Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Toyota Attacks the Volt…Again

April 18th, 2008 | Posted in: Battery, Competitors, Engineering, Research

The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) are having a conference in Detroit this week. One paper that was presented was written by Toyota and called ‘Study on the Potential Benefits of a Hybrid System”.

The results were summarized by our friend Mike Milikin of Greencarcongress.

In the study Toyota compared the E-REV concept to the PHEV Prius concept. They analyzed each vehicle driving the US06 (aggressive) cycle which they calculated requires 100 kW maximum output.

Toyota argues that the Volt would need to have battery, motor, and electrical system all be capable of creating that 100 kw. For their blended or parallel PHEV, though, electrical output would only have to create 20 kw average and 40 kw maximum, the combustion engine taking care of the rest.

Toyota concludes that because of the cost of batteries large enough to be capable of generating 100 kw, it is primarily more cost effective at the current time to focus on blended PHEVs.

My take: Yes, Toyota, I agree the Prius will be cheaper then the first generation Volts, but we must start somewhere and battery prices will drop over time.

But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?

Source (Greencarcongress)

Posted by: Lyle

143 Responses to “Toyota Attacks the Volt…Again”

Joshua Bretz Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:14 am

100kW translates into a 5s 0-60 time for a 3000lb vehicle.

(Quote)
Johnnie Paul Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:16 am

Quote: “But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

In some instances, the answer is yes…

To me, not supporting the turmOIL in the oil rich nations is a reason…cost ranks up there too, and the environment is yet another…

The Volt’s time is now…GM’s time is now!…OUR time is now!…for peace, and for the environment…and the money.

Johnnie

(Quote)
Eric Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:20 am

They can publish papers all they want… As they say, “The proof’s in the pudding!” Once both cars are out, we’ll know which one’s better.

I, like most, am very excited about needing to gas up for long trips only.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:27 am

Quote: “But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

If people buy it when the cost is over what the masses can afford, then the answer is No. Ending terrorism, saving the environment, ending the war, ending the oil monopoly on vehicles, etc. These are all part of the value of the Volt when buying it.
But each individual buyer will have to determine why they are buying the Volt. When the Volt cost about $20K, at this point it might be about saving money. But definitely not when the Volt is going to be sold at a premium. If they want to save money, they will be a Prius.

(Quote)
Jon Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:31 am

Battery prices will drop over time and with the level of R&D going into battery research I’m betting within a few years of the volts initial debut customers will have a choice of how powerful a battery they want without having to give up more space in the car. I’m sure it will cost the customer more for a 32 or 48KwHr battery but think of the improved range.
I for one can’t wait to kick OPEC, and quite frankly all the other oil producing countries that aren’t exactly friendly to the US, to the curb.

(Quote)
Dave B Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:32 am

The beauty of a free market economy and choices means both manufactures have to have excellent products. Honda can sabre rattle all they want, but time and user feedback will tell.

(Quote)
Bryon Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:35 am

Quote: “But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

totaly agree come on guys toyota has had the prius for how long and they still don’t want to switch to an electyric vehicle.

I used to be obsesed wtih the Prius and Camry hybrid i wanted one, but the advantages of having an electric car where the gas engine is used to charge the battery is awesome. It’s time for us to make the next step and i applaud GM for being the one to do it.

on a side note.

GM keep two batttery manufacturers for the first two years then have them bid for the new contracts so you can have some great competition between the battery companies between technology and price. meaning lower battery cost for GM and a cheaper VOLT for us.

(Quote)
Jay Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:37 am

Why is it that some people will think nothing of paying twice what they need to for a car that drives fast and has leather seats, but look at the environmental features of a car solely in terms of dollars and cents? If all you want is a car to get you from A to B, you never need to spend more than twenty thousand dollars. Anything more than that is because it’s worth it to you to have a car that’s better in some ways. You get something out of the extra cost, whether it’s a nicer interior, better performance, a feeling of social status, or, in the Volt’s case, the ability to contribute to lessen your impact on the environment. The fact that no one questions why this calculus makes sense when you’re buying a BMW, but think that it’s a waste of money with the Volt, just reveals how narrowly some people think about value in cars.

(Quote)
Van Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:45 am

The Toyota Prius design is well considered, given the limitations of the battery it uses. But the high power capability of the A123 battery negates the need for a huge battery in order to provide peak power of 100 KW.

And so if the Volt design packs enough battery capacity for an AER over 30 miles, based on the USO6 driving cycle, it will have ample peak power capacity if it uses the A123/Conti pack. I do not recall if the LG battery also features high power capability, but it probably does.

(Quote)
Evan Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:46 am

I think there may actually be a little ‘tongue-in-cheek’ here from Toyota…these are the EXACT comments GM (Lutz himself actually) stated about the practicality of the Prius and continued to state until about 2 years ago.

That said, if ANYONE knows how to balance the cost/benefit of introducing new technology to the auto industry it’s Toyota. But you guys are right, we’ll see what’s what once both cars are on the road.

(Quote)
TOM M Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:58 am

Let’s hope that Toyota is making the same mistake as GM made by not going with hybrids when they had the technology to do so. We all know GM is taking a risk on the roll of these dice. My theory is that doing nothing is worse than not trying new ideas.
We proved our technolgy and determination was superior in the second World War and we’ll do it again!!
Bless you GN, and go for it!

(Quote)
Eco Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:58 am

Nice comment Jay, I like that one.

I’m going to repeat a rash generalization, hoping people take it the right way.

Toyota buyers tend to buy transportation

GM buyers tend to buy cars.

Toyota says you don’t need it, GM says maybe not, but it will be fun. They are both right, for their customers.

Which is why GM has survived to this day, at all, considering their problems with product reliability (past or present, or both, however you look at it).

I got whacked a couple days ago telling people on this blog that a car is a toaster, toast is toast, blah blah blah…but what it illustrated was that most of the people watching closely for the Volt are about the car, not the transportation. Those people are also willing to shell out over 30k, because they think it’s still worth it.

I’m still generalizing, but I’m not being unfair.

(Quote)
MarkinWI Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:59 am

The Argonne study examined mpg ratings for all-electric-ranges (AER) of 10 and 40 miles. How does that work? If a series hybrid (Volt) uses no gas for the first 40 miles, how do they conclude that a series hybrid has a 50+ mpg rating, and a parallel hybrid (Prius) has a 60+ mpg rating? I get the idea that more energy is wasted in the ICE-Battery-Electric engine conversion, but that presumes that the ICE will be used regularly. When I get my Volt, I doubt if the ICE will kick in even once per week on average, given my typical driving patters.

(Quote)
wow Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:03 am

Allot of people with allot of money will find the Volt appealing and even sexy at first (along with a green-halo for the driver and for GM). That attractive/exciting aspect is one big thing going for the Volt that the Prius never had. The Prius has always had green-cred appeal and realistic payback periods but let’s face it most people find it kind of ugly and not very exciting.

For years to come the Prius will still be the “people’s” green car because it is extremely affordable and the price is still dropping as performance increases (we’ll see how well the new Honda world hybrid can compete) . The Volt will be more of a Corvette-type icon selling to an entirely different demographic at lower volume. Battery prices will come down eventually, but how fast and how far is still in question. If you don’t know the limiting material costs at mass production you can’t answer that question.

There will be some overlap in customers, but on the whole these two vehicles will not be direct competitors for a long time.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:08 am

It seems that I am stuck using gas unless the Volt can do about 60 miles in EV mode only. I have a 51 mile commute and possibly will be able to plug in at work. But GM says 50 miles at beginning of life.
So assuming that, I will run the ICE for 2 miles a day. I can’t imagine that being good for the system. It doesn’t really allow the ICE to warm up and lose any internal moisture, including the moisture that may be in the exhaust. So I wonder if the maintenance cost will be high on the ICE because of that. If so, then I buy an expensive Volt and will have expensive maintenance? I don’t know. I’m not a mechanic.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:34 am

The Prius is a brilliant execution of an innovative design. The people at Toyota are smart. Let us study what they say carefully and learn from it. Doing so requires no concessions on behalf of the Volt.

(Quote)
Canuck Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:37 am

“driving the US06 (aggressive) cycle”

Their entire premise is obsolete. The ever increasing fuel/energy prices will force more efficient driving modes. *ANY* aggressive driving style is a luxury that we won’t be able to afford in the near future.

You don’t design a brand new car technology for the past. You look into the future. Acceleration just won’t be as important in the future as it is now.

(Quote)
Canuck Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:40 am

“But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

Well the 1st priority is not so much saving money. Rather it is simply keeping driving costs stable and capping their growth. In other words, keeping driving affordable. It may mean a higher price short term (Volt) so long as the overall driving cost stops rising.

For gasoline cars there is no limit to total car costs (fuel, maintenance, etc.)

(Quote)
Sentinel Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:49 am

Let’s see… I just traded my 2005 Toyota Tacoma quad cab (sticker was $29k) that I was getting 16Mpg (all city) for a loaded 2008 Camry Hybrid (sticker $31K) and am how getting about 37.5 MPG.

However I will DUMP the Camry in a HEARTBEAT if I can afford the Volt when it comes out. If I were Toyota I’d write as many negetive things as I could about the Volt… because it’s a real THREAT if it works as advertised.

Bottom line… If I can stop wasteing $ on gas I will. I drive less than 40 miles a day. I will use VERY little gas in a year, I estimate less than 5 gallons a month.

Toyota must have a real fear of the Volt, Gooo… GM!!!!

The Prius is UGLY, the Volt has the sex appeal the Prius never will. Just becaus it’s better on Gas than my Camry Hybrid doesn’t mean I have to drive it if i don’t like it.

I think Toyota has it worng betting on something that MUST use gas. As soon as I can get off that band wagon I will. Hopefully I will do it whith the Volt.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:50 am

Toyota is seeing itself behind the eight ball and will try to discourage people from buying The Volt. Here in the US, thank God, we have the infrastructure to support E85 and the Volt (large farmland and nuclear power plants) and they don’t in Japan. They are looking long term and see them self lagging behind especially in battery technology.

In the first place, I don’t think they should have been allowed to build cars in the US without paying something to the US to offset the legacy costs of the domestic car manufacturers To me that was grossly unfair.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:51 am

E-REV is the next logical step toward full vehicular electrification to get off oil and ALL the costs related to it. What we pay at the pump is just a very small fraction of those costs. WAR, Disease, Pain & Suffering take a much larger indirect toll.

Toyota is playing political spin by telling half-truths.

On a related note: In order to have a MAXIMUM global societal impact, the E-REVs must be coupled with our willingness to disengage ourselves as the world police force. We must close over 500 foreign bases (and their related costs), defend OUR boarders, disengage ourselves the impotent & corrupt UN and throw out of our country, go back to sound (not fiat) money, abolish the NON-Federal Reserve and read, follow and OBEY (not interpret) the US Constitution.

Looking at the crop of Presidential candidates, I’m certain that there will be NO change after the election and that those saying that there will be change are simply lying to win votes from the gullible. (some of you are reading this now)

Business and politics are made up of the same stuff… posturing, lying, misdirection, spin and corruption. Toyota is just spinning as fast as it can to protect itself from some REAL competition and praying that we don’t wake up and engage our intellect.

(Quote)
Estero Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:09 am

#14 Rashiid Amul

I share your concerns about the ICE running for short bursts. If I understand things correctly, the ICE will turn on as needed to maintain a battery charge at near 30%, but never long enough to bring the charge back up to 80%. This suggest to me the ICE will startup and shut down frequently even on long trips.

I had always understood that frequent starting of any ICE causes more wear & tear than letting it run for an extended period of time.

I had also understood that frequent starting of any ICE results in less fuel economy than letting it run for an extended period of time.

So, I’m concerned about both of thes issues. Perhaps others can comment on the effect of frequent starting of the ICE as it relates to both maintenance and fuel economy.

(Quote)
BillR Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:12 am

Quote “Toyota’s basic argument is that the costs and trade-offs of deploying an extended range electric vehicle architecture at this time outweigh the benefits, and that blended systems have greater benefit at this point in time.”

With their limited technology and experience with E-Rev’s, this may be true (from their perspective).

For some odd reason, their E-Rev needs 100 kW, however, the blended hybrid only needs 40 kW (if that doesn’t tell you something, I don’t know what will).

Quote “Toyota argued that providing increased EV range increases vehicle cost due to higher battery cost; reduces luggage space; and increases fuel consumption in charge sustaining mode due to increased battery mass.”

Interesting, since Frank Weber has stated that an additional 400 lbs (the weight of the Volt’s battery pack) only decreases AER by 2 miles. Obviously, GM knows something that Toymota doesn’t.

The moral of the story, many different conclusions can be made from a study like this, depending upon what your assumptions are. What is the size of the battery pack, what power can it deliver, how efficient is the traction drive motor, etc.

Its easy for Toymota to use a low power density 600 lb Li-Ion battery pack in their study (they’ve already gone on record warning about Li-Ion safety), use a DC traction motor in lieu of the high efficiency 3 phase AC, add a great deal of weight to the car to support the battery/associated equipment, and claim the ICE has poor efficiency due to its point of operation.

All this leads to the fact that GM has used innovation in its design of the Volt, while Toymota is looking to sell the same car that it has been for the last 10 years. That’s what we call “Moving Forward”.

(Quote)
ksuhwail Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:13 am

Nothing is quite as sweet as driving in my buddies 1968 Chevelle with the windows down and the wind roaring while the needle passes 120mph. The rush of that motor and smell of the exhaust makes me giddy like a school boy.

Take that 180* and you have the Prius…If the volt can make this car FUN to drive(not necessarily in the same way as the chevelle) it will blow the Prius away. If GM makes a CAR not an APPLIANCE, then Toyhonda will have to put their foot in their mouth.

(Quote)
Mark Bartosik Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:16 am

First they ignore us.
Next the laugh as us.
Then they attack us..
Then we win.

Maybe not the exact quote, but something similar to what Mahatma Gandhi said about British while protesting British rule in India.
(I happen to be British).

It is not just about money, for me at least. If I can power my Volt via my solar panels and use no more than 20 gallons of gas per year — that would be priceless.

My BIPV: http://tinyurl.com/2jzbfq

(Quote)
Dean Anderson Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:19 am

#20 Well said Tim !!

(Quote)
TK Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:24 am

What about the fact that the Prius is UGLY AS SIN!

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:26 am

“…the Prius will be cheaper then the first generation Volts, but we must start somewhere and battery prices will drop over time.”

You only get one chance to make a first impression. A high priced Volt introduction will not plant in our collective psyches the notion of a people’s car.

Jay (#8) justifies a high Volt price because the Volt appeals to a niche; ability to contribute to lessen your impact on the environment.

Despite the claims of some on this blog, the Volt is GM’s answer to Toyota’s Prius. If that is the case, the Volt has to compete with the Prius. Has the Prius price come down from $40k to $25k? If Priuses cost $40k, would you see as many on the road? No. People buy the Prius because they can afford it and it satisfies their desire for a “normal” acting car that also saves them gas and does less harm to the environment.

I thought the Volt was supposed to be more than a high-priced niche vehicle. I thought the Volt was supposed to be a “people’s” car. If the Volt is going to be a car for the masses, it needs to give people what they expect in a car, and more – at an affordable price.

“…is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

Since the 1970’s, we’ve known that our dependence on petroleum might not be best for us. Yet, traditionally, petroleum use has not been a controlling factor in US auto purchases. Historically, we purchased large cars/SUVs/trucks instead of smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles. We want what we want. If the goal is to put a million Volts on the road, you aren’t going to do it marketing to altruistically-minded consumers consumers. You need to give people what they want at a price they can afford.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:30 am

My starting point is that the Toyota Prius is a well executed and even brilliant design with innovative features and innovative styling, So, we can learn a lot from the Prius, and from Toyota. One of the more important conclusions one reaches comes from studying its commercial success. Overall, most everyone who has looked at the Prius has concluded that it costs more, in total, than a comparable ICE Toyota. The success of the Prius comes not from lower cost but from its attractiveness to a large number of loyal (dare one say cult-like) owners. These Prius owners like its ecofriendly reputation, lower gas requirements, and like their ownership to be visible in its distinctive styling. These factors are positives for the Volt as well, or even better.

(Quote)
Kevin R Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:33 am

Most of the comments here state exactly why the Volt will be a winner and why I will be one of the first purchasers in 2010.

Minimal use of gasoline except for long trips.
Elimination of foreign oil dependence
Ability to have our military disengage from protecting petroleum routes…
…Which leads to less visibility of the USA on the world stage and thus we become less of a target to terrorists
Stop the transfer of wealth from United States citizens to foreign hostile countries
Reduction of carbon dioxide and other pollutants
Less maintenance and repair costs
The ability to charge the Volt via solar power via panels on one’s garage.

There are so many reasons to buy the Volt and many Americans will find several to support their reason to purchase one. Justification comes in many flavors. Choose any combination and it’s a win, win situation, both for us as consumers and nation and for GM!

(Quote)
Brian M Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:34 am

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the comparison of the next-gen Prius vs. the Volt is pointless, because both cars will sell out, no matter how many they make.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:36 am

Before we go on too long arguing about the price of the Volt, it is good to keep in mind that cost is one thing, price another. We bloggers (and probably most or all of GM as of now) do not know the actual production cost. We certainly do not know the Volt’s sticker price. That price is going to reflect marketplace demand at the time of introduction (which may be very strong), as well as GM magement’s outlook on possible follow up production schedules or other vehicles.

(Quote)
doggydogworld Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:38 am

#1 Joshua,

100kW is not 0-60 in 5 seconds because you can’t use all 100 kW at low speeds and aero drag plays a role at high speeds. If you distribute the 100 kW optimally among all four wheels you might achieve 6 seconds. Volt with 120kW will be at best 7 seconds due to FWD.

The Toyota paper says Toyota’s approach is the best. GM also put out a paper, which says E-REVs are superior. Shocking, isn’t it. The GreenCarCongress of the Argonne paper doesn’t make much sense. If I get time I’ll try to read the actual paper because Argonne usually does better work. BTW, I think the 20-40 kW Toyota comments relate to city cycle, not US06, but again I’d have to read the actual paper.

Blended IS cheaper, and not just because of batteries. I mentioned this in another thread. Volt has:

120 kW motor
53 kW generator
———————-
173 kW total

Volt also has 120 kW battery and power electronics. A blended PHEV could get the same performance from as little as:

40 kW mogen
45 kW mogen
—————–
85 kW total

with 85 kW battery and power electronics. Power electronics savings is 30% and motor/generator savings is 50%. These are expensive components, we’re talking thousands in savings. Battery savings are harder to compute. Power density is usually not the limiting factor for a large PHEV pack. Lower peak power might let you extend the discharge window a little. I could see 10% savings, call it $500 or so. Savings could be much more if it allows you to use a low-power chemistry such as NIMH, Firefly, Lithium-poly, etc.

Note: Toyota’s HSD does not allow both mogens to simultaneously provide full power to the wheels. As such Toyota won’t deliver the full savings mentioned above. I believe BYD’s F6DM design does allow both mogens and the ICE to simultaneously drive the wheels. Note that BYD says F6DM will cost only $6000 more than the F6. I don’t think E-Flex can match that. Final note: blended mode operation causes an emissions nightmare during US06-style driving because you run a cold engine at full throttle every time you accelerate. To my knowledge no one has addressed this issue.

(Quote)
Canuck Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:48 am

Estero,

“to maintain a battery charge at near 30%”

Wrong. ICE maintains *AT LEAST* 30% SOC
There is no rule preventing ICE from chargining battery to 80%. Certainly one of the factors will be runtime to prevent frequent ICE restarts.
ICE starting is bad when an engine is cold! If an ICE is restarted often for a warm engine then there are no significant ill effects, like higher wear. So frequent ICE starts are not a problem so long as engine is warm.

(Quote)
dodahman Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:53 am

“What about the fact that the Prius is UGLY AS SIN!”

AMEN!!!

Maybe if Toyota made an electric sports car.
ie. Supra EV
Now maybe I’d buy that.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:06 am

If gas prices keep going up, believe me, people are going to be taking a VERY close look at the Volt even if it is priced closer to $40,000 instead of $30,000 like we’d all prefer.

People don’t like being hit with unexpected price increases at the gas pump. Same thing with the prices of groceries going up. It makes people’s blood pressure go up and wonder if they are being taken advantage of by somebody. At least when you buy a Volt you know your car payments aren’t going to go up every month like your gasoline budget does.

I think people are going to be surprised how reliable the Volt is probably going to be. It will probably save a good bit of money on maintenance over time. The batteries will be covered in the warranty you know. You may be able to lease the battery and a get new one every 3-4 years that has more range and might even be cheaper.

I’m hoping that GM or some other company comes up with a really good battery charging technology that makes keeping your Volt charged an AUTOMATIC thing that you don’t even have to think about. A wireless charging system would be awesome. One at home and the office would be great.

http://www.ecoupled.com/pdf/tech_overview.pdf

http://www.ecoupled.com/resourcesMain.html

Just pull in the driveway or garage and a LED light comes up on your dash showing “charging now” or “set to charge later” or whatever. Keeping that IC engine from running as much as possible is going to be the key to getting the most “bang for your buck” out of the Volt.

People are going to have a lot of fun showing off their Volt to their friends and neighbors and telling them how INFREQUENTLY they have to pay for gas, how they don’t have to worry about the whims of OPEC oil countries, oil demand from China/India, etc. Volt owners won’t have to worry about that crap much at all if they keep the car juiced up as much as possible.

People will probably stretch their car payments some to get that peace of mind and the envy of their neighbors … especially the ones with the huge SUVs who have to drive like little old ladies because they don’t want to abuse their credit card again with another $100 (or more) tank of gas.

People that really can’t afford big SUVs and trucks will probably have to trade them in if gas prices keep going up. The Volt and 150 mpg will look pretty darned compelling to them in 2010. They’ll be able to floor that accelerator again like the lady in the Cadillac CTS commercial because they know that their Volt will be automatically juiced up again with much cheaper “electrical fuel” once they get to the office or home again.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:07 am

They are both great designs.

But with more types to choose from, we now have the freedom to choose which model suits our needs and desires the best!

I hope there are 25 different manufacturers producing all types of electrified vehicles over the next five or six years, because then pricing issues will be sorted out by competition!!!

But for now, our hopes are resting with GM to get things going!!!

(Quote)
Theoldguy Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:16 am

# 21 & # 32 I am sure that GM has designed the software to start the ICE as required for optimum charging and the ICE will probably be able to run with a no charge going to the battery in order to keep it (ICE) in good order….. Some gas will have to used for it not to go stale…. GM has probably taken into account the low milage communters and the ICE will start and probably run for a specified period of time to keep the ICE up to spec. (oil has to lub the bearings and shafts etc.) Simple solution would be to run the Batteries down to 30 % once every couple of weeks and let the ICE charge for a 1/2 hour trip or so.. no big deal.. It would cost you a couple of gallons of fuel per month..

(Quote)
Canuk Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:18 am

Tim @ #20: Thats what I agree with. The Volt is the way to go — pure electric drive sourced from home grown electricity rather than oil, for the reasons you state in your post. The myriad of world troubles that is now being derived from the overuse and dependance on oil, must be stopped ASAP.

GM — Please do not be deterred by the naysayers of the E-flex technology you’re trying to bring to market. The inital purchase price of the Volt does not take into account the urgent need to get off oil.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:18 am

Is is surprising to anyone, even given the initial price disparity between these two vehicles that the only way Toyota (or any Pro-Prius) can make an argument for the Prius is to scribble out a bunch of math on cost/benefit?

Think about the fact that a lot of vehicle purchases are emotional. Ya love it and ya gotta have it. The recent spike in the price of gas has taken a real bite out of this. This is the reason for the Prius’ success, and the purchase is rational rather than emotional. The Volt will take the sting out of this since it is greener all the way around and it’s 240 lb/ft in the basement will bring a smile the pregnant roller skate can’t. Not to mention it’s driveway appeal.

Can anyone imagine someone considering a Saturn Sky or Nissan Z car opting instead for the Volt? Of course, but how many of that group would have the Prius on even their extended list? Zip. Look at this the other way, how many people with nothing but mileage on their mind who would consider a Yaris or Prius might want to shell out even $10K+ for a Volt instead for the reasons I stated? Not all but there might be more than you might think and that purchase would be on pure emotion and guilt free.

No…if I were Toyota I wouldn’t like the Volt either.

(Quote)
OzoneLevel Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:23 am

Using Toyota’s logic, no one should have ever bought a Prius since there’s no way one could justify the price premium over say a Corolla based on mileage.

#8 Jay is right on. Ridiculous to try to justify cost of Volt technology by $$ saving on gas consumption any more than one would justify cost of leather seats, nav systems, stereos, etc. You buy it because you like it at whatever the cost. If you want to save money on gas get an old Geo Metro.

(Quote)
SteveF Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:27 am

Interesting perpective on this subject on how over time GM and Toyota reverses roles. Back 10 or more years ago Toyota was building and hybrid car call the Prius. Initially Prius cost a great amout of R&D and Toyota lost money for few years. Over time the technology matured and know Toyota is looking good. Back 10 years ago GM was saying it is waste of time and money to develop this hybrid car. Well we moved forward today and then GM realizes they made mistake and need to regain leadership. The introduce the Volt and spend large R&D and expect to lose money but expect in 5 to 10 years the technology will mature and they will be seen a technology and market leaders. Only Toyota is today taking the old GM view, that it is not worth investing in the new technology because of the risk and cost. Maybe Toyota is thinking we spend enough on development on Prius technology and let someone else develop the next generation the E-REV and then will will copy it after it matures.

(Quote)
GXT Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:27 am

This is painful!

This site has way too many ostriches that take legitimate criticism as proof positive that GM’s approach is correct and those criticizing are just running scared. You think there is criticism now? Wait until we get closer to release and the full folly of GM’s sideshow is known.

There are going to be a lot of disappointed ostriches.

(Quote)
wirenutjd Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:33 am

It’s unfortunate but hers the reality between these two cars, just check out this link on the next generation 3 prius 2009 release in January compared to the volt, basically the prius wins…by a landside.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/the-great-hybrid-showdown-chevrolet-volt-vs-toyota-prius/

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:45 am

Someone mention about wireless charging. I like to inform those who think that might be possible, don’t. There is no way that can happen. There is no technology out there that can transfer all that power to a battery or whatever, through a wireless device.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:52 am

“Toyota attacks the Volt. Again”

“Toyota concludes that because of the cost of batteries large enough to be capable of generating 100 kw, it is primarily more cost effective at the current time to focus on blended PHEVs.”

Maybe we are being too sensitive. Who disagrees with Toyotas statement , “…it is primarily more cost effective at the current time to focus on blended PHEVs?” That seems more like a factual statement than an attack.

As far as cost-effectiveness, as has been stated here before, you need to consider short-term costs, and long-term costs, and costs to the manufacturers image (halo).

(Quote)
srschrier Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:59 am

With the addition of an ultra-capacitor perhaps increased all-electric Volt mileage could be achieved by 2010 or in the second generation? Companies such as AFS Trinity have ultra-cap-battery power test vehicles on the road today.

GM’s Volt appears to be on a more progressive design track to accommodate future technologies, plus it could save hundreds if not thousands of dollars in fuel costs for consumers.

(Quote)
JPhillips Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:00 am

If what toyota was proposing was so obvious it would be common knowledge and they wouldn’t feel the need to try to convince us with there funded research papers.

Toyota has always built rice burners, so as the age of fuel economy began toytoa and honda stepped forward, and Chevy & Ford stepped backwards.

Well Toyota now you got the big boys attention, you were right there might be something to this whole fuel economy thing, so instead of selling us a car that gets 15 more mpg than any other car, GM is going to sell us one that for a large majority of its owners will never need gas at all.

Once again i say:
THANK YOU TOYOTA FOR WAKING UP THE SLEEPING GIANT!

now get back in line! your niche market has just become mainstream and a real car company wants in!

If we ever get a president who supports US manufacturing, and not sending all our jobs overseas, and cuts some of the ridiculos tax cuts Toyota gets we’ll see how they fare.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:02 am

If you read the article on Green Car Congress … http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/04/determining-the.html#more … it says this:

“GM concluded that:

The real-world RTS data set contains widespread and significant driving at power levels and speeds beyond that represented by the urban driving schedule.

An E-REV is more than TEN times as likely to finish the day as an EV than as urban-capable PHEV derived from an HEV, when operated in the actual application, as represented by the RTS data set.

An E-REV consumer, on average, use less than HALF of the petroleum of a PHEV in the real world, IF overnight charging is assumed.

An E-REV will reduce regulated emissions that are due to initial trip starts by more than 70% when compared to a PHEV in the actual application

Electric range when operating on the urban schedule is not a direct measure of a plug-in vehicle’s ability to run with the engine off, ability to displace petroleum or ability to reduce regulated emissions in the actual application. Rather, the ability to run with FULL performance on electric power alone leads to improvements which would be realized in actual application.

In the event of a petroleum disruption, an E-REV could support uncompromised vehicle operation for the majority of drivers.”

“We conclude that electrification that enables E-REVs may be well worth the effort. Specifically designed electric powertrains, incorporating higher power motors and thermal systems, higher energy batteries and integrating them into vehicle structures specifically designed for that purpose will be rewarded with societal benefits in real world use. While PHEVs can make improvements compared to HEVs, an E-REV appears to realize a MUCH GREATER portion of societal benefits.”

By the way, you shouldn’t technically call the Volt a “Plug-in hybrid” (PHEV) according to GM … even though you plug it in. PHEVs are pretty much considered the current Priuses out there that have been converted to be plug-ins. They are actually “plug in POWER SPLIT hybrids” I guess … P + HEV. HEV = power split hybrid electric vehicle. GM will have it’s own (2 mode) PHEV with the Saturn VUE in 2009 or 2010.

The “series hybrids” (E-REVs) will be the MOST technically advanced kind of hybrid. It’s more like a pure electric car which is probably how all future cars will be unless fuel cells become absolutely necessary. The marketing people will have some problems describing the new hybrid technologies to customers. Lots of new acronyms. They’ll have to train the car dealer salesmen on this stuff and give them some good laptop charts or something.

People that like Toyota cars should be asking Toyota if and when they are going to make a “SERIES hybrid” (an E-REV). Toyota will probably be in catch up mode to GM and will need to develop their own series hybrid in the next few years. It’s inevitable. They better start re-allocating their R&D budgets for another billion or so for series hybrids or GM is going to outshine them in 2010+. GM will be the top dog in the hybrid car business if they don’t.

In the RESOURCES section at the bottom of this article, there’s links to some good .pdf reports from Toyota, Argonne Labs, and GM. You have to pay $14 for them though. I got the GM (Tate) one for now and the other ones later maybe.

Edward Tate (GM) et. al.; The Electrification of the Automobile: From Conventional Hybrid, to Plug-in Hybrids, to Extended-Range Electric Vehicles (SAE 2008-01-0458)

http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/2008-01-0458

Aymeric Rousseau (Argonne); Comparison of Production Powertrain Configuration Options for Plug-in HEVs from Fuel Economy Perspective (SAE 2008-01-0461)

Masayuki Komatsu (Toyota), et. al.; Study on the Potential Benefits of a Plug-in Hybrid System (SAE 2008-01-0456)

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:03 am

I sort of responded to this before it got posted, at #40 on the thread just below. So I won’t bore you with saying it again.

I agree with #8 Jay and #39 OzoneLevel, among others. If every car was bought based upon some sort of a strict cost-benefit analysis, Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Infiniti, Cadillac, and probably the majority of the car and light truck/SUV industry, would have closed up shop many years ago.

(Quote)
AES Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:05 am

The same GCC article has a similar study from GM that points out that a Volt-type vehicle would be able to displace petroleum at all points of operation for the average commute. No blended PHEV can do that.

The article also has an Argonne national lab figure that shows that during hybrid mode, the power split (HSD/Two-Mode) hybrids have the best mpg (not surpising). However, the efficiency for the series designs is still 40-65 mpg. Not too shabby.

However, as I’ve said many times, the Volt can’t simply be a “me too” vehicle”. It needs to come to the party with a whole new bag of tricks.

(Quote)
JPhillips Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:07 am

Hey Bob Lutz here’s a title for your funded research papers…….

Dear Toyota, thanks, now go find your place in line!

PS Bob, a couple of discovery chanel shows about the end of oil should get plenty of buzz going for the volt. Maybe a couple of scientist predicting that saudi arabia only has 10% of their oil left.
Or we could just do like big oil, and pay a couple of congressman, to say oil kills, it’s unpatriotic, your either with the terrorist….oops i mean, your either with the oil guzzelers or your with us.

Come on Scare tactics and fear mongering, the american way!

(Quote)
Brad Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:09 am

Hmmmm, didn’t GM say the same thing about the Prius, It wouldn’t be cost effective to build a hybrid. Now its GM’s turn to prove it to Toyota.

(Quote)
Jon Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:11 am

#29 Kevin.
I understand all your reasoning for wanting to be an early adopter of the car. The reasons are the same for most of us. As for disengaging the US military from global conflict, ending our depence on foreign oil would help greatly in that task, but please keep in mind that we cannot become isolationist. That mentality was prevalent globally in the 1930’s and is partly to blame for Hitlers rise to power. America needs to maintain a presence in the world, but you are right in that it needs to be a much smaller supporting role rather than that of world cop.
This car and others based on its propulsion system will enable us to do just that.

(Quote)
Estero Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:19 am

I’ll leave the issue of frequent ICE starts alone for now so as not to hijack this topic but will raise it again at another time when the topic is appropriate.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:32 am

#43 Joe:

On the eCoupled website it says this:

http://www.ecoupled.com/technologyMain.html

“eCoupled technology overcomes the limitations of spatial rigidity, static loads and unacceptable power losses. It intelligently adapts to multiple loads – from milliwatts to KILOWATTS – and spatial configurations while maximizing energy transfer efficiencies by as much as 98%, making eCoupled technology comparable to hardwired connections in terms of energy costs.”

On this .pdf it says this:

http://www.ecoupled.com/pdf/tech_overview.pdf

“eCoupled technology has efficiencies near that of plug and socket
connections – a device will charge in approximately THE SAME amount of time as it would using a traditional plug-in charger.
eCoupled technology dynamically seeks resonance between the primary and eCoupled-enabled devices at high frequencies to achieve the optimal coupling coefficient under all conditions.”

I read somewhere that GM and Ford have already been talking to MIT and companies like Fulton Technologies about their “wireless charging” technology. It may not happen by 2010, but I bet it will arrive in the next 10 years somehow. It’s a great idea who’s time is coming.

People will not want to have to worry about charging their cars. Gotta make charging SUPER easy or some people will keep burning gas from their IC engine unnecessarily. People forget to charge their phones all the time. I’m for doing EVERYTHING possible to get people running on electricity instead of gasoline as much as possible. It’s good for their pocketbook and good for the whole world. This technology will already be available SOON for construction power tools, cell phones and so forth. Why NOT for plug-in hybrid cars?

Nikola Tesla must be in heaven somewhere with a big ole smile on his face because he pioneered this wireless power technology way back in the time of Thomas Edison. It was just his crazy idea back then. Now it is probably about to be implemented all over the world in the next 10 years. I bet Tesla Roadster owners will have this technology before too long. It might be pricey for the rest of us at first. That’s just how it goes with new technologies like HDTVs, etc. It gets cheaper later.

(Quote)
John Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:34 am

Frequent thermocycling of the ICE looks like a concern . If the battery needs to be cooled : may be that heat could be run thru the ICE to maintain a constant temperature ? Maybe an electric oil pump so that bearings are always wet . ( I know , electric load bad ) In that regard , I have always wanted a position for the ignition switch that would activate an electric oil pump , so that an engine is always fully lubed before it can start .

(Quote)
AES Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:36 am

http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/17/autos/chevrolet_volt/index.htm?postversion=2008041812

(Quote)
voltman Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:42 am

By my calculations, the a123 batteries are 4 times as powerful as they need to be to produce the volts 120kw (160hp).

He is also wrong that each individual piece needs to be that powerful. The engine can produce enough power to keep the car going at 80mph, thenthe batteries can provide the power to accellerate and capture it back on decelleration.

And you are right, its not just about economics. I dont want the mid east or some crazy man in venezuela telling me i cant go to work. If you drive a prius and an oil embargo occurs, you are screwed no matter what mpg you get.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:44 am

Jon (#29) How can the US “maintain a (meaningful) presence in the world if we are bankrupt?

There is a difference between “isolationism” and “non-interventionism.” Trade is good, but it’s our meddling in the internal affairs of foreign sovereign nations that has caused much of the “free” world to hate and distrust us. It is the cost of our international military police force coupled with domestic “entitlement” spending that has bankrupted our treasury and our children’s children for generations to come.

Question: What are you NOT entitled to from the US Federal Government taxpayer?

Answer: Read the 10th Amendment.

Question: When your airplane looses pressurization why do you ALWAYS put the oxygen mask on yourself first?

Answer: You can’t help others if you’re dead!

E-REV’s can remove the yoke of slavery which is petroleum. However, bought and paid for corrupt politicians want us to replace it with the slavery of world Socialist government of, by and for their elite masters who own the giant corporations. This is why they are creating the North American Union to mirror the European Union and this is why the “NAFTA Corridor” is being built from Mexico to Canada.

So for corruption Rome fell…

(Quote)
Jeffrey Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:47 am

@ 42 wirenutjd:

Before quoting that article, make sure to read through the comments and see all the errors that were pointed out about the author’s mathematical skills. The first reason to doubt the author is that fact that his entire arguement is based on gas being $4.00/gal in 2011 – I paid $3.75/gal just yesterday! As soon as you change that to $5.00 or even $6.00/gal to take reality into account, all of his alleged huge monetary differences begin to shrink rapidly. Not to mention that he replied at least twice in the comments acknowledging that his math was off, promised to fix it in the main text (see comment page 5), and never did. To me, there’s no crediblity in that article, just another Toyota lover attack piece…

The beauty of the Volt is that it works for all of us, regardless of our reasons of doing it – I’m with Kevin @ 29 for the “Elimination of foreign oil dependence”, “Stop the transfer of wealth from United States citizens to foreign hostile countries” and “The ability to charge the Volt via solar power via panels on one’s garage” reasons, not to mention being able to buy an American car I can be proud of again! I don’t care so much about the whole global warming argument, but this car works just as well for the environmentalist and anti-war type as it does for me.

As has been pointed out many times, why buy a Prius, when a Corolla will get you 80% of the mileage for about 60% of the cost? Even better, what ever became of the good old Honda CRX? The HF model from the late 80’s and early 90’s got about 50mpg, no hybrid electronics needed. Common sense is not often a large part of automotive purchases today – how else can you explain 10″ lift kits on trucks/SUV’s that rarely leave the road or 20″ rims on cars so beat up you just know the tires/rims cost more than the car itself?

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:52 am

Sorry, my comment # 57 was directed to Jon #51, NOT #29.

(Quote)
Wise Golden Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:53 am

“But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

Ironically, the car that proves this statement to be true is the Toyota Prius. It makes me chuckle that Toyota is now saying that the economics are not present to justify the volt. When the Prius was introduced, the car carried a $10,000 premium over a like model and gas cost $1 per gallon. The payback was never, but people bought for all the reasons described in earlier comments. Even today, the Prius is basically a $12,000 Yaris that sells for about $20,000. The payback remains extended.

So given these facts, we can assume that most Priuses were bought by either environmental, or Energy Security activist. That will be true of the first Volts as well, but the real fear for Toyota is that they will loose the activist to GM’s better product.

I’m buying one and I don’t care if Toyota thinks badly of me for it.

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:05 pm

Toyota has produced an argument that is based upon some pretty squishy and questionable economic assumptions – that the cost of batteries will remain high and that gasoline prices will remain at or below current levels. And that it is worth nothing to consumers to be able to avoid crude oil and carbon emissions. All of those assumptions are disproved by their very own Prius, whose value is scarcely based upon economics. It is also true that the VOLT will, like the Prius did, receive govt subsidies,which weakens still further their by-now wobbly economic argument. We know that battery prices will go down – a lot, even if the EEStor devices don’t pan out; and we can be pretty damn sure that gas prices aren’t going to collapse – just look at those global demand numbers and those global production numbers. In just the time it took to write that report, their argument has been visibly weakened as the gas prices have topped $4 per gallon.
Toyota simply cannot admit that the Volt is the only realistic means of making a dent in crude oil demand and carbon emissions – their Prius as a commuter can be easily demonstrated, based on DOT commuter trip distances, to require over 12 times more gasoline
than the Volt, and produce tons more carbon emission, which Toyota is claiming is OK since it’s cheaper – an argument that has been thoroughly rejected by those supporting coal fired power plants. Perhaps Toyota was on vacation when the subject of global warming came up. Notice that Chris Paine made a deal with Toyota and agreed to
not mention them in his “history” of electric cars, and instead made the bizarre claim that GM was responsible for killing a technology that no one ever considered alive at the time.
Toyota has produced an argument that reminds me of whistling past the graveyard. Does this mean that Toyota can’t obtain a decent li ion battery? Or are they simply trying to stop any stampede of buyers over to the competition? Or both? Honda did the same thing when they claimed that plug-ins aren’t as economical as their hybrids. They could also have pointed out that their hybrids aren’t as economical as their regular gas jobs either, but that doesn’t stop them from building them.

(Quote)
StevePA Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:08 pm

Toyota’s piece – in my view, essentially marketing damage control. Will be interesting to compare this piece to what they have to say in 2 – 3 years when they roll out their own EREV. Likely something about waiting for better battery technology or similar marketing save-face pablum.

(Quote)
Eric Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:10 pm

#53.

I don’t know much about that technology, but as an electrical engineer who specializes in radar designs, I don’t like the concept.

Wireless power is a little scary at large power levels. Look at all the buzz over cell phones and the possibility of health hazards due to their SAR levels near the brain. Now, keep in mind that the power from that phone is limited to a mere amp-hour or less at 3.7V give or take.

While this topic is still heavily disputed due to the phone’s low power levels, it is a well known fact that significant amounts of radation can have terrible effects on the human body.

A wireless power device that would provide power in an amount to charge the Volt over, say, 6 hours, would have to provide many more amp-hours at a much higher voltage. The end result is a much larger amount of radation.

I work on a radar that has an average power of about 2kW (if you wanted to charge 8kWHr of the Volt, the power could be 2kW for 4 hours straight), and you have to keep your distance (100 feet typical) when it’s on to avoid over-exposure to radation. With all the people who have garages built into their homes, I’d hate to have all that radiation flying around near me while I’m watching TV, even if there are some walls and other objects to help attenuate it.

Aside from these safety concerns, wireless power will always be less efficient than conventional wired power. If it’s more efficient, well then you’ve got a perpetual motion machine and I think we all know those don’t exist. (Unless http://www.steorn.com has anything to say about it )

A wired charging system is the way to go, and I’m 100% certain that GM knows this. Efficiency, reliability, safety, etc. It all adds up.

I have some faith that people will realize that it’s much easier to plug in their car at night than to pay all that money at the pump. People will happily adapt.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pm

# 50. JPhillips

You mentioned Discovery channel shows about “peak oil” concerns to help get more people interested in the Volt …

There’s a show on Tuesday (4/22) at 8pm EST by PBS called “Nova”. It’s about “Cars of the Future”.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/index.html

It might be interesting. It should have a bunch of top people talking about energy issues, peak oil, efficiency, the latest electric car technology, etc. They have this video archive that talks about all sorts of stuff here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/open/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/open/clip-scene.html

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:16 pm

Grizzly says, “Think about the fact that a lot of vehicle purchases are emotional. Ya love it and ya gotta have it. The recent spike in the price of gas has taken a real bite out of this. This is the reason for the Prius’ success, and the purchase is rational rather than emotional. The Volt will take the sting out of this since it is greener all the way around and it’s 240 lb/ft in the basement will bring a smile the pregnant roller skate can’t. Not to mention it’s driveway appeal”

Grizz, I understand what you are saying. But at what cost will the Volt take the sting out? If GM sells this for $40K, Prius wins. GM desperately needs a winner and a vehicle that everyone wants.
Kind of like the new VW Beetle, or the Mazda Miata when it first came out. But at $40K, this won’t happen and GM loses.

There is no question in my mind that EREV is the better choice.
Since the new hybrids came out (Honda and Toyota), I couldn’t understand why they made them backwards (at least in my mind).
Backwards I mean that the electric motor assists the ICE.
For years I thought it should be the other way around.

Pure EVs are useless in my opinion because a second car is needed. E-REV takes that aways, but $40K is too much for the masses and the Volt becomes an elitist car, not a peoples car.

(Quote)
Canuck Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:27 pm

wirenutjd,
That article’s calculations are flawed. He is using $4/gal and talking about payoff in 20 and 30 years. Who seriosly expects $4/gal in 20 and 30 years?????

On the contrary, gasoline price has no reason to stop at $4 or $5 or any other number so long as the main fuel source is gasoline.

(Quote)
wirenutjd Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:33 pm

@ 60 Jeffery

It would just be nice if they would make the Volt the same price as the Prius, then it would be game over for Toyota. Also, everybody would be able to afford it. I’m having a problem justifying a 35-40K Volt. My Insight cost me 13K used, thats a big “pay back” compared to the Volt, John

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:39 pm

#69, Wirenutjd, says, “It would just be nice if they would make the Volt the same price as the Prius, then it would be game over for Toyota. Also, everybody would be able to afford it. I’m having a problem justifying a 35-40K Volt ”

To steal Noel’s favorite word, “AMEN”.
I totally agree with what you’re saying.
It will be another 14K Hyundia for me if the Volt goes that high.
But I’m hoping my wife will be able to get the Pluggin Saturn Vue is a couple of years.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:40 pm

At #55 and before Estero commented on the possibility of frequent ICE starts . I’m optimistic. GM has indicated that the ICE would first come on at 30% battery charge left. How long the ICE will stay on then is really up to the computer program in the control electronics. The Motor Trend article (cited in an earlier thread) had a graph that showed the ICE stopping at about 40% battery charge, which could be a long time or a short time, depending on what the Volt is doing concurrently (say moving on flat and slow roads versus up a mountain road fast). But the ICE is still stopping under control of the electronics. That is, if cycling too frequently occurs, it can be sensed and avoided simply by charging the battery to 50% (ICE on twice as long?) or some higher charge level. So, thinking positively, there seems to be plenty of lattitude for ICE cycle length adjustment, should ICE cycling prove to be a problem. GM engineering obviously is analyzing this aspect, so it’s not going to be an unanticipated possibility.

(Quote)
wirenutjd Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

70 Rashiid

my wife has the Ford Escape hybrid and loves it. Ford is also working on the next Generation Escape as a plug-in with impresive numbers.

68 Canuck

I know the article is flawed, but everything here is an educated “guess” RE: the future. My point is that the Volt is too expensive for us “average” folks. Thanks, John

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:00 pm

#70 Rashiid Amul:

Amen.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

Tim #59:

I am not getting your 10th Amendment reference.

Here is the 10th Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

As far as the price being “too high for the average folk”:

The average price for a new car is abut $30,000. So if the Volt comes in at $38,000, and has a $5,000 tax credit, are you saying that spending an additional $3,000 is too much to stop using 90% of the gasoline you are buying now?

This pricing issue has become ridiculous. We can not say that the car costs too much, until we see what GM is going to charge for the car!!!!

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Lets compare the volt to a honda crx! Honda kicks the prius but in total cost of ownership.

Initial cost will come down. duh!
rev is only one very small step to bev and how much do you want to bet that in a few years after the volt is on the road conversions with better batteries or ultracaps start being churned out. Can’t do that with a prius unless you junk both of its motors.

#25
You got it absolutely right.. they ignore.. laugh… attack… then we win.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:10 pm

Toyota thinks that all US drivers drive like race car drivers around the freeway and we need the speed/power of a hybrid.

They are sadly mistaken. I drive 10 miles (one way) to work in milwaukee. All stop & go traffic and a maximum 45 mph for maybe a mile. Anyone driven in downtown Chicago? How about LA?

For the minimum amount of time you can do 70+, it is just not worth having “power” for my daily commuter car. I just want to drive 95% on electric and only fill up the gas tank once a month or two…

(Quote)
Jon Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Tim #59.
I think you misunderstood my post. Your right in that maintaing an enormous presence overseas is not the way to go, that a more non-intervention stance would be more apprpriate and as for what is fast becoming the United Socialist States of America we as the citizens have the responsibility to inform our elected leaders that we don’t want socialism and will vote them out if they try it.
Now back to the car. The volt and others like will be a enormous stride in the right direction toward energy independance and as for what the federal government owes me? Just two things
1. Protection from all threats foreign and domestic
2. An equal oppurtunity for success derived from my own hard work.

What the government does NOT owe me is
1. National health care
2. A tax rebate that amounts to socialism
3. Welfare of any type (no thanks I’ll work for my money)
4. Free hand outs
5 More government regulation
6. etc…….

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

#74, Jim I says, “This pricing issue has become ridiculous.”

I agree, but I think it has too. People are usually very close to their wallet. I know that I sit on mine (when my wife doesn’t have it )
Many people can not afford a $30K car. Why do your think Hyundia does so well? I can’t begrudge anyone who can’t afford it.
I grew up poor (thankfully I’m not that way anymore). I can afford the Volt, but won’t if it is a high price. But many many people want this car but won’t be able to afford it. I think that is why it keeps coming up.
In the hope that GM will listen, understand, and help but pricing the car in the Prius price range.

(Quote)
Al Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:41 pm

#42 Wirenutjd

Thanks for the link! It is always good to get multiple points of view, especially rational points of view unclouded by bias. Ultimately everyone will make their own choices in 2010-2015 about what they will drive. I believe/hope most folks here are concerned about the environment. Relying on coal plants or other fossil fuels are about the same as relying on gas for our cars, pollution wise. Hydrogen perpetuates this status quo.
However, wind, hydro, solar, and even atomic power hold the most promise in the near term. The more battery and the less gas we use – especially where greener generation methods exist – the better off all of us will be in the future.

(Quote)
Ash Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Toyota does not realize how hungry people are for a gas free car. They have either lost there touch or they have a similar secret project going on and they are faking it.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 2:10 pm

#80 Ash: Good points. It also may be that Toyota has a similar project but on a longer time line, so they want to slow down the train.

(Quote)
Mark Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 2:25 pm

A gas-free car may be more expensive, but it also gives the user (me) a peace of mind…no going to the gas stations, no checking out websites for the cheapest gas, and not caring as much about the price of gas.

It isn’t 100% about the money saved…it is also peace of mind

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 2:28 pm

Ash #80, RB #81,

Opel (GM) is sure doing that : quote :
”
“The Opel Insignia sets new standards in technology and innovation — this will be obvious right from the launch. But we are keeping several cards up our sleeves when it comes to environmental compatibility, excitement and safety, which we will play strategically overtime” says Alain Visser, Chief Marketing Officer, GM Europe.”
Source : http://www.gmeurope.info/social_media_newsroom/archives/379-Opel-Insignia-A-New-Design-Language-For-A-New-Era.html

(Quote)
Couts Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 2:33 pm

“But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

To me, the answer is “NO.” I can give at least 10 more reasons:

1- Oil companies and their outrageous profit margins
2- Hugo Chavez
3- Iran
4- Terrorism sponsored by some oil producing countries. (See Iran).
5- Going 1 or 2 months without having to fill up
6- Bragging rights
7- Sticking it to Toyota
8- Buying American
9- Cool technology
10- Did I mention Hugo Chavez?

Great commments, by the way, and AWESOME site!!!

(Quote)
Vincent Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 3:10 pm

Toyota knows they lost HUGE if the Volt works and it will.
GM already had a fantastic Electric Car.
Here comes one that they wont crush and take back after the lease is up. They already know what they have to do. Keep the faith. The NEW GM ROCKS!

(Quote)
calgaryvolt Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 3:42 pm

I think it will be very interesting to see what happens come 2010 or 2011 when the Volt should be coming to market. I still hold the notion that GM could be beat to market by a Japanese or maybe even European product that offers E-Rev technology. GM has a lot to gain in trying to pre-market a vehicle in development (such as they are doing now) and I think that other makers are smart to sit back quietly and (hopefully) work on developing their own product. I’d let GM make a lot of noise about the Volt and how great it’s going to be and how revolutionary it is while diligently working on my own design and trying to beat GM to market. I don’t think other car makers would be sitting around watching this development only to see what happens. I could be wrong though. Maybe we’ll know more come the next round of auto shows (Tokyo, Frankfurt, Geneva, New York, Detroit.) We already can see that Mitsubishi is working on a product that could give the Volt a run for the money and by 2010 or 2011 they might have at least a year of market research after running the car in Japan and Europe or whatever.

(Quote)
NorthernPiker Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 4:11 pm

#15 Rashiid,

Your situation, a 51 mile round trip commute, illustrates the need for the Volt AER to be optional, within reasonable limits, say 25 to 75 miles; otherwise, the market will be constrained. People with a 25 mile commute will be reluctant to buy a Volt since it comes with a 40 mile AER, 15 more miles than what they need nor want to pay for.

The 16 kWh battery pack is an unnecessary extravagance since only 8 kWh of energy is available despite the A123 claim that its batteries are good for 4000 cycles at 100% DOD. These extra kWh’s are expensive and will also constrain the market. If the production model uses 16 kWh of A123 batteries, people with a 50 or 60 mile commute will hack the software to increase the AER in the same way Calcars hacked the Prius software.

(Quote)
2Snowboard Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 4:55 pm

# 40 Grizzly,
“Pregnant Roller Skate” that is absolutely hilarious, did you come up with that one or hear it somewhere? Pure comedy gold.

Speaking of humor regarding St Prius of Tokyo, I was at a light yesterday and this Prius comes into the turn lane with out his signal. There are cars parked down the side of the street so its not a “lane” and I thinking, “is this guy gonna try and race off the line and cut in, with a Prius?” Sure enough he “guns” it but the Prius has such lame acceleration that the truck next to him would have to slow down for there to be room. St Prius even tries to come into his lane to intimidate the truck, nothing doing, and the pregnant roller skate has to slam on his brakes to avoid the parked cars and cut behind him. I laughed so hard, 0-60 in 9 or 10 seconds, that dog won’t hunt.

To think the hippie Michael Allen from Popular Mechanics wrote a piece to guilt the GM into having an even worse engine, like his VW Bus. No thank you!

(Quote)
fred Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 5:05 pm

A friend suggested that instead of waiting for the useless politicians to do whats right, that all GM dealerships install a hydrogen fueling station. That way you buy your car and fill up at the same place. Fuel cell Volt. I thought it was a good idea. But for now I am looking toward a plug in VOLT. Patiently waiting.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 5:15 pm

calgaryvolt #85:

I agree that many other manufacturers are probably working on their own BEV or a variant of the E-REV. But GM has set the bar pretty high with a Nov, 2010 introduction date. Unless the other companies had already started their porjects, they have to be running behind a bit…..

As for the Mitsubishi i-MiEV, it is all electric, with a 100 mile range, but no range extender. and their introduction date is for 50 test vehicles for use by electric companies in Japan for evaluation only, and then 2,000 units in 2010. So it is not the car I would want…. And I think it is ugly, but that is JMHO!

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 5:40 pm

1- Oil companies and their outrageous profit margins

Oil company profits margins are running below 10%. Only 8 point something. People keep yelling about huge profits but it isn’t exxonmobil that is raping the public. It is Opec! Exxonmobil has to buy much of its oil that it refines.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 5:54 pm

Maybe all the talk about a $40k Volt is just GMs way of softening us up. Originally, we expected an under mid-$20k price. Now, GM says $40k or $48k, depending on the off-the-cuff musing of the day. So, with GM high-balling the prediction, a $35k Volt debut will make us relieved instead of disappointed.

(Quote)
DG Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 5:57 pm

“But most of all, is the value of being able to drive entirely without petroleum just about saving money?”

Since there will only be a limited ammount of Volts in production in the first year (or two) and many of us waiting for a 2nd generation Volt. In all honesty at this point in time and untill 2011 a 40K price is not a problem in my oppinion. Even if GM does manage to get 100,000 volt on the road in the first two years I serriously doubt they will have a problem selling them especially with a tax break. Who said green concsious people dont have a decent income? Im not one of them but Im 25 and from a single income household. Even so Im still interested in purchesing a volt, not in 2009 but 2011 (when gas might be $6 a gallon).

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 6:06 pm

Fred #87. If we follow you friend’s advice, we would STILL be addicted to petroleum as 95% of H2 comes from reformed natural gas because it is 1/3 less expensive than electrolyzing it from water and sufficient “natural” sources like garbage dump methane are a joke. They are better off just using the gasses on site to power generators.

Using grid electricity stored in batteries is 4X MORE efficient than electrolyzing H2 from water not to mention the cost of the fool cells. Do the math.

H2 is nothing more than scheme to change our addiction from one drug they control to another. A is a pretty good analogy would be that the drug (oil) dealers want to change our addiction from cocaine (oil) to heroin (natural gas reformed into H2) both of which come from the poppies (crude oil) that they harvest. Worst of all is that they are trying to seduce stupid, corrupt politicians into taking their customer’s money (our taxes) to pay for their drug labs (reformation plants) and distribution system (H2 pumps) in advance. GM is getting some of this “research” tax money and I don’t think that it’s fair, do you?

Fool cells are for the foolish and/or corrupt. By the way, where does it specifically say in the Constitution that the federal government has the authority to give our tax money to giant oil companies, ethanol producers or anyone else? I know which Amendment says that they can’t! Do you? Does ANYONE in Congress? Do they even care what the supreme law of our nation says?

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 6:21 pm

We can not believe what Toyota says because they talk on both sides of their mouth. I bet they are developing a series hybrid as we speak but they won’t admit it. Later, they’ll say, oh yes, the time has come for us to develop the series hybrid. Then, in a year or so they will have it ready and people will say, how come a took GM all that time? Oh! It’s because Toyota is so so smart.

(Quote)
Bob Goldschmidt Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 6:47 pm

Forget about all the technological comparisons. We will encounter gas shortages and long lines at the pumps within a few years. Then GM will not be able to meet the demand for Volts for the foreseeable future, even if they have to be plugged in at work to get home without using any gas.

(Quote)
Charlie H Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 6:50 pm

#92, Tim, But if you install a few solar cells, you CAN make your own hydrogen for what is still a reasonable cost (and if natural gas goes up, your H2 will be competitive).

H2 will still be a lousy motor fuel but you can make it yourself, if you like.

(Quote)
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 6:53 pm

Everyone forgets GM came out with the electric car first (Impact), then the others Toyota Ford Honda. They were two years ahead and did nothing with the lead. Now they have the chance to be ahead once again with the volt. GM build the car, they will come. And oh by the way where is my mule? 239 410-8826 TED

(Quote)
DaveP Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:28 pm

I for one am not at all concerned about the “cost-effectiveness” of any car. And everybody who doesn’t drive a base Yaris or Kia Rio wagon would probably agree (Edmond’s total cost of ownership report):
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/tco/2008/index.html

GM essentially made a similar arguement about the Toyota Prius (and you can see how well that worked out for both companies) but what is interesting is that Toyota has put a different spin on it this time; that they can reach more people with a lower price and therefore save more gas that way. Well, that’s not actually the same old cost effectiveness arguement. They will unquestionably continue to sell the much cheaper Prius to folks who want to use less oil but wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford a more expensive Volt, and that is probably a sizeable amount of people, too. Despite what I said in another thread about the Prius being a dog (speed-wise) and I wouldn’t buy one (still true) it’s still an incredibly worthy vehicle that has done very much to raise the bar for advancing the electric motor technology in cars and it really does reduce gas consumption. It will continue to sell to people who want to play a part in advancing the technology but can only afford $20k or so. The Volt will play it’s part advancing the technology even further for those who can afford to pay $30k or so. The Toyota guys may be right. The people who can afford the Volt may not save as much oil collectively as the people who can afford the Prius. But the Volt is just as necessary to take the technology to the next level as was the Prius in its day.
The government is dragging it’s feet on global warming, national security, etc. you name it. All these advanced cars are giving us the opportunity to vote with our checkbooks as it were. If GM makes anything close to what they are claming, I’ll be happy enough to vote for it with my checkbook until the next stepping stone of development comes along.

Given that I’m going to lose money on whatever car I buy, at least the Volt gives me the opportunity to get more money back on my rather expensive solar system that I voted on with my checkbook some time ago.

Oh, and that $4 a gallon gas? I’m already paying well over $4 around here (Silicon Valley) for premium (gotta keep the turbos fed) and the midgrades just crossed $4, too. So, $4 in 2011 sounds like a pretty good deal!

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 7:29 pm

#86 NorthernPiker said “The 16 kWh battery pack is an unnecessary extravagance since only 8 kWh of energy is available …” I’m doubtful about that. My understanding is that the first 8kWh charged from the grid is drawn down in the first 40/50 miles. Then, if needed, the second 8kWh is used to run the drive motor while being cyclically recharged by the ICE. The ICE runs if, as, and when needed. Using the “lower half” of the battery this way allows the ICE to run steadily and efficiently while it is on, while the battery still can give strong performace at moments of high demand. (Of course, there is a battery reserve level, too.) These several phases take advantage of the whole battery capacity in one way or another, as I understand the explanations.

(Quote)
OhmExcited Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:29 pm

Three big problems with that.

1. the Prius is ugly.

2. It’s gutless. ergo, no fun to drive.

3. We’re still addicted to oil with the Prius. Like giving an alcoholic red wine and taking away his vodka.

(Quote)
Charlie H Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 8:54 pm

Toyota sold 20K Priuses last month and 7K Camry hybrids. At that rate, along with their great small cars, Toyota has done more to help reduce our oil addiction than GM, which is top-heavy with gas guzzlers.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

Charlie H #102

Car companies don’t drive or buy cars, people do. Don’t forget there are regular ICE cars available that get better mileage than the Prius.

Your statement should read…”Toyota would like you to believe….”

(Quote)
Charlie H Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:23 pm

Grizzly, In the city? Overall? I don’t think so.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bestworst.shtml

The Toyota has a mid-size interior. Anything with a mid-size interior come close?

Certain diesels might but diesel fuel, being denser than gas, emits more CO2/gallon burned and, most likely, more CO2/mile. I doubt that anything with the Prius’ interior can touch it.

(Quote)
Charlie H Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:24 pm

“I doubt that anything with the Prius’ interior can touch it.”

Should read: “I doubt that anything with the interior room of the Prius can touch it.”

(Quote)
Brad Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 10:45 pm

If you currently fill up your gas tank once a week and lets say you have a 15 gallon tank and gas is $3 a gallon. $45 a week you spend or $2340 a year or $11,700 in 5 years. If electricity is .60 a gallon equivalent that is $9 a week or $469 a year or $2,340 for 5 years. In 5 years you can save a minimum of $9,360 for driving your typical routes. Add a $3,000 federal tax incentive to that and possible the price of the volt could be at a min $12,360 more than a typical gas car and cost would be about the same in terms of 5 year cost of ownership. This number could be a much bigger savings if you factor in oil changes, surging gas prices, cheaper or no electric costs (solar panels) and others.

(Quote)
Hous Volt Pharteen Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:27 pm

Volt 1, Toyota 0. This is getting better than the Yankees and the red sox. Meaning the Volt is the yankees and toyota is the red sox, and as you know, NYY is on top.. always, it has 26 champs to show, and just in case you are a red sox fan (the reader) you may argue that to had won 2 WS in two years….Well, that is your Prius, enjoy it. Soon the Volt will get its 27 champs and GM back on 1, bringing nothing but inovation for a better world, the only one we have, the company we trust to delivery…GM.

(Quote)
Hous Volt Pharteen Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:28 pm

Volt 1, Toyota 0. This is getting better than the Yankees and the red sox. Meaning the Volt is the yankees and toyota is the red sox, and as you know, NYY is on top.. always, it has 26 champs to show, and just in case you are a red sox fan (the reader) you may argue that you had won 2 WS in 3 years….Well, that is your Prius, enjoy it. Soon the Volt will get its 27 champs and GM back on 1, bringing nothing but inovation for a better world, the only one we have, the company we trust to delivery…GM.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
April 18th, 2008 at 11:34 pm

Estero
I would think that GM will take a leaf out of Toyota’s handbook and use the generator to spin the ICE up, lubing it, before starting the fuel cycle, so wear and tear won’t be the problem it is with normal startup’s.
100 RB
GM is restricting the battery to 50% to double its life and get the 10 year life they want. from GM’s E-Rev PDF I think the motor will keep the battery charged between 30 – 35% only. On hard hill climbs the charge might drop to 25%.
I have really enjoyed driving the Prius, but I just don’t see it as competition to the Volt. They really are different vehicles at present. So enough with comparisons already.

As for economics 2nd hand will always beat new. Every time! How much for a 2nd hand Volt in 2015 I wonder?
Sorry Tagamet but I just have to note Oil is over $USD118.00 as I write this, US refining margins are near zero, it can’t continue, gasoline prices must rise to restore profitability.

I am willing to put my nuts on the line and predict $8 – $10 Gasoline in 2011, Stop laughing Jean-Charles, I know you are already there.
Still think the Volt won’t sell GXT?

#31 Brian M. I totally agree with you.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 3:34 am

Current refinery utilization – 81.4%
http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/AndIFeelFine/?action=view&current=refinery_util.png
This is the lowest in years. If they can’t raise prices soon, the smaller ones will go out of business. Not to worry though, Saudi has a new one coming on line soon. Uncle Hugo is looking at some as well. lol.

Go GM, go Volt. Go Toyota, and anyone else preparing to build cars with batteries.

(Quote)
FYI Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 4:28 am

Just a question, but has anyone heard if GM is planing to put solar panels on the roof or similar to have a recharge effect? I don’t know, but if everyone is plugging their cars in, wouldn’t it be less green, since plants will have to burn more coal and ommit more edmissions to match output?

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 4:40 am

FYI
I doubt it. Too heavy, too expensive, not enough power to make a difference.
1. Burning coal and sending the power to your battery is more efficient, and produces less emissions, than running an ICE.
2. Coal plants ‘only’ produce about 50% of the power in the US anyway.

(Quote)
BillR Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 5:52 am

#112 NZDavid

I notice you’ve been busy with responses this evening.

Regarding coal plants, about 2 years ago in the US, there were over 100 coal plants under development. Only a handful of those plants have gone into construction, and only a handful of open applications still exist.

States like Kansas, Washington, and Florida have denied permits at least in part due to the uncertainty of CO2 emission taxes in the future.

The next round of coal plants built in this country will need to include carbon separation and sequestration (CCS) technology and actually pump CO2 into underground storage. This is being done today on a limited basis as CO2 is pumped into oil wells for EOR (enhanced oil recovery). In the future, this will need to be done on a much wider scale for coal-based power to acceptable.

Expect to see examples of these plants in the coming years.

(Quote)
BillR Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 6:09 am

#107 & #108 Hous Volt Farteen

Your analogy is good,just backwards. Toymota has become like the Yankees, the Evil Empire.

Now comes the underdog (GM or Red Sox), who have much more integrity, honesty, and popularity. However, they have been struggling in the past.

But now, under new leadership, and with a new commitment to success, they are poised to defeat the Evil Empire, and send it to the realms of mediocrity, where it belongs.

The Evil Empire is crumbling, and the Champions of a new era are now poised to win for a number of years to come.

(Quote)
FLman Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 7:21 am

It looks GM has a big push in China! and the Volt is part of that push.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080419/ap_on_bi_ge/china_auto_show_gm;_ylt=Amt1wIgG8aPxpJSapiahWJms0NUE

(Quote)
crows Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 7:49 am

GM needs to get their act going MORE QUICKLY!

Oil traded at almost 117 a barrel and there seems to be no end in sight…

Build the freakin car already!

I really dont care what it looks like…just build the damn thing!

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 10:07 am

Green Car Congress’ concluding statement seems to me to be the right conclusion: “We conclude that electrification that enables E-REVs may be well worth the effort. Specifically designed electric powertrains, incorporating higher power motors and thermal systems, higher energy batteries and integrating them into vehicle structures specifically designed for that purpose will be rewarded with societal benefits in real world use. While PHEVs can make improvements compared to HEVs, an E-REV appears to realize a much greater portion of societal benefits.”

In other words, the Volt’s E-REV architecture has the potential to allow MUCH lower air pollution per mile at a MUCH lower fuel cost per mile.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 11:57 am

#90 fred:

There was an article in the paper yesterday about a GM dealer in Texas who has put an E85 station at his dealership. His customers were frustrated because GM keeps hyping E85, but they couldn’t buy it anywhere. It has apparently been so successful that he is looking at adding other alternative fuels, and other dealers are coming from all over the area to see what he is doing.

So, your idea is very topical, and makes perfect sense.

In SoCal, Edison is installing millions of square feet of solar panels on lagre commercial and industrial buildings. What a concept, generate the power right next to the users and minimize the need for new transmission infrastructure. Can you picture a GM dealership with a large solar array on the roof(s) of the building(s) generating power to make H2 from water? No refomulated natural gas please.

#100 Dave P.:

Yeah, Toyota’s argument that you save more gas buy building more, cheaper, Priuses makes about as much sense as GM’s argument that you save more gas by building 22 mpg hybrid pickups and Tahoes. It’s fun to watch the spin go round and round, and then reverse itself, if you have a strong enough stomach.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 1:29 pm

Folks, Toyota is probably quietly developing a “series hybrid” (E-REV) like the Volt. They aren’t as open about their development process like GM is. They’ll probably be sneaky about it and suddenly spring it on the world when they are ready. They are probably working hard to do the same things that GM is doing with the Volt. The Volt may be more expensive than the “power split hybrids” like the Prius but it definitely will have its advantages. The Volt is going to be popular. Here’s a good webpage I found that shows the differences between the hybrid technologies:

http://smartgreenenergy.com/quick-summaries/quick-summary-understanding-hybrid-cars/

The article says this:

“True serial hybrid cars can potentially change the landscape. Electric cars allow you to eliminate the clutch, transmission, and differential, greatly reducing complexity. They eliminate oil changes (for the electric motors at least), lowering maintenance costs, indeed by all measures, electric powered cars require FAR less maintenance. And serial hybrid cars can likely be provided in “big battery” versions that can work as plug-in hybrids for the majority of local trips, while relying on the gas powered on-board generator for extended journeys.”

If lithium ion battery prices go down dramatically, I bet the “series hybrids” are going to become the dominant type of hybrid car. The new 2 mode hybrids will probably be the second most popular type of hybrid. In the long run …. IF, a big IF, hydrogen gets cheap, fuel cells get cheap, and the hydrogen infrastructure ever gets in place, you might see more and more fuel cell cars … basically a Volt with a fuel cell as the range extender instead of the IC engine.

I don’t know if they’ll be able to make batteries light enough and energy dense enough to get to the 300-400+ mile range that we all want. It would be awesome if some company does. World changing. No doubt about it. That would be THE ideal scenario. We wouldn’t need IC engines OR fuel cells. We’d just have super efficient 100% electric cars that get their juice from much cheaper grid (clean) energy or better yet from solar panels on your roof. Cheap solar sourced electricity + 400 mile range electric car = THE ideal technology for transportation in the future.

I’m hoping that lightweight materials like high strength steel, magnesium, aluminum and carbon fiber get cheaper in the next 5 years or so. In 2020+ that’s going to be the ideal vehicle … a super light, aerodynamic car body with a lightweight, energy packed, quick charging battery that gets 300-400+ miles of range. You’ll see cars of all sizes. You’ll see big ole SUVs with good performance if people want them … but much lighter and more efficient. In the meantime we’re in the evolutionary stage with hybrids.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 2:22 pm

#120 GM Volt Fan:

As to your last paragraph, I’ll drink to that. I totally agree with you on the weight issue, BTW.

There was an interesting article on the Yahoo news site this morning about T. Boone Pickens, a quinessential oil man if there ever was one, investing $1.5 billion in a huge new wind farm in Texas. He has a theory that we need to stop using natural gas to generate electric power and save it for motor fuel. I agree as far as it goes, but I think that most GM-Volt bloggers are at least one jump up the evolutionary curve from there.

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 5:14 pm

The Volt is America’s electrifying anti-terrorist implement of strategic war. Throw out your cost/benefit analyses; they are always wrong because the assumptions must be flawed.
If our nation had committed to electrifying autos in the 1970s what a wonderful world this would be. The people who will buy Volts will do so for patriotic economic reasons. There will be a couple eco-dogues in the mix as well.
Japan went to war against us when we cut off their oil supply.
We need to cut off our oil supplied by our enemies before we go to war. Don’t tell me about Mexico and Canada; they ain’t doing us any favors.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 6:03 pm

>> The Toyota paper says Toyota’s approach is the best.
>> GM also put out a paper, which says E-REVs are superior.
>> Shocking, isn’t it.

Not at all. Toyota wants to sell lots and lots of hybrids. GM wants to brag about having the best. That fundamental difference is nothing new. Two-Mode followed that identical pattern.

If you were serious enough about Volt, you’d realize that other vehicles using electricity for propulsion were not the competition… that the actual problem comes from those without battery-packs.

(Quote)
Jeff Says:
April 19th, 2008 at 10:21 pm

I truly believe GM’s top managment wants to build this vehicle…but is it the “heartbeat” of the entire company?

GM is a huge company…not a non-profit or a branch of the government. It has divisions…one is the Powertrain division. Will this division embrace the E-Flex powertrain which is folks with extensive experience with ICEs…not batteries, electric motors, and power electronics?

GM named an assembly plant for the VOLT…but has anyone know the Powertrain plant for the E-Flex? Powertrains (engines, transmisisions, drive shafts, etc.) are usually produced at other sites…especially for large volume models.

If the Powertrain division is not involved 100% (development and production), I might question GM’s commitment to the VOLT.

(Quote)
Bob Says:
April 20th, 2008 at 2:52 pm

We will win the war with the terrorists by bankrupting them when oil is obsolete. Each Volt will be like a battleship or fighter plane in this war. It is crucial that the feds provide enough of a tax credit to bring the initial Volt cost into the mid 20s. Think of it as a military expenditure, which is what it really is. Over time as the battery costs come down with volume production, the subsidy will be less necessary. It is not up to GM or any private company to provide for our national security. This is one of the few situations in which intervention in the free markets by the government makes sense.

(Quote)
JPhillips Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 9:22 am

@ coutts #85

Hugo Chavez, Iran??? You’ve been watching to much CNN & Fox News.
Here’s a little historical fact for you, Venezuela has never attacked another country, Iran hasn’t been outside it’s own borders since the Persian empire. That’s right Iran has exsisted as a country for like the last 1500 years, and here we come with our (very short) History trying to convince the world that the only way we will all be safe is if we invade them and use a greater level of violence.

When are you guys going to get it, were the aggressors, were the bullies, were the ones marching all over the world beating the drums of war, creating conflict, supporting state sponsored terrorism when it suits us ( see central america in the 80’s), and acting like it’s the anti-christ when that works for us(see the middle east now). Were the ones creating terrorist millitias to support regime change and then pretecting ourselves from it 10 years later. ( see al-queida)

If we want the world to be more peacfull we have to stop being so violent.

To the guys who were saying we “have” to have a world presence for the good of the world, i say how do you know, do you think the women & children in iraq feel that way about us?

You think the world hates us now, wait and see in 10 years when all the hate were breeding right now in iraq grows up and is old enough to fight.

The rest of the world isn’t the ones who have been in some form of a military confrontation for the last 65 years straight, who spend more on their military than a majority of the rest of the world combined.

I love this country, but we have made some bad choices, we have allowed our government to create a finnacial climate to where most people don’t have time to worry about anything else, especially politics, we have allowed our goverment to strip away our freedoms under the disguise of protecting them.

A man that will forfeit his freedoms for his security deserves neither.
‘ Benjamin Franklin

(Quote)
Kevin R Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 10:20 am

#126 JPhillips

Amazing what you’ve written. I too am a Patriot. I love this country. I’m so disappointed at our direction though. Instead of a force for peace, we tend to resort to intervention and violence on a grand scale. Dwight D. Eisenhower at the end of his Presidential term warned Americans about our growing entanglements.

“He may have been the ultimate icon of 1950s conformity and postwar complacency, but Dwight D. Eisenhower was an iconoclast, visionary, and the Cassandra of the New World Order. Upon departing his presidency, Eisenhower issued a stern, cogent warning about the burgeoning “military industrial complex,” foretelling with ominous clarity the state of the world in 2004 with its incestuous entanglement of political, corporate, and Defense Department interests.”

Watch the documentary, “Why We Fight”. It is truly fascinating to hear from military leaders and Eisenhower himself about the United States going from a peace loving country to one of war mongering and constant interventions.

(Quote)
Jeffrey Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 10:53 am

@Jphillips – The actual quote you’re looking for is actually “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” However, a little research shows that he never said that, it was in a book that he published for others…

I’m completely with Couts on this one – why give my money to anyone who publicly says they hate us and want us destroyed? I’m all for any car that allows me to drive while sending the least amount of my money out of the country as possible. But every one of his reasons are valid, FYI. Your argument about Venezula and Iran were the same ones given about Germany and Hitler prior to the two World Wars, and look where that attitude got the world!

As to what I think of your diatribe? I’ll quote Mr. Franklin on that as well: “At present I shall only give you my Opinion that tho’ your Reasonings are subtle, and may prevail with some Readers, you will not succeed so as to change the general Sentiments of Mankind on that Subject, and the Consequence of printing this Piece will be a great deal of Odium drawn upon your self, Mischief to you and no Benefit to others. He that spits against the Wind, spits in his own Face”

(Quote)
JPhillips Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 12:39 pm

#127 Kevin R.

Why We Fight = Great movie that every american should have to watch in 10th grade

#128 Jeffery

” why give my money to anyone who publicly says they hate us and want us destroyed?”

I think my point was misunderstood. I agree why fund our enemies, but shouldn’t we ask ourself why they hate us? Or better asked is how come we don’t know why they hate us?

I never want to burn a drop of gas again that’s why i love this car, not because i’m a tree hugger (even though the image of my son having to put on 120SPF sunblock to go outside is a little disturbing), but i believe our economical/military dependance on oil is the main reason we have made some very bad friends, and even poorer decisions in the last 40 years.

I don’t see the connection between 2 barely able to defend themselves countries (iran & venezuela) and at the time the most heavily armed and aggressive nation on the earth (germany). Do you really believe that Chavez would act against us if left alone, or that Iran want’s anything but to be able to defend themselves against israels (illegal) nuclear arsenal.
It is our use of force that is fueling the spread of weapons of mass destuction. As long as countries believe the only way to protect themselves from us is to be our “yes man” or aquire a nuclear weapon, it will be an all out gold rush for nukes.

Sorry i misquoted franklin, but i was reciting from memory, not copying & pasting from some googled web page. I felt like the point of the quote was captured and expressed.

(Quote)
JPhillips Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 12:44 pm

#128 Jeffery

“Your argument about Venezula and Iran were the same ones given about Germany and Hitler prior to the two World Wars, and look where that attitude got the world!”

Actually your right, look where it has got us. Since WW2 we have practiced pre-emptive war, and unillateralism. I don’t think either of those policies have made the world safer, nor have they helped Americas political clout, they have helped our corporations become more global though, so in some eyes they have been succesfull.
I guess the question is are you an american or a corporate elitist?

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 1:20 pm

JPhillips:

Not all of us agree with your views, and I do not like being called a coporate elitist or having my patriotism questioned.

However, to keep this from truning into a major flame war, I think we should get this thread back on topic………..

If you want to discuss politics, this is not the web site for it.

(Quote)
JPhillips Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 1:47 pm

Jim I

I neither called you a corporate elitist, nor questioned your patriotism. Nor do i expect anyone to agree with me, i bet some do and some don’t.

I have been a member of this site since a couple of months after Lyle started it, i was also at Volt nation, and asked Bob Lutz a question myself.

So for your notes:
I reserve the right to give my opinion on anything i read here.
Also since i don’t like to impose, nor do i think it’s my right, i won’t trampple on your opinions or views or try to restrict them to things i agree with.

Jim i’ve read things you wrote i didn’t agree with but, that’s my opinion, so i left it at that.

Good fences make good neighbors’

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 3:10 pm

#125 Bob:

I agree with you. Subsidizing the Volt is waaaaay cheaper than weapons of war, aside from all of the other benefits the Volt will bring.

#126 JPhillips, #127 Kevin R:

For what it’s worth, I agree wholeheartedly with both of you. I believe that such comments are perfectly appropriate here, and very useful. I have made a few myself!

I believe that your comments speak directly to Bob’s comment above. Far, far better that our government should spend its resources (well our resources, actually) to find ways to lessen the competition for the world’s dwindling resources than to squander them in endless wars over those resources. What’s next? Water? Food? Wait for it.

(Quote)
JPhillips Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 4:09 pm

Noel,

Thank you glad to see i’m not the only one who wants the volt because i’m anti-war.

But to me that’s the great thing about this car. If your a climate guy, energy independence, american economy, or anti-war. This car is for you, it is something for the whole country to rally around.

I’m so glad to be a part of this!

(Quote)
Rouser Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 4:39 pm

Oh, please, do expand your knowledge about what’s going on in the world.

Many of the references to terrorism in these comments are naive. Most so-called terrorism occurs because our corporate controlled government pursues policies to further corporate riches that often conflicts with interests of the citizens of the countries we seek to manipulate or control.

When these people fight back or rebel against this control, it’s then labeled terrorism as part of the propaganda. If you tally the damage and deaths they have suffered, it’s orders of magnitude greater than what “we” have endured.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 4:57 pm

I am sorry, but:

You are all welcome to your opinons, but this type of diatribe should be going on in the “off topic” section of the forum, not in the Volt vs Prius thread.

(Quote)
MLRTYME Says:
April 21st, 2008 at 5:32 pm

Jeff #124

I agree to an extent..

However, working in the IT field, I can tell you that I know of no developer in our entire company who is currently working writing programs in PASCAL or COBOL. The developers I worked under when I started had already adapted to new technologies and new methodologies during their tenures. I submit that someone with a strong engineering background would be well suited to understanding the basics of a hybrid and/or electric drivetrain, even if they deal with the concepts of compression ratios and frictional losses currently.

This is true in any field where design and/or engineering is a central concern. The understanding is technology can, and will, move forward. Those who take the effort to learn and apply superior technologies have a greater potential for developing a superior product.

Hopefully, GM will be successful in this endeavor. Time will tell.

(Quote)
Blake Says:
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:03 am

I’ve had zero interest in cars made by US manufacturers for the last 20 years. Right now I’m driving an Infiniti, and before that a BMW. But if GM can deliver on this vehicle I’ll be pounding on the showroom door. Do it, do it right, and hurry up…

(Quote)
Rouser Says:
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:15 pm

Jim I,

I agree the topic of conversation has shifted a bit in this section. However, I am merely framing reference to the several postings in this section citing fighting terrorism as motivation for purchasing EVs.

Expressing views that are not spoon-fed to me by our government and media is not a diatribe. Try to think just slightly outside of the box once in a while. It’s a useful exercise!

(Quote)
Bob Says:
April 23rd, 2008 at 12:09 am

#135: “Many of the references to terrorism in these comments are naive. Most so-called terrorism occurs because our corporate controlled government pursues policies to further corporate riches that often conflicts with interests of the citizens of the countries we seek to manipulate or control.”
Sorry, I can’t buy this. When Bin Laden says he will end the war on the West if we convert to Islam, what other proof is needed to understand they hate us for what we are, not for what we do? They are an intolerant ideology that views this as a thousand year struggle in a war of cultures. It started long before Iraq, or any other foreign policy you care to name.
The oil money they use to fund their madrassas and terrorist operations will be cut off by moving on a massive scale to E-flex. This is why I said (#125) that jump starting massive use with more significant tax credits is a military expenditure. Hey Washington, we need LEADERSHIP on this.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 23rd, 2008 at 12:18 pm

Rouser:

I have a son in the military, who is risking his life to defend the rights of everyone here to be able to share their opinions. And yes, it was his choice to do so.

But I think you should thank the next soldier you meet for allowing you to be able to “think outside the box”. Because without them, you may not have that privilege……..

And again, I think this should not be discussed in this thread!

(Quote)
ev Says:
April 25th, 2008 at 11:55 am

Most of you are losing the point.
Toyota is just stating a economic fact. Phevs are more cost/beneficial. That’s not an attack on the Volt because it’s a fact. So the people who write provocative headlines ought to stop distorting it and people reading it ought to be more clear headed. There is unnecessary fiddling with emotions.

Toyota isn’t as transparent as GM. Do you really think Toyota hasn’t done any r&d on EVs or E revs. Every automaker has a secret floor where they have prototypes not open to the public. And Toyota is much better at hiding that than GM. Toyota spends more r&d than GM for SURE. Even IF by chance Toyota has little on EV or E REVs they can turn out a car faster than any of the big 3, about 18 months to 24 months. GM takes close to 48 months. Heck it’s been 4 years and GM STILL does not have a hybrid that compares to a Prius.

I won’t believe in Toyota or GM on EVs or Erevs or Phev until they put them on the driveways of people. GM and Toyota are going with fleet cars first so it’ll be a min. of 2 years before the avg. citizen gets to buy one.

By the time E revs comes out EVs will probably be taking off. Finding solutions in the future for today’s problems is ridiculous. Today’s problems can be solved initially with full hybrids and Tomorrow’s with e-rev and EVs (that-s just for gas automakers).

For other companies like Tesla they have tomorrow’s and today’s problems’ solutions now.

(Quote)
Jason Says:
April 28th, 2008 at 8:38 am

I love how people are warning about Lith-Ion safety, and yet every day we put one up to our ear and our eyes…cell phone and camera!

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009
This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]
BigCityCat
Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009
I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]
omnimoeish
First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009
The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]
admin
Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009
- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]
Texas
New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009
Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]
srschrier
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

Toyota Attacks the Volt…Again

143 Responses to “Toyota Attacks the Volt…Again”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts