Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Interview with Frank Weber, E-Flex/Chevy Volt Vehicle Line Executive, Part I

December 17th, 2007 | Posted in: Battery, Design, E-Flex, E-REV, Engineering, GM Q and A, Original GM-Volt Interviews

Frank Weber

I just had the chance to speak with Frank Weber who is GM’s vehicle line executive for the Chevy Volt and E-Flex systems. This is the first of two parts.

Do you have some new information for us today?

We are explaining that vehicle efficiency is something that is very important to make the volt a very credible statement and sustainable statement that goes far beyond the energy diversity story that is inherent to the Volt. This will have some impact to the production vehicle.

You have been redesigning the concept car into a production version that is going to be more aerodynamic?

Exactly. Because what we’ve learned is that in a traditional vehicle you have mass, aerodynamics, rolling resistance and your mass is really important to your overall vehicle efficiency. In an EV what is very interesting, to deal with the increase mass of the very large battery, what you learn quickly is the increased mass of the battery pack is not so important for the EV because you have the ability to regenerate through the electric brakes. What this means is the car is less sensitive to mass than a traditional vehicle is. However what you learn is that the aerodynamics and the aerodynamic performance is really critical to extend your electric range.

So therefore what we did over the last couple of months, we took the showcar idea and have shaped it in the wind tunnel to achieve something that is really an aero shape without losing the character of the initial showcar.

When you talk about an aero shape, do you mean a teardrop shape, like the Prius?

This is the fine line that you have to walk. What we’ve always said is the vehicle has to keep its original spirit. We want to make sure that the vehicle is compact. Typically what you have is that you have to make cars longer, but not all vehicle have to look the same. I think we achieved a unique look of the car, a short rear overhang and still very very good aerodynamic performance.

Are you at the final design at this point or is there still more work to be done?

There is always more work to do. But how you do basic aerodynamic development is what you have you hard points of your vehicle defined like width and height, your back-end ‘R’, how large your front and rear overhangs are, where your windshield positions are. We call those parameters key architectural hardpoints that are defining the proportions of the vehicle. We are now in the process of finalizing those hardpoints. However the styling work and the design work that is the end of the theme is continuing.

Because aerodynamics are so important for the vehicle, in this particular case design knows that the freedom of developing the theme further is a little bit more constrained than in a normal vehicle.

Is the car being built on the cobalt frame/platform?

Actually the next generation cobalt platform, not the current one. GM is currently developing a new global architecture that is the global compact architecture. The first vehicles will be launched off that architecture by the end of next year. We will leverage this global compact architecture for the Volt. We are leveraging that architecture anywhere we can just for economies of scale.

We wouldn’t want to re-invent all components of the vehicle. You really want to insure that you can use low-cost components wherever you can. You have to see that we are building 2 million vehicles per year off that global compact architecture. This is something that you don’t want to miss for the Volt in areas where they are not specific to electric cars.

Are you going to be employing unique components for this car due to the need for the car to be electrically efficient, such as the HVAC system?

The whole thermal management program is the most difficult part to develop and execute. We have now all the systems layout is defined for the program, and also some development partners who for months have been on-board working with us on the definition of the HVAC system. All the system that have to be electrified are new and specific for this vehicle. Brakes, HVAC systems, steering systems, and so on.

Are these new specific parts fully developed or do they not exist either?

The parts actually don’t exist. They all have a lot of development work that still needs to happen. Components and the concept layout for those components exist, however the vehicle integration, where all those components come together, which will consume the next year(s).

Are you confident about the Volt achieving the November 2010 release date that Bob Lutz has been quoted as intending?

We are working towards the 2010 timeline as a target for the program team. What we have always said is since there is no example in the industry of a battery pack that is as large as the Volt’s battery pack, given that our analytic data, simulations, all our predictions of system behavior turn out to be accurate, I then then this is an achievable timeframe. But, you don’t know what you don’t know. We are currently testing the first battery packs in the lab. We will have first running vehicles in the first quarter of next year. We fell comfortable, barring any surprises that the timeframe can be managed, but it’s a very aggressive timeline.

What are the improvements of the second LG Chem/CPI battery pack over the first?

You have a battery pack with several hundred cells in it, and the calibration took a long time, how you calibrate teh initial cell monitoring systems, now we are faster (improved software)

And as you look at the initial design, it is liquid-cooled. We are making a lot of progress on the actual design of the pack and how you manage the fluids, the fluid dynamics, and the thermal behavior of the pack. Mainly it is improvements of thermal design in pack number two.

How many individual cells are there in the pack?

there are roughly 300 cells in the pack. The cells are separated into modules, and there are several modules in the pack all of the same shape.

Where does the crossbar pf the “T” shape of the pack sit?

It is where you sit in the rear (below).

How will you secure the pack in the car so that it cannot be removed by a thief?

You would have to lift the whole vehicle by a significant amount. The battery pack sits in the tunnel area. The risk is like would you be concerned about a thief taking an engine out of a car. So you don’t have to be concerned. This is something that is roughly 400 pounds of masse bolted to your basic vehicle structure. It’s not something that you can easily remove. Its a single pack. All the modules are within this singe pack.

