Yesterday I wrote a post indicating that GM planned to remove E85 capability from the Volt’s onboard generator. Those of you that were sad, put your tissues away, those who were happy put away your party hats. GM spokesman Rob Peterson has said that GM has not changed to the production plan to have E85 capability in the car.
What was unique about our post is that in this rare instance we used an anonymous inside source for information. Rob Peterson is GM’s official spokesman on E-Flex systems. I have no documentation proving my source’s statement, and possibly it isn’t true. Perhaps it is a mistake to quote these anonymous sources, after all my objective is to provide you with the clear and transparent truth about this car to the absolute extent possible, and to avoid any rumors or misstatements. Usually I go out of my way to get the official statements direct from GM.
When I confronted him with GM’s response, my source indicated for sure that the ecotech flexfuel engine postulated for the initial concept Volt has been dropped. The new combustion engine still appears to be an unknown. Many people think it will be an HCCI engine. He thought it wasn’t planned to be E85 capable.
It is true that adding E85 capability isn’t a big deal. The cost is negligible and it’s mainly a software issue. In terms of whether the ethanol will hold up well sitting in the tank unused..well have you heard of 100 year-old bottles of wine?
Anyway, we’ll keep you posted on this as it evolves. Cheers.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 21st, 2007 at 7:52 am and is filed under Fuel. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Aug 21st, 2007 (8:02 am)OK thanks Lyle for this statement, it is important that the GM-Volt site keeps its credibility.
Thanks for your work again.
Aug 21st, 2007 (8:13 am)Well, it got an official response from GM didn’t it? GM is listening. Finally.
Aug 21st, 2007 (9:31 am)100 year old bottle of wine? More like moonshine. With or wothout Flex fuel is OK with me. No big deal. I certainly would fill the tank flex fuel if it were available. And there it would sit. For a long time, in my case.
Aug 21st, 2007 (9:52 am)Thank you Lyle, you’re doing a great job here and the information on your site is as credible as any I’ve found.
About E85, I’ll buy the Volt either way. I’d be more interested in a BioDiesel version though.
I really think that if we’re going to solve our transportation fuel problems, we need to keep it simple. We’re going to run out of oil, and we’ve probably started to already. Electric vehicles are more efficient and we already have an infrastructure in place. If we spent the next 20 to 30 years building PBR nuclear reactors, coal plants (with carbon sequestration and/or conversion to methanol/butanol) and upgrading our electrical delivery systems with intelligent routing and storage, we’ll be well on our way to energy independence. If you add renewable energy and futuristic concepts such as high altitude wind power generation and advanced geothermal, we would have abundant power for the foreseeable future.
The Volt is a small step in this direction, but it is more important as a symbol. If the Volt gains widespread acceptance, it can serve as a a tangible symbol of the kind of changes that need to be made in this country to ensure that our children and grandchildren will enjoy the same freedoms and standard of living that we have.
Aug 21st, 2007 (1:08 pm)I like the eflex idea but I think we can see that people simply want the EV/PHEV volt. If it burns only gas, that’s ok, and if it has an eflex option, that would be nice.
Aug 21st, 2007 (8:43 pm)Thanks guys
I appreciate the support.
Aug 21st, 2007 (10:41 pm)FlexFuel is back in – Great!
I have to wonder if GM might have been testing the waters here. In any case, they are listening, which is also great.
Aug 21st, 2007 (11:54 pm)I’ll take almost any range extender that I an purchase fuel for easily, regular gas, E85, diesel, but not hydrogen.
Thanks for getting the correction from GM though.
I wonder if someone knowledgeable might be able to say why a turbine is not a consideration. As I understand it turbines have as little as one moving part, are good for running generators, and can run on almost any fuel. I suspect that different fuels would require adjustments to the injection. Turbines don’t have a good torque curve, and take time to spin up, but that’s not an issue for a range extender.