Your Questions Answered by Top Chevy Volt Executives, Part 5

November 26th, 2007 | Posted in: Design, Engineering, GM Q and A

It’s not over yet. We still have some more answers to your questions to GM executives about the Volt.

Q: Is GM giving you every resource necessary to complete the Volt project?
A:(DG) “I have never seen so much of ‘Denise, what do you want’”..”open checkbook”..”and do more and do it faster.”..”This is a growth area, its kind of a min-company within a bigger company”..”The message that GM is continually hiring in certain areas is one that I have to get out to the public, because there are good people who think GM isn’t hiring”

Q: We get people on our site who are interested in working with GM on the Volt.
A: (DG) “Send them my way! Seriously! Honestly. I’m telling you, we cant find people fast enough.”

Q: Are you considering the possibility of multiple driving modes such as economy, making the battery last longer but not allowing accelerations, or a performance mode, letting you go all out when you don’t care about battery state of charge, for example?
A: (TP) “Probably not in Gen-1, as I indicated there will be a few choices we give to the customer, one being an eco-mode (HVAC) that’s a given.”..’We need to be careful about too many choices”..”Longer term given what GM brings technologically to the party..there are a host or myriad of different opportunities longer term”..”In gen-1, what does it take to get it out sooner it’s a matter of putting only a few things on (keep it simple)”..”A year later maybe well allow them to a have a greater configurability”. “In a future session when things are further along, we’ll share with you a few little tricks we think are coming”..”First we have to get the basic car right.”

Q: Are you interested in ideas that the GM-Volt readership community has?
A:(TP) “Yes. You can tell your readers I would be interested in some of the things that they think would be cool.”

Popularity: 5% [?]

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading ...

Posted by: Lyle

80 Responses to “Your Questions Answered by Top Chevy Volt Executives, Part 5”

OhmExcited Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 12:34 am

Since so much of the Volt’s design is software based, is it possible for the car to be upgraded by flash memory via the internet, instead of going to the dealership? That would change everything. Matter of fact, open the programming the general public. There really is no risk, as user-modified code could not be used on other brands. Even if it could you could write the license so that it prevents use on other brands (sorry, Bob, you probably don’t have a clue what I’m talking about).

Also, it would be good to have a display panel that shows not only how much energy is used, but how fast it is being used and when (e.g. positive charge during regenerative braking). This would give people instant feedback and over time teach them the optimal method of driving.

[Reply]
Grizzly Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 1:03 am

I’ve always thought they needed to leave room for future enhancements, and the way to do that is through firmware. I also thought that if the dash were more like an LCD screen than a traditional dash, a firmware update would give you new gauges that hadn’t been anticipated at the time of the original release. This would assure 1 gen buyers than they’ll be able to take advantage of enhanced features that will definitely be incorporated in later gens.

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 1:05 am

Perhaps Denise could post job advertisements here. They would make great reading and give us something to discuss.

[Reply]
Jim I Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 2:18 am

OhmExcited #1:

Open programming sounds like a cool idea, but it would never be allowed. The liability issues would be huge for GM. Plus, how would they know if a problem with the vehicle was caused by their hardware, or your software?

Grizzly #2:

I agree with that idea completely!!

Lyle:

If Denise wants to hear our ideas, how would she like to make that a reality? How about a separate area of this web site? Or a web site controlled by GM? Or even to set up an e-mail address to send in ideas? Let us know!!

But if they truly want real ideas, we would need to know what is already finalized, so we do not waste anyone’s time with impossible requests for the Gen-1 product. Personally, I would have no problem signing a non-disclosure agreement.

It is just something to think about….

[Reply]
Dave G Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 8:43 am

Q: Are you interested in ideas that the GM-Volt readership community has?
A:(TP) “Yes. You can tell your readers I would be interested in some of the things that they think would be cool.”

… like waving a red flag in front of a bull.

Lyle - do you think another Forum tree is appropriate here (in addition to the existing 4)?

[Reply]
Rob Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 9:22 am

I think thay should consider using HVAC with solar panel on Volt’s roof. Not only would it save battery power, it would also allow for some charging of the battery during the day.

[Reply]
banjoez Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:10 am

I love everything about the Volt concept, especially the possibility of being able to do modular upgrades (both software and hardware)to various systems as they become available. However, I wonder how GM expects to make the shift from planned obsolescence in today’s cars vs. being able to simply replace battery packs and other components with newer, more efficient (and perhaps cheaper)ones down the line and have a car that can run for decades instead of years with the latest technology. I certainly hope this is the plan but since GM is in it for the money I wonder if it will actually become a reality.

[Reply]
Tim Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:20 am

Grizzly #2 has a great idea. A large LCD screen behind the steering wheel for gauges etc and another such display could go in the center for the HVAC, entertainment, Nav. etc. Both can be updated or customized in the future. COOL!

If the Volt is going to be a 5-door hatch back, then the rear seats need to quickly and easily fold FLAT and a removable shelf below the rear window should be incorporated for load privacy and so that larger loads can be accommodated. Nothing is worse than buying a chair and having no way to get it home INSIDE the car when the weather is bad.

A 2nd electric motor on the rear axle or 2 rear wheel motors would give a 4×4 option for rain or snow. Half the county has do deal with inclement weather and many if not most of these people only buy SUVs for the 4×4 capability. A 4×4 E-flex would remove many of the SUV from the road and help GM meet CAFÉ.

The range-extender should be able to burn any combination of liquid fuels incl. kero, gas, vegoil, biodiesel, methanol, ethanol etc. without having to worry about choking on stale fuel. You should be able to use whatever is the cheap and locally available. That is what the “Flex” is all about.

This Cyclone Engine shows the great promise: http://www.cyclonepower.com/

The Cyclone Engine It is lighter and more compact than an ICE, full torque from 0-rpm, few moving parts, very cheap to make, recycles its own heat so no radiator is required and it fully burns rather than explodes fuel so no muffler or pollution controls are required.

[Reply]
Nick Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:40 am

I think their obsession with a 40 mile range is slowing them down. If they just took an Astra, retrofit it with the battery and got, say, just 30 mile electric range, it would be a huge achievment. They would have a lot less schedule risk because they would not have to deal with the litte issues like low-energy head lights, great aerodynamics, etc. to squeaze out those last few miles. And, the savings in energy to the consumer would be the same, perhapse even more because they would be more likely to deplete the full charge every day.

[Reply]
OhmExcited Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:41 am

I also like the idea of the making the dash largely software-based instead of fixed hardware. Make it like the xbox360, where the panel is periodically updated by the vendor. If the car has a simple built-in wireless device, it could automatically update the dash from the garage for people with wireless routers. If its touch screen, GM could sell optional “equipment” like NAV without having to update the hardware at the front end.

You guys also talked me out of open-source, at least being able to change it yourself during the warranty period. It could still be open so that people could inspect the code and provide suggestions to GM.

I really think GM should think this through, because cars of the future are much more like computers than a simple piece of greasy, rotating machinery. Marrying a GM car with an Apple interface would put a lot of smiles on faces.

[Reply]
Nick Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:42 am

And, of course, they could also be working on the Volt in parallel.

[Reply]
Estero Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:02 am

A lot of good ideas here and there are likely to be even more to come.

I would really like to see something done about “gauges behind the steering wheel” where they are difficult to see when the steering wheel is adjusted away from its “neutral position”. My wife complains about this all the time!

[Reply]
law Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:20 am

Lot’s of good ideas for cars of the future here. I just want the volt to work well. I do think that cars will be connected to the internet and computers in the future. This would allow you to monitor if your car is being broken into or you could check its condition or even have it start warming up for you. I predict that we’ll have this technology by 2020 but GM could be the innovator here.

[Reply]
Paul Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:40 am

In response to Tony’s request for cool ideas…

I love the clear roof appearance of the Volt, but there is the obvious issue of radiant heat from the Sun. Probably great in winter, but bad in summer.

There is a relatively new product called “switchable glass” or “smart glass”. It uses a simple LCD film layer that can instantly switch between complete clear and completely opaque. Here’s some more info:

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

I think it would be amazingly cool to have a dashboard button that instantly made the roof transparent. And it would solve the heat issue at the same time.

[Reply]
noel park Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:57 am

Did they ever say anything about having an official waiting list and taking deposits?

[Reply]
kent beuchert Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 12:12 pm

other sites have some bad info - they are expecting no more than 60,000 units first year. It looks to be built by a bunch of yahoos who seem to think that automakers
don’t yet realize what everyone else on the planet does - that plug-ins are hot these days, at least the public claims they are. Of course, the public (or I should say a small, loudmouthed segment) also screamed
and demanded hybrids several years ago, and look what happened - it took a doubling of gasoline prices to tempt anyone away from their SUVs. Unfortunately, those pushing the plug-in concept are spreading falsehoods about how economical they will be - they conveniently avoid mentioning that the purchase prices are going to be
considerably higher than a gasoline version. It’s false advertising worse than any put out by the auto companies. When the public sees those list prices, a lot of that vocal enthusiasm will fade away.

[Reply]
kent beuchert Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 12:18 pm

Looks like other sites are doing a little false advertising of their own : the pictures they are using show a vehicle that we all know won’t be built. They also quote a $25,000 price tag - but Lutz simply said
“nicely below $30K,” not $25K. I assume the
price will be $28K or therabouts. They also falsely claim 60,000 production units first
year. No one really knows what that will be,
but we know Lutz would like 100,000, a nice round number.

[Reply]
noel park Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 12:27 pm

I continue to be amazed by the number of comments you generate. It is really impressive. Even if some of them are starting to sound depressingly like other blogs. For example the diatribes under Part 4 below.

To me, the point here is to encourage/kick in the butt GM to get this car on the road. Don’t we all have that goal in common, whatever stupidity they may have committed in the past re the EV1 or whatever?

Some days ago, someone made a comment about the impending appearance of sub-$20,000, 50 mpg hybrids. This weekend our local Toyota dealer advertised a new 2008 Prius for $18,988 (one only at this price, of course).

[Reply]
Luke Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 1:06 pm

I also like the idea of a software-defined dashboard.

However, everyone mentioned LCDs. LCDs aren’t great in all lighting conditions, though, especially direct sunlight. Also, the backlights can be a little bright at night when I’ve been using my nigh-vision to peer a quarter-mile down some dark interstate.

Would a version of Sony’s ePaper display work? It was used on the Sony eBook reader, and also the Amazon Kindle. The updates can be a little slow, but it might be good enough for a speedometer. With a nice multicolor LED spotlight on the dashboard, and some other clever graphic/interior design, it could look appropriately futuristic.

Anyway, just an idea to throw in to the mix!

[Reply]
OhmExcited Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 1:38 pm

Now, Nick. Don’t want a can’t-do attitude around here. The features we’re talking about are largely software-based, not hardware. It really is an issue of development money, not diverting existing staff resources from hardware to software (something that’s not exactly possible). Maybe asking for this feature is too difficult for GM to implement in the given time frame, but a lot of subs out there could easily implement something by late 2010. They are looking for ideas, and all they can say is no.

[Reply]
OhmExcited Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 1:51 pm

This article talks a little about their plans for the instrument cluster, which is not LED based:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/10/autobloggreen-qanda-wade-bryant-on-the-interior-design-of-the-che/

If I understand this correctly, the UV laser could be controlled by software?

[quote]
We do have a traditional cluster that has your speedometer, your fuel gauge and battery level and your gear position indicator, and it’s, like most concept cars are, a very highly-designed beautiful piece but it’s three dimensional. Just behind that, closer to the driver, is a clear lens that most of the time looks completely transparent when the vehicle’s off. When it’s activated, there’s a coating that’s an ultraviolet sensitive ink – it’s projected onto, with using a UV laser projector, and it allows us to do full color animation on this clear lens. It looks like a holograph, but it’s actually visible from any angle, driver, passengers can see it.

ABG: So that’s in the main cluster?

WB: Yes. Right behind it, so we actually have an overlay of information above the speedometer and that information highlights all the power train technology, so it tells you how you’re using the power, how you’re consuming your power. It will help you interface to make choices. If you would like to, if you want to top your batteries off at any time or if you would prefer to deplete the batteries because you know you’re going to be plugging in soon, it gives you that control and it puts it right in front of the driver.
[/quote]

[Reply]
Mark Bartosik Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 2:27 pm

Software / firmware updates…

Rather than by Internet, they could be via On-Star. This might be more controllable for GM, and would give them another revenue stream.

Personally I prefer to DIY via Internet download, but I’m a geek, and most people are not. Given the risks with disabling my car I might even pay for On-Star, to guarantee support.

Best, provide, both On-Star and Internet updates. After all not all markets have On-Star available. This also caters for both groups of users (geeks and average Joe).

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 2:34 pm

Jim I, #4
The Personal Computer is a useful analogy perhaps?
The user can customise it with displays, air conditioning, communications but a service technician restores it to factory defaults if there is a problem.
There may be a risk of mechanical damage due to customisation eg broken axles, but the technicians will soon recognise that.
GM could supply peripherals, alternative energy sources, etc.
The personal car has arrived!

[Reply]
Dave B Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 3:15 pm

Some user control is fine as well as upgrades…but this is supposed to be a car for the masses. The masses do not like complicated things. KEEP IT SIMPLE.

[Reply]
noel park Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 3:26 pm

Dave B, #24:

Amen!

[Reply]
DG Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 4:28 pm

Since when can I NOT have my cake and eat it too? Damn crybabies. GM keep up the good work and just get er done! Worry about the details later.

[Reply]
Tim Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 4:37 pm

I don’t think that anything but the fact that the primary drive will be “electric” has been set in stone yet. Design specifications will probably remain fluid for at least another 12-18 months. As we’ve seen, much can and will happen between now and then.

I believe the real key to the Volt is functionality combined with stand-out styling at a price of say $25K that the “average” driver can afford. That’s why I want a 5-door hatch back with fold flat rear seats and a removable “trunk” privacy screen.

It would be a huge selling point if the primary controls of gen-1 could be software upgraded to subsequent generations as this technology will grow, change and mature very quickly. Nobody wants to buy a rapidly obsolescing car.

Just think of the after-market possibilities. The Volt will be a customizer’s dream!

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 5:15 pm

Where did that term planned obselescence come from..i cant quite remember.
On wikopedia, and they are frequently wrong , it is claimed that GM introduced styling changes in 1935 in order to make cars a fashion item.
While I appreciate fine design I rather favour technical innovation as a driver of the market more than styling.
What I think that means is the styling of the volt stays fixed for a long time, say, a decade, while it evolves technically.

..Oh well…silly idea..

[Reply]
Rashiid Amul Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 5:42 pm

Paul #14 mentions “smart glass”. I personally HATE the see through roof, (don’t want to burn my bald head, lol), but I could easily live with “smart glass”.

The LCD dashboard with future software updates sound very cool. I am a tech geek so internet upgrades are a piece of cake.

Tim #8 mentions a 4X4 car. I own a Subaru Outback because I live in New England and on top of a big hill. The Outback is AWD and is simply AMAZING in the snow. Any other time, it is just another gas guzzler. I would love a 4X4 version of the Volt.

With all that said, the most important thing is to get this car out quickly and build it to be extremely reliable. Death to oil is very necessary for our continued freedom, our current lifestyle, and for future generations of the free world.

[Reply]
Jack the R Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 5:49 pm

I don’t have a question so much as a suggestion - GM needs to make an outreach effort to Daily Kos. The vitriol against GM over there is intense, largely due to the EV1 debacle. Yesterday one of the frontpagers ran an article on “The Surging American Auto Industry:”

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/25/16832/841

featuring a few electric vehicles slightly less likely to be produced than the Volt, but no Volt.

Someone needs to arrange for Markos to have a tour and a test drive of whatever Volt parts will roll.

[Reply]
Jim I Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 5:57 pm

bruce g #23:

The broken axle comment is what would be the problem. The customer’s position would be - you gave me the capability to make these changes, so if the axle could be broken, you should have locked me out of that part of programming. The companiy’s position would be - you made changes to the vehicle we delivered to you, so the warranty is void. And imagine the poor service tech trying to diagnose and fix problems, when every single car in the shop is set up differently!

My Chrysler Crossfire can have the programming modified by a third party company to improve performance. This company basically burns in new parameters onto an EPROM chip, which is part of the car’s control electronics package. That is cool, but it completely voids the warranty. To me, the risk was not worth the gain.

And I am a programmer by trade, but this modification still did not make sense to me.

[Reply]
Fuelzilla Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 6:22 pm

Does GM design Volt as a stand-alone model or a platform? I mean, if you guys are talking about dozens of thousands in production, do you honestly believe there is a market for, say 50,000 two-door sports cars, considering there is still much competition in the niche from every car manufacturer out there? No matter how revolutionary the design and lofty energy savings goals, what on Earth made GM pick such as tiny niche of the automotive market to build a plug-in hybrid for?

Who said that people who usually drive sports cars even care a bit about fuel consumption? Most sports cars are only driven over the weekend and to the nearest golf course (my exaggeration, of course). I have driven 38,000 miles in the first year of owning a Toyota Prius. Is there a sane person out there that would drive their sports car 38,000 miles in a year?

Why did they not pick the minivan category for cry sake? Larger chassis would afford more battery capacity and muted acceleration expectations would make it possible to let it run longer on electric propulsion.

So, here is my 2 cents: GM, retire the current Volt concept and concentrate your diminishing resources on a car that would be more relevant for the average American family and a car that you would sell more of should it enter production. Looks like you only got one shot at it. Good luck!

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 6:24 pm

Jim,
I spent some time as an IT Infrastructure Manager.
We allowed users to alter their configurations at their risk and our only undertaking was to restore to defaults. All losses to their account. Isnt that the fundamental assumption behind the personal computer?

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 6:34 pm

Fuelzilla,
Its a four door saloon based on the Delta platform.
Do you work for Toyota?

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:12 pm

bruce 34 says “do you work for toyota?”
is that nice bruce, lol…

but, good to see a minimum of trolling here, and mostly great conversation about a great car.

Deat to oil, god bless the E-Rev Electric Chevy Volt, and God Bless America!

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:13 pm

that’s Death to oil, lol

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:31 pm

4 jim l “If Denise wants to hear our ideas, how would she like to make that a reality? How about a separate area of this web site? Or a web site controlled by GM? Or even to set up an e-mail address to send in ideas? Let us know!!”

an email address would be an excellent idea, but aren’t they checking here already?
of course an idea email address would be a more direct link, without all of the clutter on here.

[Reply]
Fuelzilla Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:45 pm

@bruce g:

I stand corrected. I guess you can call that a second pair of doors. Still, you would not exactly call a 4-seater a family car, would you? If you think you’ll be comfortable in there, just compare the legroom, shoulder room and headroom (hip room is a notable exception which I find hilarious but then you consider it’s for 2 hips, not 3) to that of, well, I don’t know… Toyota Prius?
Not comfortable comparing it to Prius? Compare it to any other mass market car.

Volt looks like a toy, and it’s OK for designers to play out different ideas. It’s just weird that this little car is touted as a GM car manufacturing savior. I even heard it being used as a bargaining chip in GM vs. UAW negotiations during the recent workers strike. Were UAW negotiators blind?

Anyways, no, I don’t work for Toyota, I just own a Prius. I guess, that makes me enough of a Toyota proponent ’cause I voted with my buck. I actually don’t even like their other models all that much but with the Prius they managed to get everything just right. Also, I don’t believe Toyota did embarrass themselves showing a Prius prototype made of a golf cart. If they had such prototype, they would not call it Prius. Why ruin a good name for a future product? GM marketing people have to learn as much as their designers do.

Anxious to test-drive a Volt.
FZ

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:49 pm

wow, kool, another volt slammer, i’m impressed. how to handle this one lyle?

[Reply]
billybob Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:52 pm

Gotta love the Toyota, think i will buy one?

[Reply]
Sissy12345 Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:56 pm

Just what we need, another gm basher, will Lyle please do something about this?

[Reply]
law Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:57 pm

I promote a slow change (like 15 years not 500 years) from oil to alternatives while giving oil companies a chance to drive the switchover to renewables and maintain their position of existance. In the future they can lobby for alternative energy bills, I won’t mind that.

The volt and other electric vehicle technology will allow oil companies to find a way to adapt. I think we as americans can show these companies that it isn’t a matter of if they have to adapt, it’s that they must adapt and keep pace with the modern world, otherwise they will go bankrupt.

This is why I support gas station battery swaps, ethanol, biodiesel, and hydrogen in the future. Oil companies should install charging stations in the streets and meter charging of PHEVs, EVs. It could work like how you make copies at kinkos, you put your card in, you start charging, when you return you pay for the parking time and the electricity you charge on your credit card, which could be a special card designed only for charging meters. When I say death to oil, I don’t mean the companies, just the source of energy, I want our companies to adapt and to continue to prosper.

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:58 pm

Fuelzilla,
I like the look of the Prius but I believe they put the design out because they couldnt get a reasonable range out of their battery.
Next Easter when GM demonstrates a 40 mile all electric range in a vehicle at a reasonable price it will be a whole new ball game.
The delta platform is about the size of the Corolla but i personally believe with some fine tuning they can put out a Camry sized car(on the epsilon platform).(But GM arent saying that.)

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 7:58 pm

hey, i forgot, god bless nano solar, for hopefully bringing almost free power for the E-Rev Electric Chevy Volt!

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 8:07 pm

law 42, ouch, i don’t think that i would like to trust oil companies with our next mode of transportation. we really don’t need them controlling ev’s power source. but, privately owned “service stations” like we had in times past would be a great idea for the plans that you mention.
but, it’s pretty moot anyway, since, if green finally takes hold, which i’m sure it will sooner or later, people will be re-charging from their nano-solar almost free energy, and most stores and employers will have nano solar or similar type solar covering their whole roofs, and will allow their employees and/or customers to “re-fuel” for free or really cheap anyway.

Death to Oil, god bless the E-Rev Electric Chevy Volt, god bless nano solar, and God Bless America!

[Reply]
Fuelzilla Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 8:57 pm

@ Sissy12345: Bashing GM Volt on a Volt blog is fun! Just kidding

When I first learned about Volt, I did have great expectations. Looking back at my first post about it, it reads just short of ecstatics: http://fuelzilla.com/chevrolet-volt-meet-an-electric-car/
It’s when I started learning more about it that I felt that GM made the concept to create some buzz and continue business as usual for as long as they can ride it out.

By the way, I have read here about 2007 and 2008 Volt milestones. 2007 is almost over. Does anyone know if any have been met? And what are those milestones, anyway? I hope releasing the YouTube video was not one of them. He-he, I just could not resist!

[Reply]
mykallb Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 9:03 pm

WRT the LCD display and sunlight. My Garmin E-trex is optimized for sunlight and only in the shade or indoors/night do I need to fire up the highly efficient LED to light the display. I believe that GM really needs to look at this.

Too much has been made of upgrades, and no doubt that IS INDEED warranted, but just think about how a system like this would tackle problems in performance that went unforeseen despite the vast amount of beta testing. If a software fix were discovered,
the savings to GM with a system like this could be significant. Instead of bringing your car to the dealer who will bill GM for labor and parts, you will download the new firmware fix (plus updates !!) and use a memory stick/jump drive plugged into the USB 2.0 slot in the dash/fusebox to fix the problem.

I believe that what GM loses in the possible sale of “maintenance” parts associated with traditional ICEs would be more than made up for by the offset in dealer billing for warranty work….especially for a ground breaking vehicle like the Volt.

M.

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 9:30 pm

Two decades ago it would be unthinkable, the soft car, but now software is everywhere and people can handle it nearly as well as the telephone, thirty years ago.
I know..its a sweeping statement..but how many home have computers now..how many have ipods..
They know software is not perfect but they have developed ways of dealing with it, just like the telephone.

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 9:44 pm

47 mykallb, very kool thoughts…

[Reply]
mykallb Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 9:47 pm

It’s more a matter of being what I think GM wants to be…a “cult” thing. You don’t develop a following for selling a product that was never fully thought through. You don’t do the same by having never considered the future. When you have the grasp of technology, you embrace it and use it, and never design to let anyone feel let down.

Simple, but I just can’t express any other way.

GM: Please land the Volt with GRAVITY.

M.

[Reply]
Anti-Oil Jihadi Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:21 pm

Since most (or all?) GM vehicles come with OnStar, that would likely be used to send out software updates. Assuming updates were needed. Or at least trigger a “Please visit your local service center for an important software update” message.

I assume they might be able to get the software correct the first time around. I would bet a GPS system would require more software updates than the other software.

One of my original questions for GM was separation of the computer systems into vital and non-vital areas, possibly via a virtual machine architecture, with the non-vital being modifiable (but not supported by GM). I suggested this because I believe the demographic that the Volt appeals to is the same demographic that will want to modify it.

But we need to consider the legal implications for GM. Even if they acknowledge they purposely designed it to be modifiable, but doing so will void the warranty, they could get into hot water with lawyers / parasites suing them because of their ‘lack of attention to safety, because they gave the public enough rope to hang themselves with’, etc etc. I’m sure GM has enough problems to deal with, and will avoid this issue like the plague. I know I would.

- death to oil
http://www.oiljihad.org

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:38 pm

The other possible updates may be to the algorithims or tables they use to manage the relationship between the ice, battery and external enviroment.

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:41 pm

Lyle,
Could you fit this blog with a spelling checker?

[Reply]
Anti-Oil Jihadi Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:53 pm

Bruce, if you use the firefox web browser it has a built in as-you-type spell checker.

[Reply]
james Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 10:53 pm

that (a spelling checker) would be nice bruce. my firefox website had one, but since i switched to opera, i don’t have one set up yet.

[Reply]
banjoez Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:03 pm

As an owner of a so-called “cult” car, the MINI Cooper, I can see the possibility of the Volt becoming one also if done correctly. And that’s a good thing. There is something about the Volt concept styling alone that makes it very desirable, let alone the ingenious drive train. I think those folks wishing for a more practical PHEV vehicle from GM need to understand that a large part of desireability is in the styling, especially if the price approaches the premium range as the Volt looks like it will. Let’s face it, the MINI costs way more than other 4 cyl. FWD economy cars, but the driveability, styling and uniqueness make it (arguably) worth it to a lot of people and it has become extremely popular. The Volt is the first American car in a loooong time that has the potential to capture a similar cult status while at the same time providing an answer to our energy woes. GM, you have a winner here, please don’t screw with the styling too much for the production model and end up with a boring looking Prius.

[Reply]
AES Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:18 pm

“Q: We get people on our site who are interested in working with GM on the Volt.
A: (DG) “Send them my way! Seriously! Honestly. I’m telling you, we cant find people fast enough.””

Not exactly an audition, but I made a 3d model and physics simlulation file for the volt. Right now it only works in Redline, but I might be able to convert it for other driving simulators.

Fun if nothing else:

http://www.ambrosiasw.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=115368

[Reply]
Jim I Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:20 pm

bruce g #33:

Having your desktop crash and then losing a few word processing files or some screen savers after the op/sys restore to company defaults is one thing.

Having your car go out of control going down Main Street at 5:00 rush hour because of a customer installed software modification is quite another.

I am not saying it is a bad idea. And I sure would like to have the option to poke around in there a bit, if it was available. I just think that the legal department at GM is never going to let this fly. At least for the Gen-1 vehicle. Jihadi #51 got it right. The parasites and their ilk would ruin it for all of us.

Fuelzilla #38:

GM has said they are designing this car for commuters to get 40 miles per day without using any gasoline. That is hardly a small niche market. And why does it have to be bland? I think they are on the correct path for a first generation of a new technology. This is not supposed to be the vehicle for soccer moms to haul around the team. Those will come later.

I am going to use my company as an example. We have fifteen employees. How many cars are in the parking lot every day? Fifteen. Think about how much gasoline could be saved if all those commuter cars would start using alternative methods of powering their cars?

GM has got their design parameters right for the first vehicle. Now they just have to get it out the door right.

If this is not the vehicle for you, that is your choice and your right. But don’t I also have the same right to think this might be the perfect vehicle for my needs?

[Reply]
Butters Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:32 pm

I don’t think that LCD gauges are going to be practical or cost-effective. The gauges should follow the KISS principle.

However, for the second or third generation Volt, I would like to see a 12″ wide-aspect touch screen console in the center of the dashboard. This would encompass all of the usual accessory controls, including vehicle configuration preferences. It would also serve as a multimedia player with an onboard hard disk for storing your music and video collections. The car should also have mobile broadband access (i.e. 3G, EDGE, etc.) as an option, providing web and email access on the road, including Google Maps, of course.

My questions for GM:

Are you considering any programs or partnerships to facilitate the development of a distributed charge point infrastructure?

For example, wouldn’t chains like Whole Foods or Starbucks be interested in installing rapid charge points to draw relatively affluent Volt owners to their like-minded establishments? Would it be a lost cause to pitch Exxon or some other fuel giant on the idea of installing chargers at their filling stations? Heck, I might even go to Sonic if their drive-in kiosks could charge my car while I eat.

Is it technically feasible to develop a rapid charge point for such commercial deployments that can charge the Volt’s battery in 10 minutes? 15 minutes? What about a home charging unit that draws from the mains instead of from a switched circuit? Would that allow for much quicker charging, and would it be cost-effective for buyers?

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:33 pm

Jim l,
I have to agree with you when I stop laughing but where is the line drawn between acceptable losses and unacceptable. I dont know.

Banjoez,
Welcome aboard, the mini often springs to mind as I try to grapple with uncertainty. Possibly starting as a cult and moving to a mass movement may be one way of introducing the volt and electric cars.
Perhaps a small cult of say 100,000 fanatical users would overcome the reservations of the majority.

[Reply]
law Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 12:52 am

#45 James, I see what you mean, I just hope the will of the people is strong enough to overcome the power they have. If they felt they could still be part of this, they would not fight as much to stop american energy independence. I feel like many other americans, that oil companies are a parasite that sends hundreds of billions of dollars to other nations each year (many of which are anti-american).

[Reply]
Scott H Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 1:01 am

banjoez #56:

I own a Mini also, cool. I love my car too. Just be careful calling a Prius ugly. I’ve done that before and complaints from Toyota lovers came from everywhere. I’m telling ya, they’ll hound you till they smell blood. Later.

[Reply]
mykallb Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 1:07 am

Butters Says:
November 26th, 2007 at 11:32 pm Quote

I don’t think that LCD gauges are going to be practical or cost-effective. The gauges should follow the KISS principle.

However, for the second or third generation Volt, I would like to see a 12″ wide-aspect touch screen console in the center of the dashboard

=====

Butt-er-man,

It’s as simple as this. If you release a vehicle like this it’s important that you TOP DOWN so that you never have to apologize to first time buyers as to why only a year or two after release they are floating like a row boat w/o oars. Capiche?

M.
>

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 2:18 am

I touched on downloading patches earlier, perhaps the car should also be uploading performance data, My Windows XP is always threatening to upload non performance data…it must be possible…

[Reply]
james Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 3:09 am

law 60, hope you’re right, and i’d still like to see mom and pop stations instead of oil chain stations.

[Reply]
Tim Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 10:23 am

bruce g- Start an MS Word document, type your comments there and use that program’s spell checker & thesaurus. The completed comment can then be copied & pasted into the blog and you will also have a copy of all your comments as each subsequent comment can be added to the same document. You can reference them later with the “find” feature. A spell checker on this site will only complicate matters.

[Reply]
John Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 12:55 pm

[quote comment="16295"]Since so much of the Volt’s design is software based, is it possible for the car to be upgraded by flash memory via the internet, instead of going to the dealership? That would change everything. Matter of fact, open the programming the general public. There really is no risk, as user-modified code could not be used on other brands. Even if it could you could write the license so that it prevents use on other brands (sorry, Bob, you probably don’t have a clue what I’m talking about).

…[/quote]
To be covered by WHOSE warranty pray tell?

And to be approved by WHICH government?

[Reply]
John Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 12:58 pm

[quote comment="16354"]I love everything about the Volt concept, especially the possibility of being able to do modular upgrades (both software and hardware)to various systems as they become available. However, I wonder how GM expects to make the shift from planned obsolescence in today’s cars vs. being able to simply replace battery packs and other components with newer, more efficient (and perhaps cheaper)ones down the line and have a car that can run for decades instead of years with the latest technology. I certainly hope this is the plan but since GM is in it for the money I wonder if it will actually become a reality.[/quote]
“Planned obsolescence” is a myth spread by cynical fear mongers. In reality, technology DOES really advance that fast.

[Reply]
John Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 1:04 pm

[quote comment="16357"]… A 4×4 E-flex would remove many of the SUV from the road and help GM meet CAFÉ.

…

[/quote]No it would not.

This is pure fantasy based on an embarassing misunderstanding of other people and their needs and behaviors.

People who buy SUVs usually need more space than a compact car would afford them, and would (if practical) be more likely to buy an AWD Volvo wagon.

(Really, think about what you are saying. If you really lived in the snow belt, you’d know that FWD cars work for the vast majority of people and are considered adequate enough for snow duty.
You are arguing that people will abandon Tahoes for Malibus. That makes no sense whatsoever–especially if there is no change in needs or living habits.
SUVs are expensive, and people who buy them usually have some sort of need for them or the other that traditional cars cannot fill to their satisfaction. To each his own. Don’t go trying to control other people’s lives, especially when you misunderstand them so much).

—

I do agree that they should have an LED display for the gages.

[Reply]
John Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 1:12 pm

[quote comment="16387"]other sites have some bad info - they are expecting no more than 60,000 units first year. It looks to be built by a bunch of yahoos who seem to think that automakers
don’t yet realize what everyone else on the planet does - that plug-ins are hot these days, at least the public claims they are. Of course, the public (or I should say a small, loudmouthed segment) also screamed
and demanded hybrids several years ago, and look what happened - it took a doubling of gasoline prices to tempt anyone away from their SUVs. Unfortunately, those pushing the plug-in concept are spreading falsehoods about how economical they will be - they conveniently avoid mentioning that the purchase prices are going to be
considerably higher than a gasoline version. It’s false advertising worse than any put out by the auto companies. When the public sees those list prices, a lot of that vocal enthusiasm will fade away.[/quote]People DO NOT (by and large) switch from SUVs to “hybrids”.
The size differential is too big.

This becomes OBVIOUS when you take your head out of the clouds.

They are much more likely to switch to a wagon or large car.
—

GM should still have Linux-based software so that people can make the car into a cult hit.
If this thing takes over Silicon Valley, the rest of California will follow.

[Reply]
John Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 1:20 pm

[quote comment="16451"]I don’t think that anything but the fact that the primary drive will be “electric” has been set in stone yet. Design specifications will probably remain fluid for at least another 12-18 months. As we’ve seen, much can and will happen between now and then.

I believe the real key to the Volt is functionality combined with stand-out styling at a price of say $25K that the “average” driver can afford. That’s why I want a 5-door hatch back with fold flat rear seats and a removable “trunk” privacy screen.

It would be a huge selling point if the primary controls of gen-1 could be software upgraded to subsequent generations as this technology will grow, change and mature very quickly. Nobody wants to buy a rapidly obsolescing car.

Just think of the after-market possibilities.

The Volt will be a customizer’s dream![/quote]
I expect that only a very basic Volt will be $25,000 an dpeople need to stop saying this number.

As people pointed out, it is likely to be closer to $27,000 for any average model (who wants to bet?) with many more coming in near $28,000 and up.
I am pretty confident that a fully loaded car may break $30,000.

[Reply]
John Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 1:25 pm

[quote comment="16466"]I don’t have a question so much as a suggestion - GM needs to make an outreach effort to Daily Kos. The vitriol against GM over there is intense, largely due to the EV1 debacle. Yesterday one of the frontpagers ran an article on “The Surging American Auto Industry:”

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/25/16832/841

featuring a few electric vehicles slightly less likely to be produced than the Volt, but no Volt.

Someone needs to arrange for Markos to have a tour and a test drive of whatever Volt parts will roll.[/quote]The Daily Kos cannot be pacified because of their politics–the center of their being.

They love to doubt, and otherwise downgrade and second-guess America (worse yet American COMPANIES!!!, capitalism + America is TOO much for them).

They will always hate GM BECAUSE it is American (and that is in vogue and h as always been in their circles). NO amount of outreach will reach those people–none.

JFK leftists (the near-extinct breed) might be more promising.

[Reply]
John Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 1:29 pm

[quote comment="16474"]Does GM design Volt as a stand-alone model or a platform? I mean, if you guys are talking about dozens of thousands in production, do you honestly believe there is a market for, say 50,000 two-door sports cars, considering there is still much competition in the niche from every car manufacturer out there? No matter how revolutionary the design and lofty energy savings goals, what on Earth made GM pick such as tiny niche of the automotive market to build a plug-in hybrid for?

Who said that people who usually drive sports cars even care a bit about fuel consumption? Most sports cars are only driven over the weekend and to the nearest golf course (my exaggeration, of course). I have driven 38,000 miles in the first year of owning a Toyota Prius. Is there a sane person out there that would drive their sports car 38,000 miles in a year?

Why did they not pick the minivan category for cry sake? Larger chassis would afford more battery capacity and muted acceleration expectations would make it possible to let it run longer on electric propulsion.

So, here is my 2 cents: GM, retire the current Volt concept and concentrate your diminishing resources on a car that would be more relevant for the average American family and a car that you would sell more of should it enter production. Looks like you only got one shot at it. Good luck![/quote]
Here is a man talking about “relevance” and yet touting the MINIVAN as the way forward–America’s fastest-declining vehicle segment!

I usually post on a car forum, so maybe I am not used to such rampant ignorance about the automobile industry as I see here sometimes?

And that is not the most egregious error in your post.
Please, Sir, do tell us WHICH Chevrolet Volt you have seen with two doors (and a “sports car” setup)?

[Reply]
banjoez Says:
November 27th, 2007 at 2:17 pm

[quote comment="16627"][quote comment="16354"]I love everything about the Volt concept, especially the possibility of being able to do modular upgrades (both software and hardware)to various systems as they become available. However, I wonder how GM expects to make the shift from planned obsolescence in today’s cars vs. being able to simply replace battery packs and other components with newer, more efficient (and perhaps cheaper)ones down the line and have a car that can run for decades instead of years with the latest technology. I certainly hope this is the plan but since GM is in it for the money I wonder if it will actually become a reality.[/quote]
“Planned obsolescence” is a myth spread by cynical fear mongers. In reality, technology DOES really advance that fast.[/quote]

Huh?

Looks like this poster has ALL the answers. No need to ask GM anymore questions Lyle.

[Reply]
2000Vette Says:
November 28th, 2007 at 2:01 am

Ideas to made the Volt better:
1. Include a lay flat charge cable that can be locked to the car. 12 gauge wire is expensive, make it hard to steal if parked and charging outside.
2. Include a bin in the car to store the cable.
3. Allow the charge cable to be plugged in at any corner of the car.
4. A small cheap solar panel to run the fan while parked on hot days would help cool the car.
5. A remote and/or timer to cool or heat the car when it is plugged in would be great.
6. Make the first one so simple my old mother can drive it without worry - no BMW like computer. Moving from a Malibu to a Volt should be seamless.
7. Bring it out sooner.

[Reply]
james Says:
November 28th, 2007 at 3:05 am

75 vette-good practical points, let’s hope gm is watching. : )

[Reply]
Brian Geppert Says:
November 29th, 2007 at 11:55 pm

Electricity saving idea for electric cars in general: If you are using headlights and the car is stopped, dim the lights. Regardless of saving electricity, it would be beneficial to the folks on the other side of the traffic light staring at your lights.

Meanwhile, being able to obtain upgrades to the instrument panel would be a big selling point. On the one end of the spectrum - open source, anyone can upload the new software. On the other end, only allow dealers to do it. Just make sure it is available.

I’m all for the solar panel on the roof. The Nanosolar product makes that possible and more cost-effective. Just think - you could run out of juice and gas, but just let it sit long enough and you are back on the road!

[Reply]
james Says:
November 30th, 2007 at 2:33 am

brian 77 “I’m all for the solar panel on the roof. The Nanosolar product makes that possible and more cost-effective. Just think - you could run out of juice and gas, but just let it sit long enough and you are back on the road!”
i never thought of that one brian, that would def. kick ass!

[Reply]
LB Says:
March 14th, 2008 at 2:14 am

Lots of questions about the dash and great ideas. I like the ideas of a LCD where the entire dash can be updated or changed at a later date. Very cool.

How about heads up display? Will that be an option on the Volt?

My Dad’s Pontiac Grand Prix has it and I’ve test driven a couple of ‘Vettes and the heads up display is great in that you don’t have to take your eyes off the road to see dash info and the HUD is not blocked by the steering wheel. I found that after a while of driving, it was a chore to look at the conventional dash board. When I got back into my own car with no HUD, I found that I was missing the HUD and not liking the dash board at all.

[Reply]
Dorp Says:
August 23rd, 2008 at 11:47 am

Good discussion. I like the idea of upgradeble software, as well as collecting performance data in “real time” via internet updates. I think GM would benefit by allowing 3rd party software developers come up with different user interfaces for different customers.

[Reply]

Your Questions Answered by Top Chevy Volt Executives, Part 5

80 Responses to “Your Questions Answered by Top Chevy Volt Executives, Part 5”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts