Grab our RSS Feed

Chevy Volt Media Day

April 2nd, 2008 | Posted in: General

One of the greatest opportunities I have been afforded in running this site, is to occasionally see the internal processes of the Volt’s development firsthand.

To that end, GM has once again invited me out to their Tech Center in Warren Michigan. I won’t be alone, but in the accompaniment of several journalists. I don’t know who yet, as I think that is sensitive information.

In any event, I will be boarding a plane today and shall arrive in Michigan this afternoon. We will have a reception tonight, but tomorrow will be the real meat and potatoes.

It looks like I might get back inside the battery lab and the design center where the heart and sole of the nascent Chevy Volt is coming to life.

I hope I will have the chance to ask some questions of key people.

As I am your connection to the Volt team, feel free to propose single short concise and as-yet unanswered questions here in the comments, with particular focus on battery development and design. I will try to get the best of them answered.

I look forward to bringing back as many facts and media as I can, but I suspect cameras wont be allowed in these facilities.

Popularity: 3%

(4 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

Loading ...

Posted by: Lyle

69 Responses to “Chevy Volt Media Day”

Statik Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:55 am

Good luck!

Here’s hoping they actually show you what a Volt looks like.

(=
Johnnie Paul Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:57 am

ditto!

Let us know what the Volt looks like…(?)

Good Luck and enjoy!

Johnnie
Eric Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:17 am

Any cost updates would be great. I guess this is still largely unknown though until true production date.
Van Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:17 am

Unanswered questions? How much do the respective battery packs weigh, both the LG and A123?

What differences in performance between the two packs have been
revealed by your testing so far?
Russell Judge Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:22 am

Where is GM in looking at the next generation of lithium batteries that will give the Volt a greater battery range? Are ultra capacitors being looked into?
RB Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:25 am

Ask about the control and cooling system for the battery cells, and how it is coming along. I remember it being mentioned (by Lutz) as something that did not require fundamental invention but did require engineering and development. I understood his point to be that there was some uncertainty about when it would be done in a way they could count on.
Eco Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:26 am

The question:
Will the maintenance and repair costs of a Volt be higher or lower than a Malibu, for the first 100,000 miles?

Why:
People went berserk when someone said the Volt could cost 40k or more. While a Malibu costs about 25, you are going to spend 10K more over 100,000 miles replacing parts. Not consumables like brakes, oil, etc, just parts that break because car parts fail. My estimate is that on a typical GM car, replacing broken parts and labor will cost you one-third of the purchase price. So the real price of a Malibu for 100,000 miles is around 35K, not 25, again setting aside routine stuff that you pay no matter what car you buy.

The only question with any meaning for me, is what is the real cost of the car going to be, to drive it 100,000 miles.
nasaman Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:27 am

TODAY’S THE LAST CHANCE TO RANK THE 20 “LUTZ LIST” QUESTIONS!

Go to….. http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=175

PS: I’ll email the consolidated ranked questions to Lyle, who will hopefully be able to ask and/or submit them while at GM’s Tech Center
RB Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:29 am

Also as related to the battery, what are they thinking as to what the driver will see about the battery, in operating the car. Battery voltage? temperature? estimated charge remaining (analogous to fuel left in the tank)? Will there be a record kept in the cars computer, for service? My guess is that they will try to keep meters similar to those in a traditional ICE car — on the other hand, things really are different, inside.
RB Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:33 am

Ask them what their current thinking is about the possibility of wireless access to the cars status. Can the owner do it, or just the service dept? Is it just in the vicinity of the car, or over the internet? Is it just the items on the cars display, or is there more (one hopes)? GM engineers metioned this first, and it has great possibilities for making the car less complicated and expensive, but still providing detailed information.
Tom M Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:52 am

Good Morning Lyle,

Please ask them if these batteries can be upgraded as new technology is available, like longer range etc.

Thanks and have a safe trip.
McLovin McFly Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:18 am

Due to recent speculation regarding the Volt’s questionable MSRP, what steps are being taken to reduce battery costs ?

I can afford a $5,000 battery but, not one that costs $15,000.
ksuhwail Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:19 am

Has there been any decision or consensus made on the buy vs. lease issue with the batteries?

If we are able to buy the batteries along with the car and if batteries are upgradeable will GM pay us for the returned used battery trade in or will there be a disposal fee type setup?
Jim I Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:21 am

I know this isn’t battery related, but could you ask if they are thinking of using the three model design we have discussed here for low price-no frills, mid price-average options, and high end-fully loaded?

I, as I am sure the rest of us, look forward to your report!

Have a great time!!!!
Tim Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:28 am

Since the Volt is a 5-door hatchback, does it have split fold flat rear seats and a removable trunk cover so it can have a “real” trunk and still carry larger objects?

Is GM watching EESTOR? That technology (if it’s real) would reduce the cost of the Volt and we all know that retailing the Volt over $30K will price it out of the manstream.
Tim Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:41 am

Has GM investigated using microturbines for the range-extender?

Capstone Turbine Corporation, a manufacturer of microturbine energy systems, has received an order for 150 C30 (30 kW) Capstone MicroTurbines to be applied in ECOSaver IV series hybrid electric buses manufactured by DesignLine International. This is the largest order to date for Capstone products in a Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) application.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/capstone-turbin.html#more

Three primary attributes make Capstone-energized systems almost maintenance-free:

Single moving part. A single turbine/compressor shaft with integrated generator.

Air bearings. The single moving part rides on a cushion of air. Consequently, Capstone MicroTurbines never need oil or lubrication maintenance.

Air cooled. No radiator, water pump, thermostat, hoses, belts or external accessories
Tim Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:45 am

Volt costs becoming shocking?
$50,000 a Volt?
http://www.hybridcarblog.com/
jabroni Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:48 am

What an exciting trip!

Bob Lutz has already told me that NiMH batteries are out of the question, but it sure would be nice if they used them at first. I am hearing reports of a $48000 price tag which makes it rather cost prohibitive. GM could reduce the cost of R&D drastically by using NiMH batteries at first and then switching to Liion later.

Could you ask the Volt team if NiMH is still out of the question?

Thanks
Rashiid Amul Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:51 am

Eco, #7. Are you kidding? If I buy a GM car for 25K, I will have to put 10K worth of parts into it to get it to run 100,000 miles? Please tell me you are joking. Why does GM continue to make complete crap?
My $13.5K Hyundia Elantra with 160,000 miles needed an alternator. That’s it for non consumable parts. I thought GM was getting much better than what they used to be. But if what you say is true, they still make junk and there is no longer any need to hold out for a GM vehicle. Thanks, Eco for the heads up.
Kevin R Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:09 am

I have a 2000 Bonneville with 170,000 miles on it. I have replaced brakes, strut supports, and two power window mechanisms. Without adding in consumables like oil and tires I’ve spent maybe $2500 in parts and labor in just less than 200,000 miles! If people were spending $10k per vehicle in 100,000 miles there would be major, major revolts. I don’t think $10k is an accurate figure for most GM cars.

BTW, Congrats Lyle and have a fantastic time here in Michigan! I’m interested in knowing what it looks like and when we can see some test vehicles on the road. Also the cost….it’s so important that they keep the cost at around $30-35k. If they can take a loss at the beginning and stomp on the entire industry where everyone begins to have a Volt in their driveway, they won’t have to worry about the temporary loss…they’ll have profits upon profits in just a short amount of time.
Estero Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:15 am

#7 Ecp said “My estimate is that on a typical GM car, replacing broken parts and labor will cost you one-third of the purchase price.”

My experience has been quite different. I purchase a new DeVille for $42,000 in Aug 1999 and drove it 190,000 before trading it a few weeks ago. The cost of repairs for non-consumables during the 1st 100,000 miles was less than $1,000.

The total cost of repairs for the entire 190,000 miles was less than $5,000.

The reason I traded the car just recently was being faced with about $6,000 of repairs and I didn’t want to do invest that much money in a car with that many miles.

The point is this — if I had chosen to spend the approx. $6,000 on my DeVille with 190,000 miles, the total cost for driving that car over 8-years would still be less than what you have estimated for the 1st 100,000 miles.

So, I repeat — my experience is quite different than you are suggesting.
Spin Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:18 am

When can we expect definite answers to the 3 Main questions?
1. How much?
2. How many the first year?
3. When will Volts be available?
Estero Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:18 am

Now, back to the subject now at hand. Here is a question about batteries.

“Is GM evaluating any other batteries for the Volt or other E-Flex/ E-REV vehicles than have previously been reported?”
GM Volt Fan Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:21 am

I agree with Tom M. … I’d like to have Lyle ask about what can be done as far as upgrading the Volt’s batteries to “new and improved” batteries if they become available in the next 5-10 years. Is it going to be possible to do “plug and play” with battery packs that have different kinds of battery technology? Is it possible to trade in your old battery pack and apply some of that money for a “new and improved” battery pack?

It looks like the first Volt owners might be like the “early adopters” of HDTVs. They’ll think they have the “latest and greatest” only to find out that a new HDTV has just come out that has much improved features and technologies … and often is cheaper too. That is a bummer to say the least.

I think GM ought to be somewhat agnostic when it comes to battery technology and just help us customers get the most “bang for the buck”. We pretty much just want the most reliable, safe batteries with the most range and the shortest charging times … at the most reasonable cost of course.

We’ll probably not be particularly loyal to a battery company or battery technology. I think GM ought to offer the OPTION of several different battery packs. Offer a base battery, an intermediate battery, and a premium battery (that might offer 300+ mile range and 10 minute charging time). Computer companies do this with their batteries for laptops. If people want to spend the big bucks on a super high tech battery, let them do so. There’s millionaires out there that will do so if they really like the exterior/interior design of the Volt and so forth.

Just getting a thriving, innovative automotive battery industry going is important! I’d like to see 10 battery companies out there trying to outdo each other every year! THAT is what brings the innovation and better prices to us customers. Companies like AMD have made some very nice microprocessors over the years that have forced Intel to innovate with their processors and price them more competitively. They’ve made the processors so good that the software technology for using them (parallel computing) is way behind. Everyone is better off because AMD is a major CPU manufacturer.

Over time, the best battery technologies will emerge and more or less become the de facto standard. GM should give these battery companies a chance to get their batteries on the market so people can try them out. They’ll need to be tested and certified by third party government agencies like Argonne first though … for safety and reliability, etc.

Check out the batteries that the Lightning GT is going to have. This car is going to be AWESOME … but expensive. But it is a heck of glimpse of the future that might be coming for “average Joes” in 5-10 years as the battery technology gets cheaper.

“But it’s the GT’s revolutionary battery technology that might give it the upper hand: Nanosafe’s Li-ion cells using nano titanate structures instead of traditional graphite give the GT an incredible 250-mile range, a full recharge time of only 10 minutes, and a life expectancy of 12 to 20 years, or 15,000 charge cycles before the battery performance drops significantly.”

“The GT uses an array of Nanosafe batteries, by Altairnano — which replace the graphite structures within the traditional lithium-ion cell with nano-engineered titanate materials which are much more effective along several axes. The stronger nanostructures resist breakdown over time far better than graphite, leading to a greatly increased life expectancy of more than 15,000 charge cycles before the cell drops below 85% of its original capacity.”

“The nano-titanate batteries also show extremely high levels of power density — as much as 4000W/kg compared to a good traditional cell’s 1500W/kg. And their well-ordered, low-resistance structure allows for exceptionally quick charging — as little as 10 minutes for a 100% charge.”

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/apr2008/bw2008041_141671.htm?chan=autos_autos+–+lifestyle+subindex+page_top+stories
ksuhwail Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:29 am

Eco, #7

I guess that would make Rolls Royce, Honda, Toyota and BMW all crappy cars too. All have been known to use GM engines and/or transmissions at some point in time. Heck the Pontiac vibe, Toyota matrix and Toyota corolla are all the same car essentially. The GEO Metro and Toyota Corolla were the same.

What do you think of the GEO Metro?….What do you think of Toyota?…Your thoughts should be the same! Granted the Metro hasn’t been around for over a decade.

BMW has used GM transmissions for years and the last generation Saturn VUE used a V6 Honda motor while GM gave Honda motors for their European operation in return. Honda cars with GM engines, blasphemy!

The quality between 80% of the top auto manufacturers is almost identical….They share parts, platforms, and research…The major issue today comes to personal vehicle needs, cost and design.

You must live in cool aide California to think like that…no other explanation…
Kevin R Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:38 am

Here’s the link to Britains Lightning GT. Pretty cool car but not practical for a family. ;(

http://www.lightningcarcompany.com/
ksuhwail Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:38 am

^^Not to mention the alfa 159….I guess its all crap
BillR Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:57 am

Lyle,

I would like to know if this car is the next logical step from the EV-1. I posted a lengthy analysis in the “Design” section of the forum because of the number of similarities.

Does the motor directly drive the front wheels without a gearbox, and is the motor a permanent magnet synchronous motor with a variable speed drive?

Congratulations on your invitation, and have a great trip!
Arch Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:31 am

Lyle
Does the generator turn at a constant speed?
Take Care
Arch
noel park Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:32 am

We replaced our 1985 Suburban with 400K+ miles and our 1977 shop truck(!) with new Chevy trucks in the last 3 years. This is a direct result of our excellent experience with the above vehicles.

I may complain about GM fuel economy, and the excitement factor in their offerings, but reliability is not an issue in my fairly extensive experience. If Mr. Lutz can actually achieve the technical leadership he rightly aspires to, the future is very bright. If not……………..
Voltmania Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:34 am

Eco, #7

Can you provide us with your analysis for repair costs for driving 100k miles? I can’t believe you are telling the truth. 10k for parts & labor? Give me a break! The Malibu even has a 100k powertrain warranty that would cover the most expensive components in a vehicle. I would think the Volt repair costs would be similar to the Malibu if you factor out basic maintenance like oil changes.
noel park Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:38 am

Well something went wrong with # 30 and I lost about 80% of it. Maybe there’s a message there.

So just to condense it a bit, with apologies to tne many bloggers who have said this already:

What does it actually look like?

When will it actually be available in reasonable quantities?

What will it really cost?

#19 Rashiid:

We have a 1995 Impala SS with 115K miles and a 2000 S-10 with 198K miles. Both have been dead reliable, and are still going strong. We have had nothing like the experiences which concerned you. We are going to drive the !@##$ Impala until we can buy the Volt.
Geoff Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 am

How about an automatic battery shutoff in case of an accident. Will they have that? I’d hate to be in a minor accident only to end up electrocuting myself due so some severed wires.

Thanks Lyle!
RB Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:05 am

I have a 1990 Buick with about 180K miles. It has been and remains a very reliable car. Over the years there has been normal maintanence, and after 100K miles some service on the cooling system and front axle. Generally the car has needed less service than the Honda cars we have had during the same time period, though these also have been undemanding.
Steve Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:15 am

What are the transmission characteristics?
Is GM experiencing early aging/reliability problems like Tesla?
John Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 am

I know this will be more appropriate for an e -flex Silverado , but I would like to see a 120 volt , 60 cycle out - let under the hood that I can plug into for some last resort , remote power.
Texas Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:25 am

Congratulations Lyle. It seems like your site is gaining not only a rabid fan base but the ear of GM. Please thank GM for being so up-front with the Volt’s design progress. They could be like EEstor and keep quiet so competitors and critics would also be silenced but it looks like they are marketing this product like the video game industry markets games. Video game companies feed the masses with just enough information to tease them and grow passion. When a video game or console finally becomes available there are people literally lining up the night before to buy it. That’s what I would like to see happen with the Volt. A line in front of every GM showroom that is carrying it. Have a good amount of pre-orders but leave enough units “free” to generate the pure excitement. I have been thrilled with how GM has managed this project thus far and I’m only talking about the marketing! Have fun and sneak in a video camera.

P.S. Most of us will understand if GM holds some information back. We don’t want to make it too easy on the competition or quench our excitement, do we?
doggydogworld Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:32 am

Pound them on cost all you can, Lyle. Finance and marketing execs determine a car’s PRICE, but engineers determine its COST. In the end it’s the COST that matters — if cost is high the Volt will fail. End of story. The market will not support a $48k mid-size Chevy sedan and GM won’t subsidize such a vehicle for long unless they see a clear path to profitability.

It may be too late to bring Gen-1’s cost down as the design is mostly frozen. If so the only hope is to get cracking on MASSIVE cost reductions for Gen-2. Anti-Volt execs are laying low today because the car has too much support from the top, but if the cost comes in high they’ll start their campaign to kill or dramatically scale back the program. Cost reductions must be identified NOW to show a clear path toward future profitability and do battle against the anti-Volt execs. America needs this car too much to lose this battle. It’s all on the engineers.
Dave B Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:57 am

Everyone seems to assume the mules are complete…but we’ve seen no pictures. How ’bout we begin there. Any working mules on the road?
doggydogworld Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:39 pm

Here’s an example of what I’m talking about with respect to cost. E-Flex is elegant but expensive. The three most expensive parts of an EREV drive train are batteries, motor/generators and power electronics. The E-Flex Volt has:

16 kWh/120 kW battery
173 kW motor/generators (120 + 53)
120 kW power electronics

Now consider an alternate design. A 30 kW motor (M1) connects directly to the wheels. A 50 kW motor/generator (MG2) connects to M1 via a clutch. A 50 kW ICE connects to MG2 via a clutch:

50 kW ICE –| clutch |– 50 kW MG2 –| clutch |– 30 kW M1 — Wheels

This design is grotesquely inelegant. But look what happened to the key cost drivers:

14 kWh/80 kW battery
80 kW motor/generators (30 + 50)
80 KW power electronics

Battery is a little smaller because lower power requirements allow you to extend the DOD window a bit without sacrificing cycle life. But you save 33% on power electronics and 54% (!!) on motor/generators. This is several thousand dollars of cost savings, yet the car can has 130 kW peak power instead of 120. There are compromises, for example only 80 kW is available at low speeds (e.g. below 30 mph). Using the ICE for high acceleration at high speeds (above 30 mph) also creates emissions problems and turns your “no gasoline if you drive less than 40 miles per day” story into the more complex “no gasoline if you drive less than 40 miles per day and don’t floor it”.

Still, we’re talking about THOUSANDS in cost savings. This is the kind of stuff GM engineers need to explore for Gen-2. FWIW, I believe the Chinese company BYD uses this basic architecture in their F6DM plug-in hybrid. They claim this car will cost only $26,000 vs. $20,000 for the gasoline F6 model. Part of that is cheaper batteries (BYD is one of the world’s largest ilthium battery companies), but part of it is a cost-cutting, “inelegant” architecture.
nasaman Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:46 pm

28 BillR, 35Steve….

Re: “Does the motor directly drive the front wheels without a gearbox, and is the motor a permanent magnet synchronous motor with a variable speed drive?” And, “What are the transmission characteristics?”

There is no gearbox/transmission. The 160HP motor is a high-efficiency AC induction electric motor with enormous torque at zero RPM, so a transmission is not needed.
nasaman Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:47 pm

REMEMBER TODAY’S THE LAST CHANCE TO RANK THE 20 “LUTZ LIST” QUESTIONS!

Go to….. http://www.gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=175

PS: I’ll email the consolidated ranked questions to Lyle, who will hopefully be able to ask and/or submit them while at GM’s Tech Center
Eco Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:50 pm

it would take a very long time to list all the parts I have replaced on my Pontiac, that has only 125,000 miles on it. But all of you can rest assured that 1) I am not lying, I have spent that much money to keep the vehicle road worthy and operating, and 2) I am worse off financially for having bought this GM car, instead of a competitor’s vehicle.

But I hope Lyle understands that this is a legitimate question, because you don’t have to look very hard to find people who have the same experience I have had with GM. Their market share shows it.
Jim I Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:03 pm

GM Volt Fan #24:

The Lightning GT is expected to cost about $300,000, so it should be absolute top of the line, don’t you think???

And this is not a high production vehicle. This cars for this year are all going to be hand built……….
George K Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:08 pm

Ok, its December, 2010 and my Volt is parked in the garage overnight after a 20 mile drive. Given the battery chemistry, if I am concerned about the life of the battery, am I better off “topping it off”, or waiting til it is down to 30% SOC?

Also, If there will be 2 different battery suppliers, will they each have the same specs? And, if the specs are different, will I be able to tell which is which, so I can get the car with the better battery?

Thanks so much Lyle, and GM for providing another great “give and take”.
NZDavid Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:11 pm

#45 George K. You will extend the life by topping it off each night.
Eric Marshall Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:20 pm

GM is apparently offering 3 options for the range extender; gas engine, fuel cell, and diesel engine.

I would like to see a 4th option; an extra battery pack!

This pack could be modular and removeable, replacing the engine/fuel cell and fuel storage tanks.

With this option, the Volt is ready for “Project Better Place” in North America!
Koz Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:29 pm

Have they or will they be testing battery life based on cylcing outside of 30-80% charge cycle?

How do they see the battery only operation heat load compare to genset on operation?
noel park Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:41 pm

#43 Eco:

I don’t mean to imply for a second that you are lying. Many others have related similar experiences here. I’m just saying that not all, or maybe even a majority, or GM cars are that way. Maybe we got lucky because we chose very mature and relatively simple designs. But our experience is true as well.

I think that GM’s market share is as much or more a product of timid and boring design as it is of reliability. I have had really good reliability experience, but they don’t have a car in their stable that I would consider buying at the moment. They just aren’t enough better than what I have already to justify spending the money.

I only hope that the Volt will change that equation.
Grizzly Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:42 pm

BillR #28
Steve #35
Nasaman #41

The Volt will not have a tranny, but the question is will it have
gear reduction? The EV-1 didn’t have a tranny but still drove the wheels through a differential w/ reduction.

Looking over the specs for the EV-1 it’s 0-60 is 8.5 seconds with
a motor that delivered 110lb/ft from 0-7K rpm and the vehicle weighed right around 3000 lbs.

The Volt will weigh just a little more, but it’s motor will deliver 239lb/ft at least to about 5k rpm and maybe 7K. I don’t think that a 7 second 0-60 is out of the question.
Storm Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:05 pm

Ask if they will sell me a mule after they are done with it. I will be too old to buy a Volt in 2015 when they might be available to us regular folks.
jdb Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:34 pm

I understand GE and Siemens make a solar film which could coat a vehicle. Did anyone look into that.
Can’t wait for Volt. I’d trade in my Prius in a heartbeat.
Thanks
Arch Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:20 pm

doggydogworld

That is exactly what you do not want to do. To max out the mileage in a ICE you want it designed for a very narrow
RPM range and a very narrow load range. JMHO

Take Care

Arch
Shawn Marshall Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:21 pm

Dear Lyle,
Pleas ask GM if I can have a 20 mile Volt with an attachable ICE/Battery trailer for longer trips. Thanks.
I think you’re going for a pony ride.
Shawn Marshall Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Or maybe I really want a Volt-Vette.
Randy C. Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:52 pm

My question is, if it hasn’t been asked before: “Is there a possibility for future versions of the Volt to have an optional expanded battery pack to make it a 100% BEV?”
Tagamet Says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 pm

Ditto Noel’s questions:

What does it actually look like?

When will it actually be available in ANY quantity?

What will it really cost?

Oh, and will it be available in red? (g)
Statik Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:34 am

The internet warrior in me has been dying to post this:

“This thread is useless without pics”

/lets see the car already, hehe
Kevin R Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:27 am

This just out in the Detroit News…..GM to do whatever it takes to get the Volt built!

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080403/BIZ/804030459
Steve Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:46 am

Will I be able to program in the charging start time into the Volt’s computer?
I want to plug it in when I get home at around 5:30pm, but start the charging automatically much later at night.
Steve Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:52 am

Will the all electric range change if it’s 0 degrees outside? What about -20 degrees? (Assume I park outside all night.)

In general, how does temperature affect engine efficiency and performance?

What are the results of cold weather testing?
doggydogworld Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Arch #53,

Not true. You can gain a few percentage points of thermal efficiency by designing for a narrow RPM/load band, but road load does not stay in a narrow band. You might need all 53 kW up a long freeway grade against the wind but only 10 kW at 55 mph on rural two-lanes. If your ICE is tuned for exactly 30 kW you’ll be way off-spec and highly inefficient much of the time. Much better to use an engine with slightly lower peak efficiency over a broader range. Look at the NREL studies of the pre-2004 Prius Atkinson ICE — it peaked at 37% but could sustain 33% all the way down to something like 13 kW.

Some people advocate running ICE at fixed RPM/load and using the battery as a buffer. If the ICE is tuned for 40 kW and you only need 10, you run the ICE one minute and shut it down for three. (Note, this is basically an automated version of the Prius hypermiler pulse-and-glide technique used to get maximum MPG at 30-35 mph where road load of only 4-5 kW is well below even the Atkinson’s high-efficiency band). This approach keeps the ICE near peak efficiency but 75% of your energy goes through an inefficient path of generator -> power electronics -> battery -> power electronics -> motor with associated 20%+ losses. Again in most cases it’s better to have the ICE operate a few points off thermal optimum and drive the wheels directly.

The ICE in my example would have a sweet spot to match typical extended range operation (e.g. 65 mph). RPM at the lowest speed (approx 30 mph) is about 50% below the sweet spot RPM and RPM at max speed is 50% above it. It’s very easy to design an ICE capable of staying within a few points of peak thermal efficiency over this relatively narrow RPM range. Note that for the few cases in which it makes sense ICE load can still be managed via the ‘pulse-and-glide’ technique mentioned above, same as a pure serial design.
Eco Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:27 pm

Just to finish up…if you go to Edmunds and look up the true cost to own of the 2005 version of the Pontiac I bought, repairs alone, setting aside all the other stuff, repairs alone are 10 percent of the value of the car when new. I blew threw that in a single repair job in year 5 alone. And since my version was 5 years older and 5 years worse than the one Edmunds rated, you see my point. Even five years after my version of the car came out, GM still did not keep the cost of repairs to below 10 percent of the value of the car.
Jim I Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Steve #59 & 60:

We have discussed the idea of having programming capabilities for the charging start time, as well as many other options. We hope GM was reading and listening.

GM says the battery pack will be temperature regulated, so we are hoping that cold weather performance will be built into the design.

But until we see some final specs from GM, your guess is as good as anyone else on this forum….
Jim I Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:34 pm

Eco #62:

There are good cars and there are bad cars. I had a 1991 Dodge Stealth, that according to the Dodge mechanics, had a horrible service record. But I had mine for 10 years, and put on 175,000 miles, and the only repairs I had were a bad air conditioner compressor, and a broken power window mechanism, both fixed under warranty….
Storm Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:31 pm

re #61. The charger is to charge the battery. Therefore you will never “run the ICE one minute and shut it down for three.”

I don’t understand why it is so hard to grasp the concept of an electric, battery powered car with an onboard ICE driven charger.
doggydogworld Says:
April 7th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

#66 Storm, the idea that the generator recharges the battery is a marketing concept. It doesn’t actually work that way. In extended range operation the ICE/generator will generally match the road load and send power directly to the wheel motor. This avoids an inefficient side trip through the battery. Significant power will only flow in or out of the battery In unusual situations such as rapid acceleration or deceleration. Control logic will maintain battery state of charge near the 30% mark, it will not “recharge” it back to 80%.
Rick Komraus Says:
April 7th, 2008 at 10:25 pm

I’ve done a little research on EVs. The new Chevy Volt is using Lithium Ion Batteries which has longer rang and reduced weight. Why is the range only 40 miles. Maybe I misread the specs. Early Toyota RAV4 EVs had almost 100 mile range on NiMH Batteries. I would never make it to work and back with the Volt without a recharge or running on the auxillary engine. I was hoping for an long range useable electric car. This seems like a hybrid?
doggydogworld Says:
April 9th, 2008 at 9:51 am

Rick, the RAV4-EV battery packs cost $15-20k, more than the entire manufacturing cost of a gasoline RAV4. Due to battery pack weight and power issues, RAV4-EV 0-60 time was something like 16 seconds. Volt battery pack cost and 0-60 time is targeted at $6k and 7-9 seconds. The Volt is cheaper, faster and is a “real car” — unlike the RAV4-EV you can hop in and drive across the country if you want.

If you really want a long range EV try the Tesla Roadster. It can do 200+ miles. Still not cross country, but OK for daily driving and short trips. Of course it only seats two and costs $100k, but the pursuit of EV purity requires certain sacrifices.

Chevy Volt Media Day

69 Responses to “Chevy Volt Media Day”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts