 times in each of the past two years, needing around 600 miles
total. I believe a single trip to the gas station would have carried me thru those two years. With a 60 mile range, except for trips, I don’t believe I would need more than a few gallons per year.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
I agree with kent. Diesel/biodiesel is less important in this configuration than battery capacity. An E85 range extender with a 60 mile battery pack is OK with me. Of course, biobutanol is much better than ethanol.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
I am a little disappointed, I was thinking bio diesel made from algae might be a could source of fuel for a range extender. No doubt there are some people who will buy the volt for an eighty mile commute. Given a 40 mile EV range the range extender will run for half the trip.
After seeing the Lutz video I agree that perhaps more battery would be a better solution. I suppose it might be possible to double the battery range for the cost of a diesel plus addition emission control systems.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
A likely scenario is that a series hybrid like E-flex will be the first production application of HCCI engines. HCCI engines can get similar efficiency to diesels while running on gas or a variety of other fuels like ethanol or butanol. HCCI engines have a more limited operating range than standard Otto cycle engines which makes the range extender duty cycle the perfect application since it can run at constant speed. The beauty of HCCI is that you get diesel like efficiency without the soot and NOX and no need for expensive after treatment systems like a diesel. When I asked Larry Burns about this possibility he smiled and agreed that this would be a good possibility.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Hi Sam. Thanks for your insight. In case people are not familiar with HCCI, you can read about it in Sam’s interview with Gary Smyth here:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/05/15/autobloggreen-qanda-dr-gary-smyth-director-of-powertrain-resear/
I guess whether that process can get into the Volt’s ICE by 2010, depends how far along with it they are. It sounds like a terrific system for E-flex.
There is another new technique known as variable valve actuation, read about it here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070510093248.htm
I wonder if this is similar to what GM is working on.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Give me the Volt as it is. With a 40-mile range and the fact that I have a backup plan in the car just in case I decide to go a little farther is enough for me. Going to the gas station will be a want, not a have to. I do agree with Mr. Lutz, there are too many regulations here in the USA for diesel and it is not cost effective for you and I.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
For how little the range extender might be used, I’d rather it be a diesel engine. Then I’d just rig it to use straight vegetable oil. That way it would never use any fossil fuels directly.
Diesel is better than gas engines because they can use SVO/WVO, which has a better EROI due to no refining processing.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 10:04 pm
Isn’t flexibility the point of the volt? Swap a E85 for a diesel, or a hydrogen (if every viable). GM has options to take the lead. Imagine a car that can be fueled by 4 different fuels. Now that’s flexibility! Of course if it slows down development, I’ll just stick with the duel fuel (gas and electricity). I drive an ‘05 Passat TDI which I love. Don’t be so quick to opt for the same old, because I’ll never go back.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
One more thought. Wait till the Japs run circles around us with their diesels (ie Honda Accord)
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
Lyle, HCCI has much more promise than the variable valve actuation (electronically controlled/actuated valves)
This is due to the fact that the ICE genset would run at one speed, and being able to control it’s intake and exhaust valve timing and duration won’t be necessary.
In regular vehicles, or parallel hybrids, this valve technology will be VERY beneficial, as it can help flatten or broaden power and torque curves of traditional ICEs.
As for diesel usage, the EPA is pissing me off on this. I have read that the ‘particulate emissions’ the EPA blames on diesel are mostly due to wear from tires. But they already have their answer. As with global warming ‘the debate is over’, their minds are made up, and no evidence can sway them.
Want to know part of the reason gasoline is more expensive? The EPA. Mandates of different blends for different regions and seasons is a headache to our refiners.
Anyway, the Volt, AS IS, will work GREAT for me. I live 2.1 miles from work. Everything I need is very close to me. Occasional trips to my parent’s house on the other side of town might have me using the genset for maybe 10 miles. As long as GM delivers what they say they will, I’ll stay in this virtual line for one!
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
“He also laments about the fact that different states in the country have further different standards”
Rather than lament, why not be the one USA autocompany to push for one strong uniform worldwide standard: that is the ECE standard.
If the US adopted the ECE standards that the entire rest of the world uses instead of our NHTSA standard, GM would be able to sell one model to meet worldwide standards AND all US standards.
Because those bothersome states that you have to sue like California because of their “different standards” would jump at the chance of adopting the ECE standards!
Electric cars already sell in Switzerland that meet the ECE standards. The Smart sells as an EV at infovel.com in Switzerland!
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
Dave,
A vehicle that can run off of four fuels (gas, E85, diesel and biodiesel) will NEVER exist.
Gasoline/E85 engines are MUCH different than diesel. You cannot ‘convert’ a gasoline engine to run on diesel, or vice versa.
So if you got a Gas/E85 genset, you are stuck using Gas or E85.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 10:40 pm
Susan, your comment touches on why environmentalism isn’t helping much.
Strict emissions standards are mostly feel-good laws. California is full of them. Sadly, the ‘unintended consequences’ are rarely considered, as are the real effects of such legislation.
In the very least, the unintended consequences would make diesel engines much more expensive. This would trickle down to you and I through higher costs of goods. Remember – everything on the shelves in stores got there on a truck. These trucks run on, you got it! DIESEL! Make the trucks much more expensive, and the cost of using them goes up, even if the fuel is cheaper. The efficiency of their engines goes down, and thus the efficiency of the truck goes down, making it use more fuel. It’s practically self-defeating.
In the worst end of unintended consequences, emissions become SO strict, they simply cannot be met. Or in the case of passenger vehicles, efficiency is reduced to such a small margin over gasoline engines, that a diesel engine will be impossible to sell.
California caused the EV1 debacle by mandating something that really wasn’t technologically mature yet. Sure, the EV1 worked, but it wasn’t perfect. It wasn’t as good as it could have been. The Volt is coming along, and it is NOT because of stupid legislation, it’s because consumers are SPEAKING with their wallets – by buying hybrid and more efficient vehicles.
Don’t screw it all up with legislation. The people are getting smarter about it. We’ll make a demand for better vehicles without the ninnies in Congress and the Senate forcing it.
(Quote)
July 14th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
I really like the Volt as it’s been presented already. I like the flex-fuel, range-extendable electric drive combo. Also, the 40 miles is very smart when the stats on commuting are acknowledged. That means that most people in the US can use the PHEV-40 design and rarely use range-extension.
The best thing about the Volt as it has been demonstrated is cost effectiveness for the purchaser since grid electricity is so cheap compared to motor fuel, and available infrastructure. Plugs are everywhere. I could actually unplug my PC and plug in a Volt!!! Also gasoline is available at most major road intersections, and alternative bio-fuels (ethanol and biobutanol) will become increasingly available in the future. It is significantly harder to find diesel and biodiesel, the fuels are more expensive and dirtier, and it is heavier. Also, while I agree that different electric-only ranges should become available in the future, more EV-only range means more weight and reduced power-to-weight ratios.
Other than HCCI, there is another upcoming engine technology I do find exciting: a combined cycle, six-stroke engine. I don’t know how far into the future it will be available, but it allows conventional engine technology to generate more power. Here’s the link to the Popular Scince article: http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/c1609351d9092110vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html
And one last thing, the cool thing about a diesel engine in a car is the torque, and the highest torque technology available is an electric motor, which is what e-flex is all about. The range-extender’s basic criterion is efficiency and output, nothing else.
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 12:54 am
I would like to make the following I think very important point:
I consider the Plug-in Electric hybrid paired with the existing gasoline engine the silver bullet for national security. (See http://www.setamericafree.org) Anything that distracts from it i.e diesel, corn based fuel and/or other flex-fuels even bio-diesel will be detrimental to the main goal of being finally able to introduce the electric car. This time without the baggage of not having adequate range a problem the plug-in hybrid solves. The combination of electric with gasoline engine backup is the logical and o n l y short range solution. The existing petroleum infra-structure worth many trillions of dollars making gasoline the obvious choice for plug-in hybrid backup. Once the OPEC backbone is broken through electricity- a domestic energy source! Gasoline should be the cheapest backup alternative. Remember any money wasted for producing alternative fuel would come out of the hide of the potentially cheapest hybrid system i.e. no significant energy infra-structure would need to be build at least short term! There is enough non-peak electricity (night charging) is available at least until the tipping pint in plug-in hybrid sales to require electricity expansion. We need to consider nuclear energy expansion for the longer term by the time we would have significant increase in the plug-in hybrids to require that. In summary: We should concentrate on producing a first generation plug-in electric/pure gasoline hybrids using currently available technology and/or components. Remember again the electric car (EV-1) type failed in my opinion simple because it did not have an adequate backup system (the plug-in does)for that car’s limited range. The appropriate vehicle (Volt) should be an excellent first generation plug-in hybrid useful either as a second car or as the primary vehicle for those without the need for extremely long range.
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 10:54 am
I personally think GM is off base with the alternative fuels here. The lack of electric only range is troubling. The 40 mile range is less than the EV1 had and they cancelled that car. We need this to be a plug in car with a greater electric only range. The backup system should be just that – for longer trips, but 40 miles a day leaves too many of us going back to the gas station. The primary market for this car is the green buyer – serve our needs first. Subaru has an electric only 4 seat car currently in use in Japan with a 5-15 minute rapid recharge to 80-90% capacity. Plugin America’s wenbsite says its coming to the US in 2009. A Mitsubishi Electric Colt is supposed to be here in 2010. Will any version of the Volt be ready by 2009 or 2010 and will it appeal to EV buyers with a 40 mile range?
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 11:22 am
Laszlo, I can’t agree with you more, the Volt is a perfect first step. A 40 mile all electric range combined with a backup/builtin ICE generator giving the car 500+ mile range is nearly perfect for most peoples driving habits. And nuclear power is the way to go, while working to bring photovoltaic, wave/tidal, wind, etc… along.
JohnH, comparing the Volts 40 mile range to the EV1 is comparing apples to oranges. The Volt has a builtin rangeextender that blends seamlessly to the 40 mile all electric range. The EV1 HAD to refuel every time you exceeded the all electric range, the Volt can drive til you drop.
“40 miles a day leaves too many of us going back to the gas station” is just not true.
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Ziv, I get the concept that you are able to exceed the 40 mile range with the gas/bio or whateever.
MY point is that I, as a GREEN consumer, want to be able to exceed 40 miles of driving without having to burn fossil or bio fuels. My point about going back to the gas station is that without a longer all electric range, we will still be using more gas or other fuel than needed if this car was designed for greater all electric range. I believe the 40mile all electric range will turn off many potential buyers. My statement that you say is just not true may not be something that you believe to be true, but it is something I believe to be true. I believe this vehicle is shaping up to be a disappointment to GREEN consumers. You may be happy with a paltry 40 miles of all electric or may even be able to run all electric daily based on your travel needs, but it doesn’t fulfill my needs. Wouldn’t it be better to design for a longer all electric range for people with longer commutes? Aren’t the people with longer commutes the ones who would make the most impact if we are able to cut out their emmissions? If this vehicle isn’t going to make a bigger impact than 40 miles without emmissions, why bother? I’ll be driving the Subaru if GM can’t do better than 40.
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
John H,
It sounds to me like you need to wait for whatever comes along.
The Volt is not for you.
Given 70-80% of Americans commute less than 40 miles per day, and are already used to putting gas in a vehicle, the Volt will work fine for them.
The Volt is a compromise, a combination of two flavors. I think it’s a brilliant idea. Yes, it would be nice if it would go more than 40 miles on a charge, but given my daily commute is less than 40 miles, my habitual driving would have me burning NO fuel.
The problem with making it go a longer range is that it would take more storage. That means more, larger, heavier batteries.
Other pure EVs will come along, but you’re limited in range because they will have to be plugged in.
Why would a pure EV that can go 200miles (for instance) on a charge be better than a Volt? What if I want to drive the 1000 miles to Phoenix to visit family? In the Volt, I can do that, since I can stop and get gas for the generator. I’ll get pretty dang good fuel efficiency out of it to boot.
I honestly think you’re out of touch with what the Volt is. You need to wait for whatever EV comes along that fits your need.
The Volt will be the embodiment of the old saying “You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can’t please everyone all the time.”
Good luck with your wait for something ‘better’.
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
Is GM actually going to build the Volt or are they going to “wait for the battery miracles to occur”? No battery development is necessary to build the Volt. Suppose it only had a 10 mile range on battery? Would that be a bad deal if the battery pack cost $1500 instead of $20,000 for the possibly unobtainable lithium batteries with a 40 mile range.
Build the car without relying on miracles. Improve it later.
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
JohnH, I apologize, I thought you meant it literally about the 40 miles and back to ‘refuel’.
My concern is that the Volt gets slammed for not being the perfect electric car when it is a very, very good car for the vast majority of people. If GM puts out a few versions of the car, i.e. CUV, compact sedan, etc., they will be able to find a huge market of people that don’t need to drive more than 40 miles except for the odd road trip, and that will change the face of America’s energy usage. At 60 cents for the electrical equivalent of a gallon of gasoline, it won’t take long for the first effective electric car to take off…
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
I agree with laszlo and ziv. The 40 mile electric range fits my needs and the ICE backup will handle those odd trips plus be a backup energy source if a problem occurs with the battery pack, e.g. unexpected diminished capacity (short life) or an open circuit in the pack. Hopefully GM will have in their software design an automatic operation of ICE if the battery pack faults. I’m ready to buy, just hoping GM makes sure that 6′5″ people can fit in it without turning the head sideways or be forced to look through the blue tint band at the top of the window. Fitting in a Prius or Camry is not a problem. GM are you listening? Don’t put style above function, save that for the Corvette.
There are rumors the Volt will have limited production in 2009, where do I sign-up, will there be a lottery or arm wrestling to decide who gets to buy? Will it be necessary to fly to California to purchase it?
(Quote)
July 15th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
The problem isn’t with a 40 mile all electric range, the problem is with people who commute more than 40 miles per day. Unless it’s business oriented driving, no one should live over 20 miles from their job.
(Quote)
July 16th, 2007 at 6:34 am
The Volt as is will be perfect for me. I live 19-miles one way so I would meet the 40-mile range as designed.
Here in North Alabama, we have neither bio or E85 fuels available to the general populace…heck, I would take a Volt if it ran on LP.
I have two of three cars paid off, and when the Volt arrives, I will be ready…so will America.
Johnnie
(Quote)
July 16th, 2007 at 10:41 am
Remember, GM has to start somewhere. The Volt
with 40 mile electric range may not fit everyones needs, but it is only the beginning. I am sure that as large numbers start purchasing the Volt, that GM will start offering 50 mile and 60 mile electric ranges. This is based on GM getting more experience and the battery technology continue to improve.
(Quote)
July 16th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Ziv, Thanks. No problem. I agree that multiple vehicle types with this type of a flex system would be a good idea. SUVs and minivans are the vehicle of choice here in Northern VA and an alternative for these vehicles would be great. Certainly for long trips, the Volt is better than an all electric vehicle. My concern is that GM claims that over a 40 mile range is not feasible right now, but the Tesla is supposed to have a 250 mile range. If a small company like Tesla can do it with Lithium Ion batteries currently available, why can’t GM? I guess I am voicing some frustration over not having any choices other than my current Hybrid which is essentially just a gas powered vehicle with some electric assist. A plug in hybrid of any kind would be an improvement over my current vehicle.
BTW, cce, in an ideal world no one should live further than 20 miles from work, but we know this is not an ideal world. There are many reasons that people live more than 20 miles from work. The most common I believe is the price of housing and/or the type of housing available close to their work. Here in Northern VA, prices closer to the metro area are much higher than outlying towns. Not all of us want to work AND live in the city. A condo or townhouse isn’t all that appealing to me. I grew up in a smaller town and much prefer a single family home with a yard. To get that, I commuted over 40 miles each way to and from Cambridge Mass when I lived in Massachusetts. I drove a 1984 Honda CRX as a commuter car that never got less than 50 mpg. I wish I could say the same about my 2005 Hybrid which is averaging only about 37 mpg. 21 years later and getting worse mileage than I did with my CRX. This isn’t progress. I hope the Volt is built and it is a great success. I do hope the range is extended in the electric only mode. Sorry if I was a little heavy handed in my comments earlier. I wouldn’t be monitoring and posting here if I didn’t want this vehicle to be built.
(Quote)
July 16th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
JohnH,
Comparing the Volt to the Tesla is apples to oranges.
The Tesla is – a light high performance two seat roadster. It simply doesn’t take a lot of energy to make a lighter vehicle GO. I’m sure if you wail on it, and drive it like you stole it, that ~200 mile range will be SIGNIFICANTLY reduced.
And again, once it’s discharged, your only option is to plug it in to recharge.
The Volt will be a more practical vehicle. This means it will be BIGGER and HEAVIER.
MAYBE if the Tesla’s battery pack were put in a Volt chassis, it might get more than 40 miles range, but it wouldn’t be very significant.
See, in EVs, weight is a HUGE hurdle. Weight will reduce the range on battery by a much larger factor than a vehicle powered by an ICE.
For you, and people that have to commute more than 40 miles a day, consider the Volt a hybrid, because that’s what it will be for you. If you don’t want that, you’ll have to wait for something else….
… like maybe the ZAP-X. It will have a much greater range on battery… but it will cost about $60,000.
(Quote)
July 16th, 2007 at 8:45 pm
Has GM considered a stirling engine to drive the generator. From my understanding, the stirling is the most efficient combustion engine there is and also is completely silent. The Swedes use them to power their submarines. Although they have extremely poor power response, this would not be a factor in driving a generator.
(Quote)
July 17th, 2007 at 9:56 am
This D-Cycle engine looks interesting for the range extender. It\’s a double acting 4-stroke which gives power on every stroke. It has the power of a standard 4-stroke in half the size. Take a look http://www.yanengines.com/ Imagine making this an HCCI for a more complete burn and greater efficiency.
(Quote)
July 30th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Laszlo Pollak: Thank you for the link and bringing your points up!
I made exactly those points. I think the government should support GM and America in rolling out the Volt that in the same way that JFK had the audacity to send America to the moon before the end of the 60’s today’s President should commit America to having 50% of the autos on it’s roads using e-Flex technology by 2015! And back it up with as much money as it takes to get the job done.
The money spent subsidizing this transformation will be earned backed with decreased health problems, decreased environmental problems, and decreased (actually NO oil imports) oil imports by the year 2030! After that it is massive savings and better health and environment for all Americans!
(Quote)
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:52 pm
Vice-Chairman Bob Lutz reasons for not using a diesel engine are just lame excuses that have no basis in fact. Currently GM offers numerous gasoline engine options on all of its models. If they were worried about economies of scale then they would not offer such a variety of engine sizes. Mr. Lutz sites the different state regulations. Again this does not wash as gasoline engines have in the past had different emission equipment to accommodate the California more strict standards. While mass production may be more difficult it has not proven a too difficult hurdle to overcome in the past. He next sites the need to inject urea, which is used to reduce the Nitrous Oxide emissions. This is just one more excuse for inaction. Honda is rising to the challenge and will soon be offering a clean diesel that meets all the emission requirement of all 50 state. GM why can’t you? It is no wonder that GM continues to lose market share. All they do is whine about how difficult life is instead of rising to the challenge.
Other manufactures have risen to the challenge and are taking market share. Volkswagen has much smaller economies of scale, yet they offer a diesel engine. I drive a diesel Jetta and my daughter drives a diesel Beetle, which get 48 and 50 MPG respectively. Yet GM does not offer a diesel engine car. The excuse is that the American public doesn’t want a diesel engine. Why is this true? Could it be that during the last oil crises GM brought out diesel engined cars that were junk? They converted gas engines to run on diesel, which turn out to be unreliable. Management was more interested in a quick buck then the customer’s long-term well being. This same management philosophy plays out in other area as well. For example it is well known that 90% of all engine wear occurs in the first few second of engine operation. To address this issue both German and Japanese auto makers have check valves in the engine lubrication systems. These valves prevent the engine oil from draining out of the engine when it is turned off, thus insuring that the engine has lubrication available for starting. Detroit engines do not have this innovation. As a result Detroit engines start to burn oil just a few years after purchase. Whereas the Japanese engines will continue to run, with out the obligatory blue cloud, for at least 100,000 miles if not 200,000 miles. My diesel Jetta has passed 200,000 miles and is headed for 300,000 miles. The American public may not know why these other engines are so durable they just know that an American engine is not durable and “appears” to be of lower quality. When in fact it is not a quality issue it is a management issue. Management has to decide to order the engineering change that will extend engine life knowing full well that the car will not wear out so quickly and sales will suffer. But will they suffer? Yes in the short run because the engines will last longer. But, in the long run a reputation for quality will be reestablished and market share will return. Looks like a Win, Win situation to me.
Vice-Chairman Bob Lutz if you want to recapture GM’s glory days, stop making excuses and offer the American public a car that is superior to the competition. American’s want to buy an American cars, give them something that is worth buying. If you are unwilling then it wouldn’t surprise me that GM will go the way of the Hudson and the Studebaker. The American public will not continue to buy product that they perceive to be inferior when alternatives are available.
Mr. Lutz it may be more expedient to only offer the Volt from the beginning with only a gas engine since it is off the shelf technology then say so. But please don’t insult us by making a bunch of excuses. Stop playing the victim, stop making excuses. Excuse makers never win!
(Quote)
August 14th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Does Lutz not know about the internet ? Does he think we are stupid consumers who don’t know how to Google ?
Google this – GM sells cars in Europe that meet EURO5/6 that takes affect Jan 2009.
US wide the requirement is Tier 2 BIN5. These standards are in point of fact LESS than EURO5/6.
VW is selling the Jetta diesel here in 2008 in all 50 states, and have nearly filled their 2009 production quota already…
SO, why doesn’t he want a small diesel ? Remember, a small diesel with a set rpm will ALWAYS produce less CO2 and less emmisions than ANY gas / E85 engine can do…
Answer: the diesel will last nearly as long as the Li-I battery so we will be driving it too long = less sales.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
hi
lr08ua83upy7ej8f
good luck
(Quote)
January 24th, 2009 at 1:40 am
Actually, I take strong objection to the statement that Lutz makes about there being stricter regulations for burning diesel in the US.
The reason that diesel can be used so freely in Europe is because they use low-sulfur, or in some countries, zero-sulfur diesel. Peugeot has particulate emissions filters that last for over 100,000 miles.
Diesel is, in fact, a much cleaner and efficient fuel in Europe because of the technology over there. GM needs to bring some of that tech over here, and improve on it further.
Case in point: BMW 535d. Diesel engine, 0-60 in 6secs, limited to 155mpg. It’s more efficient, produces less CO2, is quieter, faster and cheaper than its gasoline equivalent.
(Quote)