AND 
Fully Operational 40 Mile Range Chevy Volt Prototype to Hit Road This Month
During our Chevy Volt media day, myself and other journalists were given a whirlwind tour of the E-Flex battery lab. Hybrid Director Mickey Bly briefed us on the current mule (test car) status.
First, there have been four mules operational for the past 6 months. We actually got to see one on a lift, with an A123/Conti battery pack sitting on a smaller lift below the vehicle ready to ride up into the T-shaped space within the floorboard.
This mule which has been running constantly for these past 6 months has a fully-operational comprehensive E-Flex powertrain, and all of the Volt-specific components within it, per Bly. Thus far it has been running on a daily basis using small NiMh packs which allow it a 1 to 2 mile pure EV range, but has allowed testing of the electric drive, range extender, and controls. The skin of the car is that of a late model 2005 Malibu.
Mickey told us that the first lithium-ion pack (he wouldn’t say which pack-maker first) will be placed into the first mule this month, and that GM plans a fleet of about a dozen to soon be off and running.
This month marks a strong and decisive landmark or turning point in the development process, for these prototypes, although not in finish, will be for all intents and purposes, Chevy Volts.
The engineers will from these be able to learn the real-world driving characteristics of the battery packs and allow them to prove the models are valid and the car will behave as intended.They will also learn how to optimize the control mechanisms.
Volt executive Frank Weber noted that true Volts both in appearance and form will appear in mid-2009.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Related posts:
- 10-Mile Range Volt Prototype out in 2008, 40-miler in 2009
- Micky Bly, GM Director of Hybrid Integration on the Running Chevy Volt Prototype
- E-Flex/Chevy Volt Battery Lab Tour and Update
- GM May Offer a 20-Mile Range Version of the Chevy Volt
- Exclusive: GM has Received Second Continental/A123 Chevy Volt Prototype Battery Pack in Michigan
(14 votes, average: 4.93 out of 5) 
Loading ...
April 4th, 2008 at 5:44 am
So to all the naysayers who complained about Bob Lutz not making his Easter deadline, the truth is that mules with NiMH batteries have been in operation for 6 months.
Now mules with Li-Ion batteries will be on the road this month.
I’d say that the July date for press rides in the mules should be met.
The more I review this car, the more I see it as a stretched EV-1 with updates and a range extending engine. Both have electrohydraulic brakes, an electric drive, front wheel drive, battery packs in the center tunnel, low Cd, similar suspensions, front disc brakes, rear drums, and the list goes on.
My point is that the EV-1 was considered a technological breakthrough, and this means GM is building on their experience, which will result in a better product and the ability to bring it to market sooner.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 5:53 am
GREAT NEWS, LYLE ….FOUR MULES OPERATING FOR 6 MONTHS!!!
Even though the tiny NiMh batteries they’ve had available only allowed brief operation in EV-only mode, they allowed the drive train to be put through all its operating modes. And I understand that Mickey Bly said the first mule has run continuosly since they first fired it up (6 months ago)! Very reassuring, since there’s no reason to expect endurance problems with the electric motor, controller or range extender …..BUT with a fleet of about a dozen mules with full Li-Ion packs up & running soon, there should be plenty of time for extensive endurance/distance testing!
With this early start, my guess is that GM will have logged in excess of 3 million miles or more on these mules & on full Volt prototypes BEFORE the first production cars roll off the line in Nov 2010!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 6:16 am
#1 BillR mentioned “rear drums”. Is that what we can expect with the Volt or what that only a reference to the EV-1?
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 6:36 am
1 BillR, 3 Estero….
I can personally guarantee you the Volt will have 4-wheel discs; any car today that even HINTS at being a performance car ABSOLUTELY HAS TO!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:11 am
This is wonderful news!
nasaman:
3 million test miles? I guess that would depend upon how many prototype vehicles they would make. If they have 20 hand built test vehicles right now (which they don’t), to get to 3 million miles in the next 31 months, each car would have to drive about 161 miles every day…………
And as far as the brakes, I would agree that they should be 4 wheel disk, but the original specs for the Volt did list “electro-hydraulic power assisted front disk, rear drum”, so Estero’s question is not completely unreasonable.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:13 am
#4 nasaman
The specs I have for the EV-1 rear brakes indicate 8.9 inch metal-matrix composite drums with electric actuation.
For the Volt concept, go to Lyle’s home page and click on “Full Specifications” (right hand side of the page). The brakes are listed as: electro-hydraulic power assisted: front disc, rear drum
If GM decides to upgrade the rear brakes to discs, that may be so, but for the concept vehicle, they seem to be the same as the EV-1. You will be amazed at the similarities between the EV-1 and the concept vehicle.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:13 am
Lyle, you lucky dog. Well done, sir. I wish I was there with you.
I realize the design is final. Any news on when we can see pictures of the Volt?
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:43 am
Excellent news…! Thank you Lyle.
Johnnie
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:46 am
Seems like progress is being made rather quickly. I’m curious about one thing. The quote that the production Volt will be revealed around mid-2009. Shouldn’t GM shoot for the January 2009 Detroit auto show? It sounds like all the components are there, why not get the press coverage and drive one to the show?
I know I know, thump me for getting demanding. Great job GM!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:54 am
Great News…. Let the Revoltlution begin!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 8:04 am
5 Jim I, 6 BillR….
You’re both right —and that’s one reason the “Lutz List” includes as it’s 2nd question, “When will the “design freeze” specs for the vehicle be released?”
Re: drum brakes ….it would be marketing SUICIDE to NOT use 4-wheel discs (I’m sure GM knows this despite what the old specs say)
Re: 3 million miles on mules/prototypes ….Frank Weber’s buddies in Germany put over 5 million kilometers (~3 million miles) on test mules/prototypes of the fairly-conventional Opel Antara CUV before it was introduced in 2006. I can’t imagine he’d be outdone by them on the radically-different Volt, the car that brought him to Detroit!!!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 8:17 am
I’ve wondered for awhile now if GM had some mules already running, and this confirms it. I say, build an army of mules…whatever it takes to get the product right! Great article. Thanks again Lyle.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Here is a video of the 1/3 scale model of the final production volt in wind tunnel testing, the Malibu mules and battery packs.
Chevy Volt Laboratory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_8uF8QKfeI
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 8:47 am
#12, Schmeltz, I agree. Do whatever it takes to make the product right.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 8:52 am
Testing has been going on a LOT longer than most think.
Take Care
Arch
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Too bad they couldn’t slap a 300 pound NiMH back into one of the mules for testing.
I am extremely excited but that is tempered ny the 48,000 dollar price tag…..This may be the best car every produced and i will not want to make the payments!!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Dave B #9
Don’t be suprised to see it at the Detroit Auto show. I would expect it.
This is great though. GM has been very open about the technological development, albeit it appears we are a few months behind in actually getting the news. Just what I would do if I were them.
We have a saying at our place, ” Never promise anything you haven’t already accomplished.” Looks like GM is following that path as well.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Rear drums is not marketing suicide…maybe that’s all that’s needed with the majority of the braking coming from regeneration and the small front disc brakes. Many small cars today, like the Chevy Aveo, still use rear drum brakes.
Hasn’t everyone been complaining about the price…adding needless options is going to drive the price up.
I’m excited to hear that the mules are operational. I would expect GM to reveal the final design during a big event like Detroit auto show or even the Super Bowl.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Lyle,
I’m a longtime lurker, but I just wanted to weigh in on this landmark day and say thank you to you and all who contribute with their posts. I’m constantly impressed at the level of professionalism and detail found here.
Producing this car will be a cornerstone for the revival of American industry. I can’t wait to drive one!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 9:41 am
#11 nasaman, #18 jScott1
I’m not sure that I can find the source, but if I recall correctly, the front brakes on the EV-1 were power-assisted hydraulic, but the rear brakes were electric actuated only (no hydraulic lines to the rear). With the front brakes providing 60 to 80% of your stopping power, combined with the regenerative braking, the rear brakes are probably for hard stops only. Time will tell what GM decided was the best choice.
#13 Tim
Thank you for the link to the video. It was excellent!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Lots of good news out there…. Now…I am willing to pay up to 35 - 37 K for this car…..But hurry… by 2010 or mid 2011 my 07 MAXX will have about 250,000 KMs on it and will need to be replaced.. It would still be a great car but I usually upgrade when they hit around 180.000 KMs. so…. GM I’M hanging on till 2011 but ….. the Volt has be there for me or very shortly after….
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Conflicting reports
I tend to belive this site, however today’s (4-4-08)
Las Vegas Review Journal published a report in their automotive section titled “Chevy Volt saddled with battery delays” and said testing will not begin until July.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Tim #13
Great link to the video. I am a little suprised it is out there with the scaled car included. GM seems really close to the vest on the final design. You can infer a lot from what that video shows.
I just hope the wheel and tire package is closer to the show car specs. It really needs that aggresive stance to differentiate it from the rest of the true competition.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Great news! Well done. Cool video. Rear drum brakes are fine with me.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Did you notice the size diff between the EV-1 pack and the Volt Pack? WOW!
Anyway, most of the braking will be handled by the regen anyway, so wha’s the big deal with drum rear brakes? I want the Volt to be affordable and the video states that the target is STILL around $30K.
Anything over $30K and the Volt loses much of it’s mainstream game-changing ability.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:39 am
GM Rocks!
This multi-threaded design approach is far and away the best way to complete a design as quickly as possible. Just as no battle plan survives first contact with an enemy, no business plan survives first contact with reality. The more you build and test, the more quickly reality is revealed to engineers, designers and manufacturers at all levels. The sooner you know all that you need to know, the sooner you can make decisions on how to proceed, and the sooner you take the next steps, until complete.
This approach tends to send analytical types right up the wall, because they always believe you can map everything out on paper. Analysis might (but not always) put you in the ballpark, but it will never get you to homeplate. The multi-threaded approach often unnerves managers, because it reveals so many problems so quickly, it gives the appearance of chaos, but in reality, the best managers can navigate through chaos, mitigating it and eventually conquering it. The baseline product rolls out the door, and on that solid platform, you can iterate to a better product in the next generation, knowing its been well fleshed out.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:41 am
Awesome news!!!
#16 jabroni - There is no price tag yet, only rumors. Keep your hopes up.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Jason #24
Dead on.
We have always felt that the sooner you get on with it, the sooner you know what needs tweaking.
REMEMBER, the 3rd “iteration” always works (at least, around our place). Get the first two out of the way as quickly as possible!
Nothing tells you more about what needs worked on than reams of data. Generate it fast.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Video of the windunnel testing of 1/3 scale model shows a highly descised final version!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_8uF8QKfeI
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Damn you think Chevron would of let them used the full sized NiMH batteries they bought to repress. I mean damn man it’s over were moving on to li-ion, you won, the full sized auto ready nimh battery only exsisted in theory thanks to chevron.
GM is playing with our minds, they know this thing can do 40 miles ev easy, and i’m still hoping for a price tag of $32,500. If there game plan is to promise little and deliver big everything they have been saying recently makes sense.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 11:25 am
It looks to me like the basic operation of the E-Flex has been rather thoroughly shaken out. Swapping in the new batteries shouldn’t affect much.
CEO of ZENN Motors said that they and EEStor will begin converting existing gas cars to all electric in a few months when the new EEStor capacitors come of the assembly line. They would obviously do conversions on similar sized cars, since they have manufacturers already producing the heat pumps, electric motors
they will need to build their own cars in late 2009. I assume auto magazines will be the first to submit Toyota Corollas/Honda Civics, etc. for conversion and then test the results. We should, therefore, know later this year exactly how those potentially game changing energy cells work. Hopefully GM can get their hands on some or pay to convert one of their test mules and test the capacitors themselves. If they work, in one fell swoop, the Volt goes all-electric and its price drops.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
13 Tim thanks for the link. really liked the ev-1 battery standing next to the VOLT battery pack .
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
I know this is a moot request but I am going to express my opinion anyway.
I hope Gm will consider the good folks on this site that have signed up for the VOLT and supported this project from the very beginning. It would be a shame if GM leaves us out of the loop when this auto hits the show rooms. I realize what has been said about California, Florida and DC.
Lyle and many of you have promoted the VOLT and I hope GM realizes our loyalty to this project and lets us have the opportunity to purchase a VOLT even if we have to go to one of those states.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Good news from GM… Now let’s get the VOLT out there…..Mid 2011 is when I will be looking forward to picking up my VOLT….My 07 MAXX will have around 250,000 KMS on it and will be due for upgrading.. $30 K - 37 K… I won’t have a problem with that if the car is “fully dressed to the nines” if not …I am sure there is going to be a rush of Hybrid,,,,,, electric vehicles to choose from by then..
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
#13, Tim. Great video. Thank you for providing the link to it.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
This is great news!!!!
But I guess I’ll have to take back all of those things I said about this being an open development project… What’s next — is Lyle really a GM employee? GM could learn a few things from Sun Microsystems recent change to an open development model!
Hopefully we’ll see a lot more information about these cars soon.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Two things: I wonder if that battery pack is a factory built Prius NiMH pack? The range sounds about right.
I think drum brakes are about reducing drag. Disc brakes tend to always have some contact with the disc, and therefore greater drag. Drum brakes the pads can completely retract away from the drum for lower rolling resistance. As was mentioned earlier, regenerative braking can reduce the actual load the brakes need to handle.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
#13, Tim,
Thanks for the link to the video. Does the wind tunnel model seem to have a shorter hood, or is it still in proportion to the original vehicle?
Loved the battery pack shot - new battery tech is one thing, but the range extender is probably the biggest reason for the difference in size. I would like to see what the range extender looks like in situ.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Enjoyed the video . Thought the point about the battery being 1 / 3 the size of the EV - 1 was overdone because I believe it only has 1 / 3 the capacity of the EV - 1 ?
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
nasaman #11:
Well if Frank Weber need 3 million test miles, I again volunteer to help him make that goal!!!!
And the links being provided by eveyone here are just teriffic!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
This is excellent news. While EEstor might actually be sitting on the technology that will change the world…no one but EEstor seems to have seen it.
GM, on the other hand, is opening their shop to the world.
I congratulate GM on this progress with the Volt, and the approach that the company is taking to bring it to market.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
#31 Luke:
I hear you - I was a bit taken aback to learn that mules are already running. Even so, I have to agree with MetrologyFirst at #17. This process may not be totally transparent, but it is a whole lot more so than anything I have seen out of GM in the past. If it works out well, maybe they will be even more so in the future.
A lot of people have expressed concern about it being too open, feeling that they are tipping their hand to the competition. I somewhat share that concern.
Others have said “Always under promise and over deliver.” To my pleasant surprise, that’s what I see here.
If you look back at my comments here over the months, I don’t think that you would see me as a cheerleader for GM, but I think that they are striking a pretty good balance here. Especially if you consider that this “open process” is pretty alien to their historic culture.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
I think this approach evolved on Wall Street . One downside is that we may start seeing Whisper Numbers for range and performance ,and will be disappointed if they are not met .
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Here is another link with more info.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080404/bs_nm/gm_volt_dc_1
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
This is great news; can’t wait to hear more.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
#13 Tim, great video, thanks, some comments:
First, the car now looks like a Lexus IS300 to me, very good news for someone who hates these newfangled American “muscle cars.”
Second, of course the EV-1’s battery pack is 3x bigger than the Volt’s, the EV-1 also had three times the range! Not sure why anybody was impressed about that. I could stand next to the Volt’s pack with a AA battery and totally blow these guys’ minds!!
Third, what in the world was the woman doing out there with a smoke pipe? How are you supposed to get any accurate measurements from that. The smoke is totally automated in other wind tunnels I’ve seen.
Fourth, it’s no big surprise to me that they’ve had prototypes rolling around for months. Like I’ve always said, there is no revolutionary new technology here, except for maybe the battery chemistry.
Fifth, interesting that they can drive around and do testing with 1-2 mile batteries. It has been speculated on this board that acceleration is being limited by the discharge rate of the batteries. If you can accelerate in a meaningful way with such a small battery, maybe making the Volt a fast car is just a matter of slapping a bigger motor in there.
#1, BillR:
It should be no big surprise that the Volt is similar to the EV-1. I wouldn’t say that means they’ve necessarily learned anything from the project. A lot of this stuff comes down to design features that can’t really be changed. For example, the Volt HAS to be front (or all) wheel drive because 80% of your braking force is from the front, so if you want to do regenerative braking in a meaningful way, you need to put your motor in the front.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Great photo of two battery packs:
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080404/FREE/978770661/1024&template=zoom&Site=CW&Date=20080404&Category=FREE&ArtNo=978770661&Ref=AR&Profile=1024&CRED=
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Thanks again for all the cool links guys. Great stuff.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
#41 Tom
Quote “Second, of course the EV-1’s battery pack is 3x bigger than the Volt’s, the EV-1 also had three times the range! Not sure why anybody was impressed about that. I could stand next to the Volt’s pack with a AA battery and totally blow these guys’ minds!!”
The EV-1 lead-acid battery pack had a rated maximum capacity of 18.7 kwh. It weighed 1310 lbs.
The Volt’s battery pack is rated at 16 kwh (minimum) and weighs only 400 lbs. That’s pretty impressive to me! The fact that GM is choosing to operate the battery pack between 30% and 80% state of charge is probably to extend its life, so the Volt’s AER is less (not to mention the Volt is a 4 passenger versus 2 passenger vehicle).
I’m not surprised the Volt is similar to the EV-1. What I am saying is that it is likely that GM started with the EV-1 when they designed the Volt concept, and are now utilizing the knowledge that they gained from making the EV-1. Why re-invent the Wheel? i.e. reuse the electrically actuated rear drum brakes from the EV-1, and other systems as well ( maybe with slight modification).
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Thanks to all and particularly to Lyle for all the informations.
Let me add this one : the batteries are also tested in Germany (source today on GMEurope social media newsroom, link : :http://www.gmeurope.info/social_media_newsroom/archives/370-Chevrolet-Volt-Development-Charges-On.html
Other pieces of information may also be found in the article.
What a wonderful day.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
From #39 BillR’s link:
“Meanwhile, GM engineers are counting on braking to capture energy that will deliver some 20 percent of the power needed for the Volt’s 40-mile battery range. Without any braking — in perfectly traffic-free highway driving — the range would be closer to 32 miles, GM engineers said.”
This is news to me. I’ve heard this speculated but hadn’t heard of it coming from a GM engineer. I thought it was 40 miles on US06 cycle they were shooting for.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Pumped
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
The 1/3 scale model, despite the camouflage tape, reveals several key changes (improvements, IMO) over the concept Volt….
1) The top rear of the cabin has exterior “fins” added at both sides of the rear window, much like the Tesla, Lotus & a few other exotic, high-performance cars –could this be for reduced drag? In any case, it’s a styling coup d’etat (in my opinion)!!!
2) The top & windows are both slightly taller (for head room & safety reasons, I imagine) and the wheels/tires are slightly smaller (probably for cost & availability reasons)
3) The hood looks somewhat shorter, probably because the much larger windshield is very steeply sloped, which moves its lower cowling further forward, most likely helping to reduce drag
We’ll have to wait for styling details, but I’m extremely pleased with what I can infer from this You Tube screen capture paused at about 3:23…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_8uF8QKfeI
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Ask them to sell me a mule when they are done with it! Please. 2015 is too far away.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
My recollection from first reading of the official GM Volt web site back in early-2007 was that there would be front disc and rear drum hydraulic brakes. If it is true GM has gone to all electric brakes that is a good thing for the reason I earlier stated in #48 at this link.
http://gm-volt.com/2008/04/02/volt-will-charge-at-both-110v-and-220v-half-of-range-charge-within-an-hour/#comments
Let’s hope that GM keeps surprising us with good news like the four mules operational for the past 6 months using NiMh packs.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Koz @46:
Again, I wouldn’t be too concerned about the range reports. I truely think GM is scrambling the cards a little to keep the competion guessing.
I fully expect the Volt to get 50 miles a charge, when new, in the US06 cycle. More I would think if you drive it carefully.
Maybe 30 miles if you want to drive it like a Vette!
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Regarding # 39 BillR article link:
Surprising comments by GM engineer regarding 32 miles without breaking and Boniface stating the aerodynamic improvements boosted the electric range by more than “half a mile.”
Aerodynamic changes result in a 2% increase to electric range? Only through regenerative breaking will the 40 mile target be reached? Neither comment seems accurate based on previous performance statements. I think the reporter got this wrong.
All in all, I like where we are in the process. And I think the data is getting better, not worse.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Craig #51
It doesn’t seem correct since GM/Lutz have already stated that the 40 AER is more of an end of battery life range. That would mean that it might be closer to 50 when the vehicle is new. Si w/o the 20% that regen provides a new car should get 40 if that assumption is correct.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
53 Grizzly…
Right! And we all need to keep in mind that “deceleration charging”, though seldom if ever discussed by GM, will also contribute to the Volt’s range …..not on the Bonneville salt flats, but perhaps even MORE than regenerative braking does on hilly, low-traffic highways.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Think of GM’s 40 mile claim as an EPA estimate instead of a legal contractual guarantee. (Duh.)
Has anybody ever really honestly gotten the EPA estimated mileage out of their car?
There are a lot of people who are EXTREMELY concerned about exactly what the Volt’s electric range will be and whether or not they will be able to do all their driving under electric power. Why? Okay, let’s say you have to drive 45 miles instead of 40. You burn a tenth of a gallon of gas. It’s not the end of the world.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
#50 MetrologyFirst:
Yeah, 0-60 in 6.0 sec or whatever.
Floorboard the throttle when the light turns green and watch the range meter drop like a rock.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
“Meanwhile, GM engineers are counting on braking to capture energy that will deliver some 20 percent of the power needed for the Volt’s 40-mile battery range. Without any braking — in perfectly traffic-free highway driving — the range would be closer to 32 miles, GM engineers said.”
A truly silly statement. I’m quite certain “GM engineers” said nothing of the sort. They may have said range would only be 32 miles with no regen (i.e. 100% friction braking).
Regen recovers some of the energy you normally lose when braking. But you get the best range by not braking at all.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Although I posted the yahoo link, I take no responsibility for its content…
For #51 Craig
My guess is that the aerodynamic improvements have increased the Volt’s range by HALF, not half a mile. This would mean if the concept vehicle’s range was 30, it is now 45.
It has already been mentioned that the drag of the newly styled Volt is 30% less than the concept vehicle.
#46 Koz
Given the journalist’s accuracy as noted above, I question what was truely said regarding the 32 mile range. The question may have asked about the Volt’s range at highway speeds of 80 mph for all we know.
[Reply]
April 4th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
If this sells I wonder where we will get al the needed electricity to charge the thing with? The East and West coast suffer power shortages every summer. I hope it will be afforable to the Wal-Mart checker or the people working on the farms. If not there will be a very limited place in the market for them. No one wants a $100,000 golf cart.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 4:30 am
64 Just Watching….good point, but keep in mind that even with just the ICE running, you’re still in a vehicle that gets better fuel economy than 75-80% of the vehicles currently on the road (if current engineers are correct at 40+). So, if you can charge somewhere, then GREAT! If not, then run the ICE until you can charge. I see that as a win/win situation. I’m a bit spoiled in AZ with Palo Verde running and with Solara planning that HUGE electric solar field in SW Phoenix, but I can understand your concern.
As for the wheels/tires…that’s nothing that a call to Centerline or Weld wheels can’t fix. Get an Ultra-light billet wheelset to fill those fenderwell openings a bit nicer? Sure!
Oh, and Tom…some of us LIKE the older American Muscle car look…
Sure, my toys may have the COD of a 1978 Peterbuilt, but I still get stopped EVERYTIME I’m at the store, gas station, or wherever, by people who evidently love the look of classic muscle cars as much as I do. Don’t bury my cars yet…I have too much work into ‘em…he-he!
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 5:38 am
How do we find out where we are on the preliminay “Buy” list. What number we are ?
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 6:07 am
Thanks doggydogworld for that comment. I was about to say the same thing. Regenerative breaking doesn’t give the Volt more range over a drive with no stops. If that were the case then you could just start and stop over an over again to give your volt more range….. NOT the case.
Regenerative breaking REDUCES the loss you get from throwing all the energy you have built up in the cars movement when you break.
Best range from a any battery pack would be ranked as follows.
1. No slowing or stopping and driving at slow in city speeds.
2. No slowing or stopping driving at highway speeds.
3. Stop and go driving with regenerative breaking.
4. Stop and go traffic without regenrative capability.
Someone correct me if I am wrong.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 7:15 am
67 omegaman66…..
Your ranking is correct. But we all also need to remember that the Volt, like all well-designed EVs, also recovers kinetic energy by simply DECELERATING —i.e., without even touching the brake pedal. The drive motor’s controller instantly switches the motor to GENERATOR mode when the accelerator pedal is released, allowing it to charge the battery even when the car is just coasting.
This deceleration charging mode also prevents driver anxiety due to “freewheeling”, just as ICE-powered cars do using “engine braking” (with either manual or automatic transmissions) —but with the added bonus of energy recovery.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 7:47 am
Noel Park: “Floorboard the throttle when the light turns green and watch the range meter drop like a rock.”
Not so much as one might think. Tesla looses about 10% at full throttle and with A123 batteries the Volt could be less. Of course the significantly smaller battery pack size of the Volt may more than offset the higher power A123 chemistry. Either way it should be close. The real range killers will be hard breaking that uses significant friction breaking and high speads. With EV propulsion and sizable battery packs, one should be able be able “stomp” on the accelerator mostly guilt free.
67 omegaman66
2&3 are reversed in general for EPA ratings for cars with meaningful regen, but it could be either way in real world depending on driving conditions. This is why you see better city mpg ratings than highway for many hybrids. I think in reality a lot of people will get better mileage with their highway driving if it is done on busy highways (referring to steady speeds, not stop-and-go). The disturbed air on busy highways reduces drag significantly. Otherwise, I believe traveling at 65 MPH will require more KWh/mile than normal city driving in general but it all will depend on a lot of factors that aren’t yet known.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
#69 koz:
Well sorry, but the physics of that escapes me.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Noel Park
The kinetic energy of a mass (the Volt) is only dependant on the msss and the velocity, not how quickly the velocity is acheived. The total energy inputed to arrive at this kinetic energy state is the value of the kinetic energy plus any losses in getting there. Given the same exterior conditions and as long as tires don’t lose traction, the only meaningful difference may come from battery discharge rates. At high discharge rates some batteries exihibit significantly higher internal resistance, but my understanding is that A123’s chemistry performs well at high discharge. I could be wrong, but this is the physics as I understand it.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Koz,
F=MA Force is the product of mass times acceleration. Your understanding of physics is deficient. Changes in speed cost energy. At least in an EV, some of the deceleration energy can be returned to the battery.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Koz #69
“With EV propulsion and sizable battery packs, one should be able be able “stomp” on the accelerator mostly guilt free.”
*** *** *** ***
Huh??? I guess you could also say with ICE propulsion and a SIZABLE gas tank you could do the same.
[Reply]
April 5th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
#72 Storm
Please re-read my post. I specifically stated Kinetic Energy is a function of mass and velocity (KE = 1/2 *mv^2) which is correct. What I was saying is that fast acceleration (stomping on the pedal) vs slow acceleration to the same speed REQUIRES exactly same amount of energy (wheel energy). The differences in energy use come from the losses in providing that acceleration not in the rate at which kinetic energy is acheived. With the Volt, those differences in losses will come almost exclusively from differences in the battery’s efficiency at different discharge rates. My understanding is that A123’s chemistry, and LG’s for that matter, can handle high discharge rates (i.e. high power) well.
#73 Grizzly
Battery power delivery efficiency has no relation to ICE power delivery efficiency. Battery cells delivery less energy as the discharge rate increases, but there is a certain range in which this curve is pretty flat. Each type of chemistry and cell design has a different curve. What I meant by sizeable battery packs and guilt free acceleration is that the energy penalty (reduced range) from flooring it is reduced as the battery capacity is increased.
On the otherhand, as your sarcasm alludes increasing the gas tank does nothing to mitigate high power losses that the ICE suffers from. ICE’s are most efficient in a certain RPM range. Flooring it in an ICE cause the RPM’s to fluctuate drastically and less of the power is delivered in the RPM sweet spot than with constant moderate acceleration. Thus, ICE’s suffer from a much larger efficient hit under max acceleration than a well designed BEV.
[Reply]
April 6th, 2008 at 5:24 am
I’d ;ike to volunteer to drive a test mule in Florida summers. 239 410-8826. Call me. TED
[Reply]
April 6th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Koz.
“What I was saying is that fast acceleration (stomping on the pedal) vs slow acceleration to the same speed REQUIRES exactly same amount of energy (wheel energy).” And that is what is untrue. The energy cost for acceleration increases by the square of the time. Getting to speed in half the time requires 4 times the energy.
Kinetic energy is a stable condition. Acceleration is dynamic.
[Reply]
April 6th, 2008 at 7:25 am
#74 Koz
This will be an interesting comparison, when the data becomes available.
I agree with your basic premise, however, I do believe the losses associated with the power electronics and the motor drive must be considered, as well as the battery internal losses.
For the others, I will describe a basic scenario for comparison.
Two Volts are at a stop light. When the light turns green, the first Volt nails the accelerator and zooms up to 50 mph. After cruising for a short period at 50 mph, he then coasts down to a stop at the next stop light, and gets full advantage of his regenerative braking.
Volt #2 leaves the stoplight with a mild acceleration until he reaches 50 mph and then immediately lets off. He then coasts down to a stop at the next stop light, and also gets full advantage of his regenerative braking.
Both vehicles will reclaim the same amount of electrical energy from the regen braking process. Therefore, the real difference is in the acceleration portion of the leg. Which uses more energy? Note that as Koz noted, at 50 mph, each vehicle has the same amount of kinetic energy, so the question becomes “what is the relative efficiency between the two modes of acceleration?”
We are not talking about an ICE which at full power may consume large quantities of fuel, and typically uses a richer mixture to give you that added power. There are large differences in efficiency for the ICE when operating at full load versus part load. With the Volt, we are now talking about the differences in efficiency of the electrical system.
For Volt #1, a large current draw is required to provide full power. As Koz notes, this may have an negative effect on the efficiency of the batteries, but it also should reduce the efficiency of the power electronics and the traction motor. The question is, how much difference will there be?
We probably won’t know that answer for some time, however, it might only be a small penalty, like 10% additional energy consumption, so that zooming around in your Volt, versus driving very conservatively, may only result in a small energy penalty.
[Reply]
April 6th, 2008 at 7:41 am
#76 Storm
I think you are confusing power and energy.
It takes more power to accelerate at a faster rate, however, you apply that amount of power for a shorter period of time to get to a given speed (point of kinetic energy). Energy is power multiplied by time.
For example, a toaster oven may draw 1000 watts (1 kW). That is its power. If you cook something for 1 hour, you will use 1 kwh (kilowatt-hour). That is energy, and is reflected on your electrical bill.
You could accomplish the same task by using a 500 watt oven for 2 hours. You reduce your power, but consume the same amount of energy.
In your example, I think you mean to half your time to a given distance (such as in drag racing) it requires 4 times as much acceleration (power) to halve your time. This follows the relationship
d = a * t^2
Distance equals the product of acceleration and time squared. To halve your 1/4 mile drag race time, you need 4 times the acceleration, or 4 times the power.
[Reply]
April 6th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Storm,
“Kinetic energy is a stable condition. Acceleration is dynamic.”
Yes, and?
BillR,
I like your example. It more clearly conveys what I was trying to convey. I was lumping the high power (pedal to the metal) additional motor and power electronics losses into the non-meaningful category. I think this will be true for the motor for 0-60 acceleration, but you are probably correct about the power electronics.
A strict strict interpretation of Noel Park’s initial comment about the range meter dropping like a rock has merit. The range meter will drop at more rapid rate during higher acelerations, but the overall reduction in range due to differing accelerations to the same speed will behave as BillR and I have stated.
[Reply]
April 6th, 2008 at 9:42 am
#64
There is plenty of electric power to charge up Volts during off peak periods. Peaks in electrical usage occur in the morning when everybody gets up and goes to work and in the evening when everybody comes home from work and turns up the AC or heat and starts cooking dinner. Charging electric cars all night long will “fill up” valleys in the load curve and actually