Have you received A123/Continentals first pack?

What’s happening this week is that the battery team is in Germany at Conti and they are reviewing the status of that pack. This is ongoing while we are speaking.

Posted by: Lyle

64 Responses to “Interview with Frank Weber, E-Flex/Chevy Volt Vehicle Line Executive, Part I”

LyleL Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 7:46 am

Yikes!!! A disturbing picture for tall people. Yes, it’s the concept car. Yes, the front seat likely doesn’t adjust and is placed well forward for appearance sake. I’m still worried GM will lock out a segment of the population from owning this car.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 7:46 am

Those are good solid answers to good solid questions!

Thanks Lyle.

(Quote)
Dave B Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 8:08 am

Darn good interview. Thanks Lyle and GM for keeping the interest out there… Is GM paying you yet?

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 8:10 am

Thanks Lyle!

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 9:04 am

Very reassuring interview, Lyle! (Forgive me for a back-handed compliment, but I’ve decided you’re a “techno-weenie” at heart, since your spelling, like any good engineer’s, is not without a few flaws).*

Kidding aside, my life-long involvement in spacecraft power systems has led to a long, intensive interest in electric-drive cars (even before GM’s EV-1 appeared). The only truly fundamental technical challenge with EV’s has been battery energy density & lifetime. But IMO, the intense LiIon development work in recent years has now extended battery performance & life more than enough. In fact, I believe time will show that even the Volt 1.0 will still be driveable after about 20 yrs, in other words, after most people (even 2nd & 3rd owners) would be anxious to replace it for reasons similar to those encountered in aging conventional cars –numerous small failures such as electric door locks, windows, dash/interior lighting, etc start giving trouble. (Many of these little headaches are due to wire harness problems. Believe it or not, even the redundant high-rel wiring we use on spacecraft causes more trouble than anything else.)

So I’m convinced the Volt design is no longer dependent on major technical breakthroughs; i.e., it’s down to sound basic engineering. GM knows that, I’m sure, and that’s why they’re “betting the company on the Volt”.

It’s a safe bet and I’ll be one of the first Volt customers!

*(Or maybe it’s because “MD = mentally deficient”, as I remind my physician friends when they kid me that “PhD = piling higher & deeper”)

(Quote)
Drake Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 9:46 am

Lyle – Great interview as usual. I look forward to part 2.

LyleL – While I am a pretty tall guy too (6′3″), I don’t see any issue with me fitting in to a Volt. GM, of all automobile manufacturers, knows about driver and passenger comfort and how to make a vehicle’s cabin acceptable to the average driver. Also, Mr. Weber’s legs were not stretched out in the picture- this would change the perspective considerably.

FTA: “What we have always said is since there is no example in the industry of a battery pack that is as large as the Volt’s battery pack…”

I really need help understanding this statement. I mean I know the EV1 only had 2 seats, but…

1) It got 75-150 miles per charge.
2) Its battery relied upon the antiquated NiMH technology.

The Volt’s range is only supposed to be 40 miles, and relies on advanced Li-ion batteries.

Do the extra 2 seats really make that much difference?

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 9:49 am

Thanks Lyle,

What I see on the picture is that F.W. sits at the wheel of an Opel Flextreme not a Chevy Volt.
BTW, no news of the Flextreme since september.
Impossible here in Europe to ask Opel, they just give void answers. Could you get some news for us ?

(Quote)
AES Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:07 pm

[quote comment="20096"]
I really need help understanding this statement. I mean I know the EV1 only had 2 seats, but…

1) It got 75-150 miles per charge.
2) Its battery relied upon the antiquated NiMH technology.

The Volt’s range is only supposed to be 40 miles, and relies on advanced Li-ion batteries.

Do the extra 2 seats really make that much difference?[/quote]

They chose 40 miles very much on purpose, regardless of the number of seats.

They could have easily made it go 80+ miles just by changing the shallow discharge regime of the standard 16kWh lithium pack, but that would have negatively impacted lifespan. (NOTE: I suspect some people will hack the pack anyway to max their electric range while also voiding the warrenty).

They could also have just stuck in more batteries, but that would have driven up cost and weight. The EV1 got its range by having over 1000+ pounds of batteries and deep-cycling them. Compare that to 400 pounds of lithium on a shallow cycle and you see the difference.

So 40 miles is a very thought-out balancing act between range, durability, weight, and cost.

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:11 pm

As you can see, the front seat is well forward. It will have the same dimensions basically as the Cobalt. I haven’t heard any complaints about tall people having problems with the Cobalt – at 6 foot 3, I fit into them pretty well. Then there’s always the hoped-for Saturn version of the Flextreme, which I would pay very close attention to before deciding … Saturn
claims some hybrid news at the January Detroit Auto show – I predict they will unveil their version of the E-Flex.

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:12 pm

Would I love to see a Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky E-Flex.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:13 pm

Wait list tops 7000! Way to go guys.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:16 pm

[quote comment="20094"]The only truly fundamental technical challenge with EV’s has been battery energy density & lifetime.[/quote]

Why do so many forget the third challenge?

COST!

Having achieved realistic density & lifetime is a really big deal, but whether or not it is affordable is too.

JOHN

(Quote)
Brian M Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:22 pm

john, #12:

That’s what most people don’t understand about the EV1. The car would not be affordable to most people with that huge, expensive battery pack.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:34 pm

kent #9 & 10: I’m also very interested to see Saturn’s offering(s) of E-REVs! (When I bought a Saturn years ago, a Vice President at Saturn, noticing my “nasaman” license plate paperwork go by, called me and explained that a guy at GM named Philip Garcia won GM’s contest to name the new car/division. Garcia’s winning comment was, “We used ‘Saturn’ (the moon rocket) to beat the Russians to the moon; we should use ‘Saturn’ to beat the Japanese.” My view is that the Saturn division could certainly help GM beat Toyota et al in the “E-REVOLUTION”!!!

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:40 pm

john1701a #12: You’re absolutely right, John –battery cost has also been a major challenge!

(Quote)
wow Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:46 pm

The battery challenge is bigger than that:

-Energy capacity/density
-Cycle life at rated energy/power capacity/density
-Calendar life
-Cost
-Power capacity/density
-Max recharge rate capability (the faster the better, not just to improve overall recharge waiting time but also to improve regenetive braking energy capture)
-Safety
-Thermal management requirements (how much of battery’s energy is used to keep it cool?) related to how efficient is the battery at transferring energy?
-How much does the battery discharge when just sitting in the parking lot?
-All of these same questions below freezing?
-All of these same questions above 90 deg?

(Quote)
Scott Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 12:54 pm

Lyle,
Best interview yet!!! Great questions and a lot of new answers with loads of detail. The design is really starting to take shape. There should be a contest as to who can most closely illustrate what the the final design will look like.

(Quote)
Tom Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 1:18 pm

First of all, I suspect the reason all these guys are harping on aerodynamics is because the production Volt will look very different from the concept and they’re preemptively deflecting criticism. I still don’t see why aero matters more than mass for this car vs. any other, assuming constant battery size/weight.

Second, it is disappointing that the electrical AC, steering, etc. is made out to be a big deal. Almost every manufacturer (including GM!!) was able to make all-electric cars back in the 90s without much drama, and right now there are a million Priuses on the road with all-electric auxiliary equipment. Don’t make this a bigger deal than it is, GM.

(Quote)
Drake Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 1:31 pm

AES – Thanks for the information man- I didn’t know that the EV1 ran deep discharges on its battery. It all makes sense now. Also, I am _sure_ that Volt enthusiasts will hack the Volt in many different and interesting ways- including, like you said, making it run deep discharges on the battery. Any wager on how far the Volt will go with a full battery discharge?

nasaman – very interesting to hear that about the birth of the Saturn brand name.

John – I know you’re a Prius guy, and all, but there’s no reason to continually pummel the Volt. GM has stated that they expect to lose money on the first couple of generations of the Volt, as did Toyota with the Prius. After the Volt brand is established, and the technology matures a generation, GM will have a cash cow on their hands with in their E-Flex line. This is how these things work: money is invested upfront for an even larger payout in the future.

(Quote)
Tom Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 2:02 pm

I don’t know how much battery hacking will happen. Right now laptops and cell phones have logic and software that prevent discharging below a certain percentage and nobody seems too excited about changing that. (When you’re laptop or cell phone battery says it’s dead, it actually isn’t, just like the Volt.)

I know a lot of people on this site get really worked up about being able to drive 45 or 50 miles all-electric instead of 40 because their commutes are just a little bit longer, but I just don’t get the benefit. How is using no gas THAT much better than using a tiny tiny amount of gas? And running the engine regularly is almost certainly better for it.

(Quote)
Ed Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 2:15 pm

Why is it that nobody wants to hear anything negative or even the least bit neutral about the Volt. John made a good point about cost but you choose to see that as a negative comment. Seems if your not saying thats great, way to go GM alot of people don’t want to hear it. I am for an EV, doesn’t matter if it’s GM, Toyota, or other auto makers. Give me a quality EV that fits my needs. If you drive a Toyota Prius or any other hybrid you are doing your part to conserve oil consumption. Why this American verses Asian mentality.

(Quote)
OhmExcited Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 2:27 pm

Hard to believe they’re just figuring out now that aero plays a bigger role than mass.

(Quote)
Jason Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 2:31 pm

Regarding the Volt’s platform. As said in an earlier post, range is not based so much on vehicle weight but aerodynamics. I’m concerned the car is going to be too small for many people’s needs considering the battery takes up a large part in the middle. Wouldn’t it make more sense to build this on the larger but shortened Malibu platform?

The next gen Prius is going to increase in size while getting better milege. I believe many will choose the Prius over the Volt based on size if both are priced in the same range. This is already happening with the new Accord against the other mid size cars.

(Quote)
Brian M Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 2:46 pm

Ed:

I for one acknowledged John’s point. It is a good one; the Volt will not sell if it is too expensive.

However, I think that as Americans, we should root for GM, Ford, and Chrysler more than other companies. More of the manufacturing stays in America, and the profits stay here instead of going overseas. American companies also use more American suppliers. All of this is benefitial to our economy, whereas European and Japanese cars are benefitial to their own respective economies.

I agree we should be focused on a solution to use less oil, but I also think we should hope that solution comes from an American company. And if two solutions that are more or less the same appear, we should lean towards the American one. Of course you can choose whichever you want, I will not vilify you or turn it into a which-hunt if you choose a Toyota over a GM.

And yes, we have a lot of pro-GM people here, but remember the name of the site is GM-Volt.com, not generic-EV.com

(Quote)
Jake Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 2:57 pm

Tom #20 – The Li-Ion batteries used in cell phones and laptops can be seriously and irreversibly damaged if they are discharged below a certain point even once. I think the low voltage cutoff point for these batteries still allows around 80% of capacity to be used…not much room to go beyond anyways, or you will damage the battery.

The high-discharge cells being developed for the Volt are an entirely new animal. I don’t know about LG’s, but A123’s M1 architecture is much more tolerant of deep discharging than some other lithium batteries. Any artificial cutoff is probably only being used to increase overall cycle life. If someone wants to risk battery lifetime to get more miles per charge, there isn’t much stopping them except a lack of technical know-how.

*Disclaimer* – I am not a preeminent expert on battery technology, it is more of a hobby of mine. Take everything I say with a modest grain of salt. Perhaps nasaman can chime in if more accurate info is required.

(Quote)
AES Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 3:13 pm

If I were to hack a Volt pack (provided I had the ability) I would honestly only expand the discharge to 80%, instead of the planned 50%. Keep max charge at 90% so there’s room to absorb regen energy, and make 10% the minimum.

That would be healthier for the pack but still expand the range a bit:

0.8 X 16kWh=12.8kWh.

Using the Volt’s projected efficiency of 5 miles/kWh, that’s 64 miles all electric.

As for lifespan, even if you did that cycle routine every day, and if you counted it as a deep charge, that’s still:

64 miles/cycle X 3000 cycles=192000 miles before the battery starts to degrade. Probably even better since 3000 cycles for A123 was calculated using 100%DOD.

(Quote)
Drake Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 3:17 pm

Ed – I agree that it shouldn’t matter which company our EVs and PHEVs come from. My only goal is to replace oil as the world’s main transportation energy source with something a little less costly (in more than a lot of ways) like electricity. I will buy a Prius if it beats the Volt. I don’t think it will, however, atleast in the shortrun because of Toyota’s conservativeness.

Concerning John’s post, I think that battery cost is a good topic to consider, but will ultimately not be a major factor for Volt buyers. GM will eat part of the additional cost and then the government will hopefully take up the rest through tax credits, leaving us with the remaining $30k. Not a big deal, considering how much money most of us will save each year driving our Volts.

My perception of John’s cost remarks (and this is not the first time he has brought up the cost of the battery) is that they seem to be spoken from the perspective of “this car’s battery is too expensive so GM should not be building it.” I adamantly disagree with this idea. The only way that technologies advance and mature is when they are embraced. We will never see widespread public-adoption of EVs/PHEVs if one company doesn’t stand up and take the first step. Today that company is GM and they are fast tracking a massive comeback for Detroit and their place on the world stage.

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 3:45 pm

[quote comment="20160"]Lyle,
Best interview yet!!! Great questions and a lot of new answers with loads of detail. The design is really starting to take shape. There should be a contest as to who can most closely illustrate what the the final design will look like.[/quote]
Scott #17 : sorry to say you that (see my post #7) the design is th one of the Opel Flextreme, see this pic

(Quote)
noel park Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 3:56 pm

Brian M, #24:

Right! Well done.

(Quote)
Scott Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 4:18 pm

Jean-Charles Jacquemin:

I was referring to the text in the interview, not the picture. I know there’s only one production Volt front end teaser out there.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 4:20 pm

Re: “I’m concerned the car is going to be too small for many people’s needs considering the battery takes up a large part in the middle.”

Jason: I was also initially concerned about the battery size (and weight). But then I realized 1) that it’s designed to fit right where the drive shaft has always been on rear drive cars, with its “T” under the rear seat, 2) that a V-8 engine & transmission can weigh a lot more, and 3) that the under-floor location lowers the Volt’s C.G. nicely as a bonus. Also, the floor “tunnel” stiffens the overall structure. I can’t think of a more ideal place to locate the battery!

(Quote)
Jim G Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 4:33 pm

nasaman,
I also like the idea that the CG is lowered, (as well as likely providing near perfect weight distribution), but it will hardly fit right where the driveshaft has always been. We’ve been told that the pack will be 18″ high. That will come up much higher than a normal tunnel.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 4:33 pm

Tom #18:

I think the reason that the electrical subsystems now being all electric is such a big deal for GM is one of volume and reliability. Building 1100 EV1’s for a short duration life, assuming that was the plan all along, is quite a bit different that contracting out for multiple hundreds of thousands of units that need to have at least a 10 year life span. So yes, I can see why the engineering for these sub-systems is very important.

And I really don’t think there is a lot of drama being made out about them, just a realization that this has to be done right. There will be no second chance for the Volt. If the first model is a disaster, it is all over for E-REV. And I think that everyone at GM is taking that very seriously. It is pretty easy for us to second guess every thing they are doing, but it is not our futures being put at risk, it is theirs………..

That is my take on it, anyway.

(Quote)
Jason Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 4:47 pm

Re: 31 & 32

The latest gen of compact cars have a flat floor in the rear seat. It looks like the volt will be at a disadvantage and and also missing the middle rear seat.

In a larger car like the Malibu they could have hid the battery better while getting the same range on electric power. And maybe still seat 3 in the back.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 4:48 pm

[quote comment="20200"]nasaman,
I also like the idea that the CG is lowered, (as well as likely providing near perfect weight distribution), but it will hardly fit right where the driveshaft has always been. We’ve been told that the pack will be 18″ high. That will come up much higher than a normal tunnel.[/quote]You’re right, and I didn’t mean to suggest the floor pan tunnel would be no taller (or wider) than a drive shaft tunnel. But it doesn’t NEED to be that small ….since the Volt is a 4-seat design, both front AND rear seat passengers can enjoy full center consoles. The minimal loss in inside floor space is a good trade for the lower C.G. plus the convenience (and luxury) of a full rear console. I think of the Volt as a “4-door sport coupe”!

(Quote)
lkruijsw Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 5:28 pm

Any news of the Volt in Europe?

(Quote)
AES Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 5:29 pm

[quote comment="20198"]I can’t think of a more ideal place to locate the battery![/quote]

There’s also the safety consideration: the pack is in a much more protected spot than the batteries in a plug-in Prius conversion, and you don’t have to give up your spare wheel as well.

(Quote)
AES Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 5:34 pm

[quote comment="20205"][quote comment="20200"]I think of the Volt as a “4-door sport coupe”![/quote]

Much agreed – I’m a big fan of sport coupes.

On the subject of “sport”, I hope they keep the motor output at 160-odd horsepower, rather than the asthmatic 120hp found in their fuel cell electrics. I’ve driven the AC Propulsion eBox, which is just a Scion xB with a 160 hp electric motor and a 600 (!) pound lithium ion battery. It does 0-60 in 7 seconds despite having a Cd of 0.35. So I hope the Volt has similar performance.

(Quote)
Daniel Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 5:50 pm

Very awesome interview.

Does anyone know when GM will be choosing which battery manufacturer to use? (between A123 & LG Chem)

(Quote)
Ed Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 6:03 pm

I agree with you if both cars are equal I will give GM a shot. All I ask is for a quality car. I raced stock cars (GM Chevy 350 Monte Carlo) a couple of years ago. I’m not a GM hater.

I think this forum should also keep GM on thier toes. When I bring up negatives I hope a GM exec reads it and just maybe does something about my comment. Not everything I say but maybe a point here or there. I have stated over and over again I want to see GM succeed. I for one cannot wait to buy an EV. The better the vehicle the better for all of us.

By the way thanks for answering me in an intelligent way and not bashing me for my thoughts. I think when all is said and done we all want the same outcome.

(Quote)
Steven T Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 7:08 pm

Nasaman, Jim G. Have you thought of the tunnel still being small because there will not be a drive train or rear end so the battery pack may be able to be positioned lower on the chassis so there may not be but just a small hump.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 7:24 pm

I have had a lot to say about the importance of aerodynamics here over the past weeks. Even so, we cannot lose sight of the critical importance of mass. I think that what we are saying is that aero may be a bigger part of the mix than previously thought, but the issue of mass does not go away.

Never doubt that every pound which is added to the car incrementally lowers the range. It all has to be accelerated every time you slow down or stop. Watch the instant mileage readout on the dash of a conventional car when you leave a stop. Regenerative braking may change the equation somewhat by recapturing some of the kinetic energy which conventional brakes turn into heat, but the laws of physics have not been repealed. Given all of the mechanical and electrical inefficiencies in the system, you cannot get it all back. For every pound you accelerate up to speed, there is a cost in energy, and thus battery range.

Thus, everything else being equal, a Malibu sized car with equivalent performance and batteries cannot have the same electric range/fuel mileage as a Cobalt sized car. Plus, the frontal area, and thus drag, would be greater.

If Toyota is going to make the Prius bigger, with better mileage, they are going to have to use some substantially better technology than they have now. Especially as the frontal area increases. They are going to have to make a big breakthrough in the driveline (smaller engine with turbo?), and/or use exotic materials to keep the weight down. Or maybe they will have a plug in component to spoof the EPA ratings.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 8:23 pm

[quote comment="20215"][quote comment="20205"][quote comment="20200"]I think of the Volt as a “4-door sport coupe”![/quote]

Much agreed – I’m a big fan of sport coupes.

On the subject of “sport”, I hope they keep the motor output at 160-odd horsepower, rather than the asthmatic 120hp found in their fuel cell electrics. I’ve driven the AC Propulsion eBox, which is just a Scion xB with a 160 hp electric motor and a 600 (!) pound lithium ion battery. It does 0-60 in 7 seconds despite having a Cd of 0.35. So I hope the Volt has similar performance.[/quote]AES: I agree completely …AC Propulsion says their eBox with its 160HP motor & 600LB LiIon battery weighs 2970LBS. GM will surely try to hold the Volt, with its 160HP motor, 400LB battery & Range Extender, to a similar (or lower) curb weight and will clearly achieve a MUCH lower Cd. This tells me your hope for similar 0-60 performance from the Volt is reasonable. However, the box-car-shaped eBox claims a top speed of only 95MPH and GM will likely favor gear ratios allowing the Volt to reach 120MPH, if only for the bragging rights (oops, I mean MARKETING reasons). Even so, based on your eBox test drive, a 0-60 time of 8sec for the Volt certainly seems achievable. That’s sporty enough for me!

(Quote)
Tom Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 9:55 pm

This whole aerodynamics issue raises an interesting point: what, exactly, is the emphasis of the Volt?

Is it supposed to be a car for greenies, like the Prius, that ekes out the last tenth of an MPG for bragging rights, at the expense of looks, handling, and acceleration? Then by all means let’s all get excited about aerodynamics, low rolling resistance tires, driving really slow, etc.

Or is it just supposed to be a solid car that has a great new electric drivetrain, which will hopefully eventually be used in other vehicles? In that case, I don’t really care if it gets 38 all-electric miles instead of 40. Make it look good and handle at least as well as a Cobalt (not exactly a track car, but better than a Prius).

Or, there’s an outside chance that it’s a performance car that gets awesome MPG (or MPkWh?). This would really be something exciting for the public. There was talk a few months ago about 5-6 second 0-60 times. This puts it solidly in the ‘performance’ range and I don’t see why it’s out of the question–the EV1 with the same weight did 0-60 in 7 seconds with its 137 horsepower motor. Unfortunately people have been talking about 8-8.5 seconds recently and GM seems to be setting expectations very low by talking about BS performance measurements like 0-30 and some kind of “off the line” nonsense so I’m not holding my breath for much excitement.

(Quote)
OhmExcited Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 10:32 pm

I don’t understand why they don’t make a more powerful electric motor. What Tesla found was the more powerful you make it the more efficient it becomes (almost like cheating). And you aren’t using that power when you’re idling or driving normally, only if you really step on it. You can still pick the whole thing up and put it in your backpack, so it’s not like added weight would be a problem. I don’t see the tradeoff. Maybe GM is holding back to offer higher performance options in other vehicles.

(Quote)
pstoller78 Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 11:23 pm

Even though a more powerful motor may not carry a weight penalty, I can imagine that they may be significantly more expensive to manufacture.

(Quote)
Marty McFly Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 12:28 am

[quote comment="20246"]#44 what, exactly, is the emphasis of the Volt?[/quote]

That’s a good question. IMHO, it is different things to different people. I’m sure there are a hundred different ways to market this car (and the bowtie will take advantage of every single one of them).

Whether it be a means to reduce gas bills, carbon footprints or even a way to reallocate funds (from certain geographical areas of the world), it really is what you want it to be…

… a really cool car ;>)

(Quote)
james Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 12:37 am

tom 20. even someone who knows as much as you seem to think that you know about batteries and tech, shouldn’t have a problem figuring out that hacking a battery for a car to increase the distance that the car will go by several miles is a much bigger deal than hacking batteries for a laptop to run an extra 5 minutes, lol.

grizz, thanks for clearing up the exponentiality debate a few days back…

(Quote)
Jason - Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 12:57 am

#44

Using a pure electric drivetrain gives torque from a standstill and will feel faster than the 0-60 time suggests. Something else to consider, a time of 8 seconds is faster than a midsize car with a 2.4 base engine.

#42

Noel, thanks for adding to my points. I feel the amount of interior space is very important and could very well limit sales. Take a look at these pictures, is the Volt even able to compete with interior space like this?

egmcartech.com/2007/10/18/officially-official-2008-honda-fit/

I agree additional weight will eat range, but sizing from the Cobalt to the Malibu I’m guessing is 200-300 lbs or two passengers. It’s said here the range was understated and who knows, we might end up with a 45 or 50 mile range by surprise. I’d be very interested to know what range GM gets when they test the battery and motor in older Malibus without aero improvements.

Take a look at the Mercedes Bionic concept.

greencarcongress.com/2005/06/daimlerchrysler_1.html

It has the frontal area of a van but a drag less than the EV1. Now I don’t suggest they make the volt look like a fish, in fact I really like the clean sleek design of the car (in the leaked image) and hope they don’t make this car look like it’s trying too hard to be efficient. I’m just saying there are always going to be ways around drag no matter what the car’s size or shape is.

Toyota has never been about major breakthroughs and I don’t believe they will need one with the Prius. They refine and improve every generation while also making it larger and more efficient. The only major change I see happening could be a switch to diesel. And I’m disappointed to see the Volt using gasoline when GM has some great diesels in Europe.

(Quote)
butters Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 8:46 am

My suggestion for battery pack form factor in future Volt generations is a flat shape stretched over much of footprint between the wheel wells. The pack, thermal system, and aerodynamic/protective belly pan would be integrated as an assembly that attaches to the underside of the chassis. The high surface area design would optimize cooling efficiency, lower the CG, and eliminate the intrusion into the passenger cabin.

As for the mass vs. aero issue, it’s clear how regenerative braking mitigates the impact of mass in city driving patterns. But does the electric drive also have an impact? The electric motor increases in performance as load increases, unlike the ICE, and they both decrease in efficiency. But does the electric motor decrease LESS in efficiency under load than the ICE?

I’m a form-follows-function kind of guy. I think that aero is critically important, and moreover that aero tends to look good anyway. I love the Volt’s propulsion system, and the concept styling is undoutedly attractive, but I have a feeling that the ideal aero shape for a space-efficient compact hatchback is closer to the Prius than the Volt concept.

I’ll probably get flamed for this, but, although there is certainly room for improvement, I find the body shape of the Prius to be fairly aesthetically pleasing. I also like the newer Civic body. I like that kind of sensible design. I grew up in the 90s, and I think that a lot of people in my generation (many of us just beginning to consider new cars north of $20K) have a different perspective on American vs. Japanese design tendencies than previous generations.

A lot of people here are long-time supporters of American cars and/or GM, and I respect that. Frankly, I’m surprised to find myself excited by an American car. I’ve always found Japanese cars to generally offer a better combination of price, performance, reliability, features, and styling. The American auto industry has been in the dumps for most of my life.

With E-Flex, GM has the opportunity to really change the game and leapfrog the Japanese automakers who seem to be doing a stutter-step on electric propulsion. But when I look at the Volt, I don’t see something that looks like a global car, I see an American car. It reeks of that bold and aggressive in-your-face attitude that many foreigners and Americans find excessive and offensive–even embarassing.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 11:43 am

Tom, #44:

Sorry to repeat myself from previous threads, but yes, I do think that it is about mileage bragging rights, and I don’t care what the 0-60 times are. The secret of the success of the Prius is mileage bragging rights. If the Volt does not significantly raise the bar on those bragging rights, it will sink without a trace.

butters, #50:

You won’t get flamed by me, because I completely agree with your comments about the styling of the Prius and the Civic.

I’m a form follows function guy too, and I also believe that aero looks good.

(Quote)
Tom Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 1:44 pm

noel, #51:

My view is that the Volt will have all the bragging rights in the world unless another manufacturer comes out with a similar drivetrain. We’re talking an electric-only range that’s almost SIX TIMES more than what Toyota is talking about for a hypothetical plug-in Prius, AND it allows full acceleration, at highway speeds.

So at that point, does it really matter if it’s six times or five times more than a as-yet-nonexistent competitor?

So no matter what, Chevy is going to win the green contest and get all the green points. So what’s the reason for continuing to stress out over minutiae? Why not make the car a little cooler looking if that means sacrificing a bit of aerodynamics? Why not focus more on performance?

You may be a greenie and the Prius’s 0-60 time of 11.5 seconds may be “fast enough” for you and you may think that car races and aggressive driving are immature, but there are a lot of people out there who love fast cars, and if Chevy could come out with something that’s actually fast instead of “feels fast” or is “fast enough” and additionally it’s super-green, then why wouldn’t it?

(Quote)
noel park Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 2:10 pm

Tom, #52:

Well, if I want to go fast I take one or both of our vintage racing Corvettes to the track, which we do several times a year. They are also just barely streetable, so they can trundle over to cruise night to show off if we really want to. We are also working on restoring a 1917 Chevrolet “speedster” for the really old vintage races. So you can see my interest in the bowtie.

However, these cars are totally impractical, as are more modern Corvettes in my opinion, for everyday commuting in the gridlock known as Southern California.

For everyday commuting and business errand running (25,000+ miles/year), I want to make a statement about energy independence, as so many of our friends here have said so eloquently. Acceleration, top speed, and high speed cornering mean little or nothing in this venue.

(Quote)
Tom Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 3:02 pm

noel, #53:

Performance of the Volt doesn’t matter to you or others only because that’s your assumption and you’ve convinced yourself it’s true.

Tesla’s rationale for making an electric sports car is to break people out of the mindset that electric cars are all as crappy as golf carts and Priuses. And guess what, it worked. Almost everybody I talk to has heard of and is excited about the Tesla and hardly anybody already knows about the Volt.

Performance matters, a lot, to a lot of people. Look at the Accord and Camry. They’re big, bland family sedans, for god’s sake, but they’re still sold with V6 trims that are pushing 300 horsepower these days. And Average Joes buy the hell out of them. That alone should convince you of the market value of performance.

There was a thread on this site a couple weeks ago about what features of the Volt you’d like to be able to show off to your neighbor. Instead of something as asinine as LED lights, how about showing off a 0-60 time that’s faster than a Subaru WRX, all while saving the environment? Now that’s a killer feature that will have people knocking the showroom doors down. But I think GM might be too dimwitted to deliver and will just go after the market segment that the Prius has already recently saturated.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 3:34 pm

The market segment is far from saturated. Soon enough, as gas prices continue to climb, it will be even bigger.

As I have said here before, we drive a 1995 Impala SS, with the 260 hp LT1 engine. 260 hp may not be a big deal now, but it was hot stuff in 1995. The car gets to wide open throttle about once a year. The power is basically useless in highway driving.

I have the tickets and the insurance debacles behind me to show for many years of “aggressive” driving on the street. It does not work for me.

When gas gets to $4.00, or $5.00, or $6.00, or wherever it is going, the car with the best mileage numbers will rule.

(Quote)
Tom Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 4:53 pm

noel, it is pretty narrow-minded of you to think that just because _you_ are “past” your hot-car/aggressive-driving phase, that everybody else either is or should be.

The beauty of electric cars is that they can be fast AND efficient, at least moreso than gas cars. There doesn’t seem to be much of a disadvantage to making a fast Volt so I don’t know why GM is downplaying the performance aspect. You’d think the least they could do is make it as fast as their 1997 electric car but there’s no indication that they’re even going to do that.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:19 pm

Tom, #56:

Well maybe they can give us the ultra high mileage first generation and then branch out into high performance, SUV, “crossover” and other variants along the way. I myself, along with others, have asked for an e-flex small pickup truck, which would be perfect for my business driving.

I am sure that GM must have some pretty sophisticated market research to guide them in the development of this leap forward.
Who am I to argue with that.

I wonder if they have any numbers on the sales of the Ford and Toyota hybrid SUVs? Totally irrelevant vehicles in my opinion, but what do I know. How about the ridiculous “high performance” Lexus(s?).

All I know is, if it doesn’t out do the Prius in fuel economy, I’m not buying it.

(Quote)
Luke Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 5:44 pm

[quote comment="20339"]My suggestion for battery pack form factor in future Volt generations is a flat shape stretched over much of footprint between the wheel wells.[/quote]

That sounds a lot like the “Skateboard” concept:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=E7k&q=skateboard+vehicle+concept&btnG=Search

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 6:11 pm

[quote comment="20417"]
The beauty of electric cars is that they can be fast AND efficient, at least moreso than gas cars. There doesn’t seem to be much of a disadvantage to making a fast Volt so I don’t know why GM is downplaying the performance aspect…[/quote]You’re right, Tom. How about seeing if Ford or Ohio State would sell the 770HP electric motor they used in a Ford Fusion at Bonneville recently to set a new land speed record? That beast might be a little hard to retrofit into a Chevy Volt and a heavy drain on the battery, but (if it held together) it sure would blow the doors off a Tesla!

(Quote)
Tom Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 6:45 pm

noel, #57:

A few points.

First, how could the Volt *not* outdo the Prius in terms of MPG? For

(Quote)
Brian M Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 9:29 pm

[quote comment="20430"][quote comment="20417"]
The beauty of electric cars is that they can be fast AND efficient, at least moreso than gas cars. There doesn’t seem to be much of a disadvantage to making a fast Volt so I don’t know why GM is downplaying the performance aspect…[/quote]You’re right, Tom. How about seeing if Ford or Ohio State would sell the 770HP electric motor they used in a Ford Fusion at Bonneville recently to set a new land speed record? That beast might be a little hard to retrofit into a Chevy Volt and a heavy drain on the battery, but (if it held together) it sure would blow the doors off a Tesla! [/quote]

Don’t forget that if you want to have a larger motor than was originally designed, you also need a larger inverter with altered software, bigger cables to carry the higher current, more cooling capacity to take away the heat, and enough room to fit all of that stuff.

(Quote)
RB Says:
December 20th, 2007 at 6:31 pm

It’s very disappointing that the Volt will be built on the cobalt platform. The cobalt is a turkey with a bad reputation. The cobalt heritage will cause people to never even consider the Volt. Yes, it is good not to re-invent everything, but that does not mean you use parts you otherwise can’t get rid of.

(Quote)
Howard D. in the OC Says:
January 2nd, 2008 at 9:17 pm

Please design the production Volt to fit tall people! I’m 6′6″ (hardly a giant by today’s standards) and you’d be surprised at how many cars I cannot fit in comfortably. That means adequate headroom as well as legroom. And watch out for center consoles, low projections from the dashboard, knee bolsters, and the like which make it impossible to fit one’s legs where they have to go.

(Quote)
lean manufacturing software Says:
January 31st, 2008 at 4:01 am

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory November 18, 2009
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1038564_thnk-picks-indiana-for-u-s-factory) […]
Jason M. Hendler
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010 November 18, 2009
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010: _Link_... […]
Jason M. Hendler
Any news about the NiMH battery? November 18, 2009
Now that there are new owners of the patent, is there any indication that they will allow its use for electric cars? Like many others, I believe that... […]
Desertstraw
energy requirments of modern electric vehicles November 18, 2009
does anyone know any credible sources of information concerning the electricity requirements of modern electric vehicles per mile of travel and the... […]
crubkings
30% reduction November 18, 2009
The Belgian governement decided that if you buy a car with less then 60g/km emmision you get a 15% tax reduction and you can write it off for 100% if... […]
filiep

Interview with Frank Weber, E-Flex/Chevy Volt Vehicle Line Executive, Part I

64 Responses to “Interview with Frank Weber, E-Flex/Chevy Volt Vehicle Line Executive, Part I”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts