AND 
Continental Says Chances Good of Getting Volt Battery Contract
A couple of weeks ago we heard an interview with Compact Power CEO Prabhakar Patil in which he indicated his company and LG Chem had a good chance at getting the Volt contract and that his packs were the one’s running in the prototypes. It was also indicated that LG Chem would build a U.S. production facility should they get that contract.
GM would not confirm they were close to choosing one supplier but that an announcement would be forthcoming.
A new interview with Continental’s board member Karl-Thomas Neumann was recently published.
He said "Our expectations are high and we’re confident that we made a good offer to GM."
He also indicated that if his company and battery supplier A123 Systems got the contract, Continental too would build a U.S. assembly plant.
Although I do not have definite confirmation from GM there appear to be some indications that a battery contract decision could come in August.
Source (CNN )
71 Responses to “Continental Says Chances Good of Getting Volt Battery Contract”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This 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, 2009I 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, 2009The 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, 2009Link 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, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
June 29th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Here we go again! Competition is a good thing! Whoever wins the contract should be held to the US ASSEMBLY plant, no ands ifs or buts!
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Can’t wait!
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Just pick both of them…
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
I think all domestic automakers should insist their battery suppliers build plants in the US, just as they made US companies build plants in their countries.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Just make sure this thing is modular before it’s bolted in! All too many times in history no one ever considered an upgrade path which makes things much more difficult down the road. Part of the appeal of ownership for anything is that it won’t be obsolete in a short amount of time. Easier said that done with a 400lb pack, but this is definitely a valid consideration!
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
#5
that should read “Easier said THAN….
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
This article is just like one of those “news teasers”. You get the tease…but film at 11pm (except it is 1-2 months here).
Does a plant need to be built to supply the initial packs? If so, I wonder if the battery pack companies supplied a detailed proposal for building it.
I’ve not seen these fun questions asked yet…so I’ll ask them:
- Will the battery packs come with a full charge on delivery to the customer?
- Auto assembly plants fill a tank with a few gallons of fuel to drive them off the assembly line. Will GM even bother to put fuel in the tank or just charge the battery?
- Will a surge protector be recommended for plugging in?
- Wlill the Cadallic versions be named with numbers like competitor luxury brands? For instance, 120V & 240V.
- Will an OEM extension cord be standard or optional?
- Is a General Electric Sports Edition in the works?
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Yes, no, maybe. Use as needed!
Speaking of weight, what is the expected weight of the battery pack? I just hope it comes with the standard 9V transistor radio battery connector…..
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
So I guess no REAL news today…
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
mmmmm…the sweat smell of politicing. Seems to be in the air these days.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
hmmm…
He is not confident and the statements about the injection systems sound a little desperate…
…more rumours…
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
These days with the costs of overseas shipping up substantially, and the weak dollar, it makes good economic sense to build them where they will be sold. Saw on on CNBC or CNN a story about a furniture maker that moved furniture production back to the USA from overseas because of this, and it appears to be part of a trend of reverse off-shoring.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
It doesn’t really matter who wins the initial Volt contract. Let GM decide this, the more important issue is the success of E-Flex architecture! Both suppliers will be needed for this to succeed, and I believe both will be used. That said, the world is a strange place and I hope that for the LT both will succeed in building plants in the US.
Let’s also understand that AER alone will not sell vehicles in numbers at this time. Range extension is not only huge but will be significant for some time and E-85’s significance in this respect will grow. GM is on the right track, and it’s important that they dial it in!
GM needs to work to make the entire fleet E-85 capable so that we can progress to an E-flex world.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
If both batteries meet the specifications of GM …the winner will be the company with the lowest price. GM has gotten an earful about the ultimate price of the Volt. If one of the battery manufacturers says they will sell them to GM for say $8,000 each and the other company says they will cost $10,000 …GM will buy the $8,000 version. It is just that simple.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
#7 Jeff:
Thanks for the laugh. I LOVE the idea of a General Electric Limited Edition. If we are in a battle for the manufacturing future of this country we might as well get the other heavies involved.
And yes, I say Battle: GM and Ford go under permanently or get bought out by foreign competition then we could be in a world for hurt. Unions would be nonexistant (UAW…if you want to do SOMETHING good to make up for the last 30 years, start picketing Toyota and Honda plants for crying out loud.) and brain drain would be horrific. Toyota does just about ALL their engineering and research in Japan. I fail to see how Toyota becoming the dominant auto manufacturer in the US helps the US in the long term (sure, manufacturing plants. Non-Union and little to ineffective healthcare. )
Forcing production in the US is a good thing. As GM and Ford are finding out currency exchanges can really hamper a company. GM and Ford have GREAT fuel efficient small cars in Europe but the currency exchange makes them non-competitive to bring over.
Statik:
I see the table is pretty much set for a GM announcement on Thursday around oh…3:30 ish EDT haha.
After that announcement how much do you want to bet they reveal the Volt design the day after on the 4th?
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Man, that Volt is badass! What brushes are you running?
MSD Xtreme Dominator X 1000’s!
With Monster Cables…..and I changed all of the caps in the controller to polystyrene….
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
A123 build their batteries in China.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 12:01 am
Is GM limited to a battery supplier from just one vendor? Can they sign contracts with multiple vendors who will then continually compete to improve the battery and/or reduce the cost?
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Kent Lue @ 18
GM have a few different battery supplier contracts on different cars. I’m sure A123 system and LG Chem is working on other GM cars as well. What many people are looking is what company is going to get the battery technolagy for the Volt
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 3:10 am
I hope the Volt battery pack is made of 10 or 20 or more batteries that are bolted together. That way, if one battery fails, then we still have the other batteries in the battery pack to drive the Volt motor/engine.
But if it is only one huge battery in the battery pack, and if that one battery fails, we won’t have any power to drive the Volt, since the ICE role is to charge the battery pack and not to drive Volt’s motor.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 3:46 am
i found this article i dont know if lyle knows it or passed it over.. but.. enjoy!
http://automotive.speedtv.com/article/chevy-volt-yours-for-40k/
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 4:38 am
Those batteries are big. It kind of reminds me of past technology innovations that came out big, bulky and expensive. Like the computer or cell phone. However over time got smaller and less expensive. Hopefully battery technology in plugins go the same way.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 4:48 am
Just remember how it went with CobaSys!
No point in making the same mistake twice!
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 5:04 am
My Bradley Electric Research Car took it’s 1st solar charge last friday. I’m going to try running all this week on sunlight !!!!!
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 5:55 am
#3 Jeff says: “Just pick both of them…”
I agree. Most industries purchasing departments require dual sources whenever possible.
As for building a plant in the U.S., I think this is just a P.R. move. The individual battery components would still be produced in Asia. Only the pack assembly would move to the U.S..
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 6:09 am
#7 Jeff asks many questions. Here’s my stab at answers.
Q: Will the battery packs come with a full charge on delivery to the customer?
A: GM is the customer of the packs, so the answer would be no. If you mean Volt customers, the answer would be yes.
Q: Auto assembly plants fill a tank with a few gallons of fuel to drive them off the assembly line. Will GM even bother to put fuel in the tank or just charge the battery?
A: They’ll need to put gas in the tank for the final engine test.
Q: Will a surge protector be recommended for plugging in?
A: Outdoor / Garage power outlets require GFCI protection.
Q: Wlill the Cadallic versions be named with numbers like competitor luxury brands? For instance, 120V & 240V.
A: Last I heard, the regular Volt will have a 240V charging option.
Q: Will an OEM extension cord be standard or optional?
A: Probably standard.
Q: Is a General Electric Sports Edition in the works?
A: No.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 6:16 am
CPI might be talking too much these days during the final stages of battery testing and sensitive contract negotiations. GM is the one who should make all announcements regarding the selected battery and company, not those who might be on the receiving end of a contract.
Who knows, all these statements might come back to haunt CPI if for no other reason than NOT keeping quiet.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 6:30 am
This post is more bad news on batteries. We don’t know if the contract problem is price, production numbers, quality, warranty, some other factor, but obviously there is a major problem. When one gets to the bottom line of today’s post, it is that there is no contract for batteries as of now, and GM indicates no liklihood of a contract for yet another month. Obviously a company without a contract is not going full blast toward making a factory to deliver batteries.
The battery is the most critical item of the Volt. Every week it is delayed delays the introduction by the same amount or more. Are we to 2011 yet?
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 6:37 am
#21 Jeremy, That article actually described the Volt’s power system accurately in about a sentence.
“Unlike Toyota’s hybrid cars, the Volt runs for 40 miles on electricity alone before a frugal, constant-speed engine kicks in to recharge the batteries.”
Why can’t they all be like that
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 6:41 am
First, if you listened to the recent videos with Bob Lutz discussing the Volt at a dinner meeting, he talked about automation in battery production. Current automotive batteries only have about 4 minutes of direct labor in the final assembly process!
Bob goes on to talk about lamination processes, similar to ones in the paper industry, that could be used for Li-Ion batteries. If the investment is made to make the production of Li-Ion batteries extremely automated, it would likely make sense to build the final assembly plant in the US. The raw materials, however, would probably come from global sources.
It is my belief that GM will make a huge commitment to E-Flex. This will equate to a large global need for batteries. Perhaps LG Chem will get the contract for the Volt, and build a facility in the US, while Continental will get a contract for the Opel Flextreme, and will build a plant in Europe.
Either way, a highly automated process to manufacture Li-Ion batteries is needed, and this will require a huge investment from either supplier (perhaps the reason McCain has offered a $300 million “Prize” for low cost Li-Ion).
If the cost for the Volt’s battery pack can be reduced to around $3500, E-Flex will find its way into many new applications besides the Volt.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 6:56 am
#15 Morgan
“Statik:I see the table is pretty much set for a GM announcement on Thursday around oh…3:30 ish EDT haha. After that announcement how much do you want to bet they reveal the Volt design the day after on the 4th? ”
Lol.
I think the ‘big day’ for news that blows will be Tuesday.
So, Lyle if you are tight on significant news to start threads on, and you can hold off until Tuesday afternoon, your good to go. (I mean after all, how can there actually be news every 2 or 3 days for 5 years on the Volt…it’s just a car, it’s not like there are nightly boxscores to post).
Fearless prediction: Sales off 39%. Aveo and Cobalt still selling strong. Vibe wiping the floor with anything else in the lineup.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 6:57 am
#30 BillR
The more highly automated a production line is, the longer it takes to set up and perfect. Initially all “highly automated” means is that every error affects 1000 units,, rather than just one. This part is one of the main reasons why the delay in signing a contract worries me. While the battery is only a part of the car, internally it is a complex device, and no battery = no car.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 7:23 am
“Toyota does just about ALL their engineering and research in Japan”.
Have you watch Autoline Detroit (LA) lately? It looks to me tons of Toyota RD is done in the California. John McElroy, the host of the show, has been promoting the Asian auto makers for weeks now. I’m sure they are giving him a good time. John sure does not live to the name of his show, especially while Detroit is going through a hard time. It’s like there is nothing good to say about the domestics. They should change the name of the show to “Autoline Asia”.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 7:34 am
to #28 RB
This post is more bad news on batteries. We don’t know if the contract problem is price, production numbers, quality, warranty, some other factor, but obviously there is a major problem. When one gets to the bottom line of today’s post, it is that there is no contract for batteries as of now, and GM indicates no liklihood of a contract for yet another month. Obviously a company without a contract is not going full blast toward making a factory to deliver batteries.
The battery is the most critical item of the Volt. Every week it is delayed delays the introduction by the same amount or more. Are we to 2011 yet?
Relax, take a break, take a little smoke or skip a little rope.
Do you call your glass half full of half empty? I think we know the answer to that question.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 7:43 am
BEV Volt. Bring it on. One companies pack in front and the others pack in the back. Form an H and 80 miles per charge. One can dream can’t one? TED
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 7:51 am
#34 Joe
Thank you for your concern about me. I spent the weekend with my grandson, a wonderful little boy who will, I hope, have an electric car in his future. Today I came back to work with a very positive outlook on life.
As for my views on battery contracts and production, they are analytical and objective. I wish GM and their autoworkers the best. It is a fact, though, that their battery contract is late.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 7:57 am
#30 BillR says: “Either way, a highly automated process to manufacture Li-Ion batteries is needed, and this will require a huge investment from either supplier (perhaps the reason McCain has offered a $300 million “Prize” for low cost Li-Ion).”
Note that it is the battery pack suppliers (not cell suppliers) that are talking about building plants in the U.S.. Automation in the pack assembly is not as critical. Pack assembly does not require a huge investment from the supplier.
It is the making of the individual Li/Ion battery cells that requires a highly automated process. The individual Li/Ion cells will be made in China (A123) or South Korea (LG). These highly automated plants already exist, and already have spare capacity to build enough Li/Ion cells for the Volt (see previous articles on this site for details). So there is no huge investment needed here either.
I think the McCain $300 million battery prize is deceiving. The implication is that viable batteries don’t yet exist, and that we need more innovation to create them. This is simply not true. The batteries do exist. Lutz has said this over and over. If you don’t believe him, go to Home Depot and look at cordless drills. Everything is going Li/Ion.
Here’s another example. The Tesla Roadster provides 220 miles of range. The battery pack for this car uses normal high-volume Li/Ion cells, and costs Tesla $22K. The 40 mile range battery pack for the Volt will be a small fraction of the Roadster’s pack. Using this example, it seems the Volt’s battery pack should cost less than $5K once volume ramps.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 8:02 am
I will guarantee you the battery packs, regardless of the company, will be marked with “Assembled in the USA using Foreign and Domestic Components”. The guts will be made in China.
And if I am wrong, Statik will buy you a Volt.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Jeff @ 3,
Pick both of them? Yeah, and which Volt would you want? Obviously, not all Volts are created equal under that scenario.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 8:29 am
#38
Your analogy I believe is correct. That is the best way to keep the cost down and at the same time keep the technology here so we can further improve on it.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Just pick them both.
What is the advantage of only having one?
May want to have even more than 2.
The size of the projected battery market is hudge.
The problem to manage will be a shortage of supply.
Pick at least 2 suppliers if not 4 or 5.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 8:52 am
With A123 battling over two patents with the University of Texas, I would agree GM should NOT put all their “battery eggs” in one basket. The initial Volt production run should utilize both companies and GM should let real production scenarios be the deciding factor for long term partnership. Any delays to the show room could have catastrophic results for the image of the Volt. The competition would use any problem to spread FUD “fear, uncertainty & doubt”, as we see FORD trying to do.
http://www.forbes.com/2008/06/16/a123-altair-compact-pf-guru-in_jw_0624advisersoapbox_inl.html?partner=yahootix
Another concern I have about the decision is company ownership. Does GM really want to depend on a battery supplier with ties to the Oil industry? “Chevron” A costly last minute monkey wrench could “put the kibosh on” the entire project.
I have faith GM will leave no stone unturned, and come 2010 we’ll see the Chevy Volt on the road.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 8:55 am
This is essentially no news. I think GM should give each of the two companies a portion of the contract. If volume is what I expect it to be in 2012 and on, they are going to need both companies working in plants located close to production facilities. GM will need multiple production facilities to product the Volt and its siblings.
All I can say is: Go GM and Go, Go, Go Volt.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Of course KTN is going to say Conti has a good chance! As a recent former employee of Conti working with GM, I believe GM is going to pick the cheaper battery pack no matter what and MAKE the supplier meet the spec regardless if the supplier is making a profit or not…..
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Lutz clearly said that one of the two suppliers has a lower risk. I’m thinking they’ll go with LG Chem.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:28 am
At this point no one really knows GM’s plans, but we all know the battery is the weak point in the future production of the Volt and its siblings. If GM picks just one of these companies, they risk having manufacturing or labor problems that may stop production of the batteries. It just seems wise to me to have two suppliers capable of making and supplying a battery meeting GM’s requirements. As future siblings of the Volt come to production, GM could have adequate battery capacity to handle the volume.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:33 am
But, what do we know. GM has to be thinking about these things. They are not existing in a vacuum any more. They have this site to keep them informed on our needs, whatever those are. I feel sure GM will tell us of their battery production plans when they are ready.
With all the business it seems A123 is lining up, it would seem they are going to be busy whether they get any of the GM business or not. I don’t know much about Continental’s (LG Chem) current or future business. Does any one have any info about that?
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:44 am
#12 Jeff M:
God send that it shall be true.
#15 Morgan:
Amen on the Battle.
#25 Dave G: Every litle bit helps. Also, see #12.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:51 am
N. Riley #47
To be informed on Conti here is the link toward their homepage :
http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/com/en/continental/portal/general/home/index_en.html
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:55 am
This is a serious question. Not just throwing something out to be a pain in the neck.
Why doesn’t GM attempt to team up with Mitsu…or deal directly with their joint venture over at Lithium Energy Japan and just buy the Li-Ion cells that are already field tested. I’ve not heard of GM even attempting to reach out to anyone else to see if it is more logical to co-venture and/or simply purchase the packs.
Production begins in a few months at LEJ, and first year roll is pegged at 200,000 cells, (aprox 88 cells to a 16 kWh pack), so next year’s run should be 2,300 packs.
http://lithiumenergy.jp/jp/
Final initial pack cost is estimated at $5,000, which makes sense, seeing how they are selling the finished product at 25K.
Seems like all this battery stuff is a distraction and they are taking a unecessary risk on success…and it is clearly affecting their anticipated production deadlines.
I don’t know, maybe they have tried. It would be a interesting interview to just see the thought process behind the initial decision to go it alone. Did they just want to fly solo, or was it forced upon them?
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:56 am
#49 Jean-Charles
Thanks for the link. I will take a look.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:07 am
After reviewing Continental’s web-site, I find they are a much more diverse company than I previously thought. It was interesting. Thanks, Jean-Charles.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:12 am
#50 Statik
It could have been several reasons, the least of which may have been lack of knowledge about battery companies. GM may have approached a number of companies and was not able to secure help in the way they felt was needed. We will probably never know, unless Bob Lutz writes an autobiography. That could prove to be an interesting read.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:20 am
#52 N Riley
“We will probably never know, unless Bob Lutz writes an autobiography. That could prove to be an interesting read.”
Wow, that door is soooo wide open.
Should I? Nah.
/fish in a barrel
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:34 am
#46 N Riley says: “… but we all know the battery is the weak point in the future production of the Volt and its siblings.”
I disagree. The weak point will be software. This is why Tesla was built in Silicon Valley. The software to control each subsystem will be complex enough, but the interaction between subsystems will make it very complex.
There are also issues to iron out in heating and air conditioning. Even the chassis could have issues, especially given that battery servicing requires a huge t-shaped hole in the bottom of the car.
As Bob Lutz says in the previous article,
“…Trust me, the battery will not delay the car.”
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:37 am
I would imagine that GM wants to perform “autopsies” on test mule batteries before awarding a contract, and the more time for testing, the more that will be revealed about the durability of the batteries.
Hopefully both companies’ batteries will work, and GM can ramp up production quickly, knowing that they have redundant suppliers.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:38 am
#54 Statik
I don’t know why you shouldn’t. Nothing has stopped you in the past. Go ahead and say what you were thinking. You know, I bet you and Bob Lutz would be good friends. Now, before you say anything, that does not mean anything bad. I just mean two great guys like you two would probably hit it off.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:43 am
#55 Dave G
I meant that in the production run of the Volt and its siblings the battery production to keep up with demand and the dependence on one company if something prevents battery production. I know about software, since I am in that business. Those problems will be ironed out fairly quickly and patched in the field as problems occur. I was primarily considering supply of needed batteries if the only supplier had a manufacturing problem or a labor problem, for instance.
I might add, that being located in Silicon Valley does not guarantee quality software. Plus, quality software is available else where.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:49 am
#56 Ross
“Hopefully both companies’ batteries will work, and GM can ramp up production quickly, knowing that they have redundant suppliers.”
Unless GM gives both companies a portion of the contract, the losing company will not ramp up for production just in case a redundant supplier is needed. They would only build manufacturing facilities for actual production contracts. Not for “hope for future business”. At least, that is the way I see it. Redundancy means both companies have contracts for their part of the “pie”.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
N Riley, #52
Thanks N. I was reading the last study June 27 by conti, very interresting about the acceptance of electric and hybrid vehicles in the population.
Here is the link, and it seems that we must educate a lot of people :
http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/com/en/continental/portal/themes/press_services/press_releases/others/pr_2008_06_27_hybridumfrage_en.html
Hope that helps
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
>> Plus, quality software is available else where.
I strongly agree with you, N Riley.
Sincerely,
Mike-o-Matic
Quietly producing quality software in Wisconsin since 1992!
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
#20 Jack Daniels
The ICE drives the motor and charges the battery pack. The battery pack is not needed to drive the volt. It would be possible to make a volt without the li-ion batteries.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
#58 N Riley:
How do you know that the electric motor supplier won’t have issues meeting the production demand? What makes the battery different than any other part in this regard?
We know that the Li/Ion cell manufacturing plants in China (A123) or South Korea (LG) have the capacity to meet the Volt’s demand (see Lyle’s previous articles on this site about this very subject).
Are you suspicious that the battery pack assembly will have supply issues?
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
#3 Jeff
Just pick both of them…
Ditto. Two sources are better than one. Just submit the same requirements to each company. Assuming their individual battery chemistries can both last the required length of time and their prices are similar, I say go with both of them and be done with it.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
I have li ion battery packs from DeWalt, Milwalkee Tools and Black and Decker. Two of them have A123 batteries in them and the other is not anywhere as good as the A123 batteries. I use the batteries to power electric planes. The A123 batteries are the only ones so far that have shown they can last. The technology was invented at MIT and is patented. It is revolutionary. I absoutely want A123 batteries in my electric car and will accept no substutites. (and yes, I have no spell checker)
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
#63 Dave G
Not suspicious, just seems like a weak link. I agree any part of the Volt coming from an outside supplier could be considered a weak link. But, don’t you think there are multiple suppliers that could supply electric motors on short notice. The battery is just the biggest new part that could be sourced out to a single supplier, thereby making it a potential problem.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
#65 Len
Firefox has a built in spell checker. It works great and is better than Internet Explorer, IMO. I use it on about 6 computers. I also use Internet Explorer occasionally. Firefox underlines a misspelled word. If you right click on the word, it gives possible spellings with the top choice usually the one you need. Of course, if you misspell it really bad, it may not know what word you need. It works great if you get even close in spelling. I use it all the time on this site. Even then I may miss the fact that Firefox has pointed out a misspelled word. It is free to download and use. Google “Firefox”.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Whoever gets the battery contract (and I hope for both), I would expect them to build plants in the U.S. to meet demand and keep shipping cost down.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Dave G # 55
“I disagree. The weak point will be software. This is why Tesla was built in Silicon Valley. The software to control each subsystem will be complex enough, but the interaction between subsystems will make it very complex.”
*** *** ***
Very good point. Any wonder why Zielinski was replaced by Farah as chief engineer? Farah was responsible for system integration and controls for the EV-1. No small task, but Farah and his team are up to it. This is another reason why these silly arguments stating that if GM went w/ NiMh the Volt could be out this fall are baseless.
(Quote)
June 30th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Mike-o-Matic #61: Agreed!
And how about – Also producing quality software from Youngstown, Ohio since May 1, 1980!!!
(Quote)
July 4th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Cobasys is a joint venture between Chevron Technology Ventures LLC, a subsidiary of Chevron Corporation (NYSE: CVX) and Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. (NASDAQ: ENER).
http://www.a123systems.com/#/news/news7
(Quote)