AND 
GM Marching to a New Beat: Expect Mutiple Volt Versions
With SUVs fast becoming obsolete and Americans making the Europe-like shift to small cars in the face of unyieldingly high gas prices, GM has to act fast to adapt to this new marketplace.
Obviously the Chevy Volt is the key in this regard but its still 28 months away.
Per a new report GM now plans to bring its newly designed and publicly voted for Chevy Beat to the U.S. market. This is a small car (just 32 inches longer than the Smart) in the mini class, and able to get 40 mpg. While pricing isn’t known, GM vice-char Bob Lutz has previously stated cars in this class could start out at $10,000.
Insiders also suggest GM may roll out a diminutive pickup truck similar to the Montana which is currently sold in South America.
In another remarkable clue, the report quotes an outside expert as saying "the Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine."
Clearly there are massive internal GM shifts underway moving engineers away from building SUVs to building cars, and while the Volt sounded like a great idea when the concept wast first announced at $60 a barrel oil, they couldn’t have predicted it would take on this importance so soon.
Source (Bloomberg )
Popularity: 6% [?]
Related posts:
- No to Beat But Yes to Trax or Groove: GM US Subcompact Within 2 Years
- How the Chevy Volt is Expected to Beat the 100 MPG Designation
- Lutz: Volt Battery Suppliers are in a Horse Race and Expect 100,000 in sales by 2012
- Should GM Skip the Volt and Just Make More Efficient Gas Cars?
- Is GM Building the Volt Purely for Political Reasons?
(7 votes, average: 4.57 out of 5) 
Loading ...
133 Responses to “GM Marching to a New Beat: Expect Mutiple Volt Versions”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- GM Orders Enough Hitachi Lithium-ion Cells for 100,000 Hybrid Cars
- Toyota Aggressively Patent Protects Prius, GM Doing Same With Volt
- GM Advanced Battery Lab Tour w/ Video Part II
- GM Asks Bankruptcy Court to Approve Formation of New GM
- NUMMI No More: Has GM Said No-Thanks to GM-Branded Prius?
- Toyota’s New President to Continue Focus on Hybrid Rather than Electric Cars
- Voltec Could go Mainstream in 5 to 6 Years
- GM Will Build New Yet-to-be Revealed Subcompact Car in Michigan, Hopes to Sell More Than 100,000 Annually
- Chevy Volt Integration Vehicle Update
- Chat Live with Andrew Farah, Chevy Volt Chief Engineer Right Here: 4PM EDT
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Corp.
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Back to Top
July 4th, 2008 at 7:13 am
I’d buy one to tide me over til the Volt comes…but only if it has proper crumple zones (unlike the STUPID car, I mean SMART car).
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:25 am
National speed limit pushed as gas saver
cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/03/warner.speed.limit.ap
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:25 am
In the original from AP, which I can’t quote without going into moderation (four times). It says basically that it is built for other markets and might be rolled out later in US.
This bloomberg article was written off the back of the AP article, and has a different spin entirely. It totally ignores the fact the platform DOES NOT pass US regulations and has to be re-engineered. This is not pro-active GM thinking, it’s reactive, as in ‘OMG what can we get into the market quick’ (It’s still a good idea, and their best short term option to their small efficient car crisis)
EDIT: Oh yes I can. W00t! I have learned how to beat the moderation! Huzzah! Quote and link to follow:
“The Beat, to be built in South Korea, will be rolled out in other global markets faster than it would be in the U.S., Allen said. He did not know when the car might be sold elsewhere or in the U.S.
The car still must be engineered to meet U.S. safety and emissions standards, he said.
GM unveiled the Beat with two other ultra-small cars as concepts at auto shows last year, saying the trio was designed to attract young buyers in urban markets around the globe.”
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080703/gm_mini_car.html?.v=2
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:28 am
It may have been “not intended for North America” but it may well make it here after all.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:37 am
Side note:
As far as I recall from last years auto show the Beat is to be made under the ‘Daewoo’ banner in South Korea. I believe that it is the same plant that is having all the union problems and work stoppages.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINSEO33549120080704?rpc=44
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:58 am
Perhaps they should convert one of the existing truck plants to make the beat here.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:59 am
This car is the Chevy WTCC Ultra, I didn’t know they changed the name to Chevy Beat.
Nice sporty looking ride.
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/chevrolet-wtcc-ultra-concept
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:59 am
That’s all fine and dandy that GM is rolling out inexpensive gas mizers, but the next car I buy will definitely be a plug-in. I think that knowledgeable and savvy consumers, especially on this site, will settle for nothing less than a plug-in vehicle no matter how long the gap is between now and its availability. I do, however, like the idea that there will be multiple versions of the Volt available. You’re giving your customers choices. That makes me smile.
But, if you can’t plug-it in, ya won’t make me grin!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:59 am
In another remarkable clue, the report quotes an outside expert as saying “the Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine.”
Does this mean GM is hinting that the Beat may be electric or a range-extended vehicle as well? GM, MAKE THESE VEHICLES ELECTRIC!!! I’d cut you a check today for a Beat with a range of 100 miles and 80 mph. $20-25K sounds reasonable to me…
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:06 am
The biggest question is whether or not GM can aviod bankrupcy until the Volt platform becomes profitable. Even with the give backs from the unions it will be difficult selling $10,000 Chevy Beats instead of $60,000 Ecalades.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:08 am
The Beat is an interesting car. Let’s see if GM actually survives long enough to produce / bring it here. With gas soon headed to $5.00 a gallon here in the heartland, it’s too bad that GM, Ford and Chrysler haven’t seen fit to offer cars of this class. We need many more inexpensive vehicle choices.
The big problem is that “consumer protection / safety clowns” have legislated $5,000 to $10,000 into the cost of every damm car here.
But anybody who wants to can buy a motorcycle with Bonneville Speed Record Capability and wrap themselves and any passenger around a tree or a utility pole. Depending on the state, you may or may not even be required to where a helmet. Motorcycles are allowed just about everywhere except Interstate Highways.
We need to put pressure on the State / Federal Government level to establish a class of vehicles like the “Kei Cars” in Japan. People in this country should have a choice to license a small car that will allow them to drive on roads where the speed limits are say… 55 mph and under.
I myself drive 35 miles roundtrip to work each day. The posted speed limits never exceed 50 mph. I spend half of my commute time navigating through a small town.
We should have the ability to import and license Kei cars NOW.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:28 am
GM execs are finally acting like leaders, and advancing their troops on various projects that will help them maintain market share. The results are already seen in GM’s ability to suffer less severe drops in sales as their competitors, during these hard economic times.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:28 am
#1 max_headroom wrote:
“I’d buy one to tide me over til the Volt comes…but only if it has proper crumple zones”
It’s sad to see that the safety nuts have conditioned you.
#4 statik quoted:
“The car still must be engineered to meet U.S. safety and emissions standards, he said.”
Screw that. This economy is headed in an extremely bad direction.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:53 am
“The Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine,” said Hall, who studies GM’s plans for future models.
Well, lets see, I imagine millions of them coming of the line in the next 5-10 years, so its good to see GM catching up to where I’m at.
REEV or E-REV is the way forward.
I would also point out, that on a percentage basis oil is on track for $200/barrel by year end.
Dec ‘07 = $100
Jun ‘08 = $142 + 42%
Dec ‘08 = $201 + 42%
It’s amazing how the threat of Chapter 11 focuses the collective mind.
GO GM, GO Volt & siblings. hehehe
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:59 am
As I see it, a 40 mpg Beat effectively brings the price of gas back down from $4 per gal to $2 per gal over a 20 mpg Camry.
Any and all alternatives, especially affordable alternatives, to today’s crisis should be welcomed as we work our way out of this disasterous situation to affordable all electric plug in vehicles.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:06 am
Stupid expensive safety standards. It’s the 4th of July. I want to be free. I want cheap cars with low safety standards. And don’t give me any socialized medicine either. When I crash my toy car, I have insurance, it’s my choice.
What, you say my employer won’t keep paying my salary once I’m brain-damaged? And my employer-provided insurance will dump me like yesterday’s trash as soon as the COBRA period runs out? And I’ll be a burden to all of the people who still pay taxes as a I draw too little from Social Security to live more than a bare existence? Never mind.
Motorcycles allow you disable and to kill yourself, so we should replicate that experience with cars? I’ll pass. And I’d rather not pay for your disabled self either. I support the “general welfare.” Happy 4th!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:22 am
I don’t know about you but I am not dying for good gas mileage. I want my car to have a least a little thought to safety. There are still people out there that can afford to drive land yachts and it’s bad enough they will go over the top but I at least want the car to hold it’s shape on a hit.
If you want to drive a paper mache car, more power to you but sign a waiver for my car insurance first. And then double SUV insurance (just kidding).
It will take a decade to get the SUV/truck sizes down so you don’t have to buy a defensive car.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:42 am
#17 TBK,
Your assumption seems to be that bigger cars are safer. Take a look at the April Consumer Reports crash tests section. I think you’ll be surprised.
Cars that do well in crash tests are made to crumple. SUVs are generally more rigid to stand up to off-road abuse.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:42 am
GM better get it’s head out of the sand if it wants to continue to celebrate 4th of July next year! They just don’t get it. Why are they putting money into ICE? Reports are GM is bringing back the Camaro Z28. They still want the American public to be dependent on foreign oil. Wouldn’t it be awesome if GM designs a Z28 with an electric motor based on the EV1 that would compete against Tesla.
Hopefully one day we will be celebrating independence day from oil and then America will be prosperous again.
Happy 4th and God Bless America!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:45 am
GM desperately needs a tiny and inexpensive car to help with its image. This will get more people into the showrooms and can only be good for Chevy/ etc.
Go GM. Make this a fun small car with some cool features. Make it a smart choice (less $/ better car) over with SMART car.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:47 am
statik@#3
Thank you for a great job of sleuthing. Dispels some misperceptions.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:52 am
GM needs to do what it can and perhaps what it takes to survive (be profitable). Look, I too want to be safe and there is no reason small cars can’t be safe. Everybody talks about the europeans and the cars available to them. Is everyone forgetting that they too want to be safe and just because cars manufactured for europe don’t meet US standards doesn’t mean they are not safe. They are, Volvo and Saab have been building some of the safest vehicles in the world for many years; long before Detroit was legislated into having to do so!
It’s the damn ambulance chasers in this country that have driven the safety issues in the US and it’s well past time for some push back.
A law of physics! If a vehicle weighing 10,000 lbs travelingat 60 mph hits a vehicle weighing 4000 lbs it’s over. Nothing you can do to engineer safety into that 4000 lb vehicle which is going to keep the 10,000 lb vehicle from creaming it.
Bring on the beat. It’s not the final solution but it’s a step in the right direction (finally).
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Smart car? The version sold here is no gas mizer like the European models. #1 max mentioned crumple zone, with such small cars there is not enough mass to provide for a crumple zone so they wrap a cage around it an put airbags inside. I saw the crash tests and the Smart bounced around like a basket ball, the passengers were protected but whiplash type injuries looked like a possibility. Will folks in small cars have to wear helmets and HANS devices to be safe?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:55 am
#16 MarkinWI
Ahhh, so you’re AGAINST CHOICE NOW and you have decided FOR ME what is safe FOR ME and MY NEEDS. Why don’t you try telling the motorcycle lobby that they need to install seatbelts?
Socialized medicine? A proven joke. The best change would be what Romney signed into law in Massachusetts.
General Welfare? Excuse me “General” but just WHO decides that? Let me guess, it’s YOU ! You’re hunched over a laptop in a Starbucks in a stronghold of democracy.
Location: Madison, Wisconsin.
HA,HA,HA
Have a Happy 4th of July everyone !
(That goes double for you Socialists)
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Dave G @18.
Sorry, I should have been clearer. My assumption is that a 4000lb+ vehicle will mangle a vehicle that had no thought to safety and survivability. No doubt you can die or survive in many different sized vehicles. My hypothetical paper mache car will likely be a death trap against an Expedition, but you could die in the Expedition too.
I am not willing to overlook personal safety to get 50MPG+ out of my car. I’ll give some of that up if I can increase my odds of surviving a rumble with another vehicle (which is likely to be some huge SUV or truck for years to come.)
The Pontiac Fiero was considered a plastic death-trap by many but in fact was only outdone in crash safety by the Volvo in it’s day. It’s possible to build a light car that gives you some protection.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:15 am
small cars are safe. The problem with the US is not that small cars are not safe-it’s that there are too many large vehicles on the road. Our large vehicles aren’t sold too much in Europe and Asia because their roads are smaller.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:15 am
“the Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine.”
That statement from the outside expert suggests to me that the batteries for the Volt are working out a lot better than people think. It sounds like they’re going to use the E-flex powertrain right away on maybe 5-6 different models besides the Volt in 2011 or so. Toyota and the rest of the competition better start think in terms of a FLEET of “series hybrids” like the Volt. They better get busy on their own series hybrids or GM is going to become THE super high tech, fuel efficient, green car company in a few years.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Damn socialists!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:24 am
This car is a necessity for GM. Look at the latest hybrid sales figures. Seems Toyota cannot make enough batteries for Prius even though it has a tiny battery (about 2 kWh). Imagine scaling production of Volt and its 16 kWh battery!!! Clearly Volt supply will be limited for some time, at least 2010-2013.
In the meantime they need cheaper alternatives such as this model. In fact, it would be wonderful if they used Volt tek in it, everything short of batteries. Using electronic stearing, start/stop when idle, etc. could bring incremental efficiency improvements without an expensive and supply limited battery. Thus they would have a 40-50 mpg car sooner than Volt and offer some competition to Toyota and Honda.
Needless to say, this car should have the 1.4L engine (with turbo or without).
Regarding safety, as more and more bigger vehicles are spending less time on the road due to fuel prices then safety of these smaller models is improved as most other vehicles on the road will tend to decrease in size. So safety is not a problem.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:40 am
National speed limit pushed as gas saver -
“Sen. John Warner, R-Virginia, asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman to look into what speed limit would provide optimum gasoline efficiency given current technology.”
Umm… that would be “parked”, Sen. Warner.
At what speed would an electric car achieve optimal gasoline efficiency?
If Sen. Warner wants to improve our quality of life, he needs to get his head out of the oil barrel and concern himself with Virginia’s tobacco crop.
Anyway - HAPPY 4TH!!!!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:41 am
STOP GAP
STOP GAP
STOP GAP
GM was fiercely against hybrids. And that was the song they sung in retaliation to Prius. Wow! Have the tables ever turned now.
Hopefully, those here still fighting other vehicles using battery-packs will finally figure out what the true competition actually is.
It’s the surge of non-hybrid vehicles to worry about, not hybrids like Prius. And this report clearly shows where concern should be focused.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Hey all… I have a Malibu Maxx that has been set up so that I average about 30 MPG (US) and I have a large motorcycle that averages about 47 MPG (US).
And I am still waiting for a picture of the Volt production vehicle..
You want better gas milage… Talk to all the managers of large citys and towns that have traffic lights and get them to coordinate them so that if you get a green light and are travelling the speed limit, you should be able to get ALL the green lights on that street or avenue instead of having to stop at every other traffice light… what a waste of gas in stopping and going 8 times in a 2 mile trip.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 11:03 am
ALL cars of ALL sizes and ALL shapes are safe….assuming ALL drivers are safe, careful and considerate drivers. You know what happens when you assume….
I ride a motorcycle 50 miles every day and will continue to do so even after I get my Volt and even after gas hits $10 gallon. My motorcycle gets 45 MPGs and saves me at least an hour every day on my commute.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 11:03 am
I kind of like the look of that Chevy Beat’s headlights and front end in the picture for this post. It gives the car a feisty, predatory look like a young lion on the prowl on the Kalahari desert in Africa or something.
I wouldn’t mind if the Volt had headlights similar to that … only a bit smaller in size and less dramatic. Similar to a European sports sedan or the 2008 Corvette.
http://www.motorauthority.com/wp-content/uploads/BMW/odds/2007/BMW_3_v.jpg
I think a lot of people like their car to have a fierce look to it … a bit like a leopard from Africa or something. It gets people’s attention … especially when you see one coming up behind you in your rear view mirror.
From what I’ve been hearing, the Volt front end might look a bit like a Saab 9-3. I think Saab cars look alright. Not TOO exotic looking, not too generic looking.
http://blogs.cars.com/photos/2008_saab_93/2008saab931.jpg
Like a good painter, a good car designer knows what to add and what to leave alone. Sometimes just a slight variation on a classic, popular look is what they should do instead of going overboard to make the car look unique. It’s like clothes in a way. Most people don’t really want to stand out in the crowd TOO much unless you are a multimillionaire who is craving attention or something. I like subtle, stylish, sophisticated design in cars … not too boring but not too exotic either.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am
#19 Antranig Van:
You might be onto something here. It wouldn’t be that hard for GM to build an E-REV sports car. The margins on sports cars are much better, so the initial costs of going E-REV would be easier for GM to swallow. The ability to run on gasoline, E85, or electricity would give it a natural advantage over the Tesla Roadster.
A 2-seat variation of the Volt with a 32KWh battery pack and a 240KW electric motor would be FAST. You wouldn’t need a larger ICE, since the average power would be the same, but doubling the size of the battery and electric motor would double the peak horsepower for acceleration. GM could charge a lot more for that kind of car.
Oh yeah, you would also get 80 miles of all electric range.
I would guess $60K base sticker for this type of car would be profitable for GM, and they would sell a fair amount of them at that price.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 11:17 am
MarkinWI # 16,
Motorcycles allow you disable and to kill yourself, so we should replicate that experience with cars? I’ll pass. And I’d rather not pay for your disabled self either. I support the “general welfare.” Happy 4th!
No machine can be sufficiently well engineered to protect its occupants from idiocy. Cars have been involved in the killing and maiming of several of my friends and acquaintances. Good engineering can soften the blow, but the “cars safe, motorcycles dangerous” dichotomy is naive. Very naive. The only way to be safe is to be aware and conscientious.
And, yes, I’ve operated and dinged both cars and motorcycles. Both are dangerous. I’ve also nearly been shot in what could have been a stupid party accident (my former-girlfriend from high-school times didn’t know what she was doing with a gun in her hand, and it went off accidentally). Cars scare me more than either guns or motorcycles because a) people think that they’re safe and b) idiots operate them with impunity and c) cars (and a bus, in one case) have been involved with the deaths of more of my friends than either guns or motorcycles put together. With guns, at least, the average person agrees they’re dangerous, and treats them with care.
The engineering that goes into making cars crashworthy is truly a marvel of the modern world — but no amount of engineering can overcome stupidity.
Sorry, your naive faith in safety-engineering struck a serious chord there. Please, please, please take the Motorcycle Safety Foundation’s Basic Rider Course, or some Private Pilot, training to get some perspective on what you’re really doing when you get behind the wheel.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 11:55 am
#25 TBK says: “It’s possible to build a light car that gives you some protection.”
Yes, I agree. In fact, there’s an extreme example of this shown in the Nova “Car of the Future” program:
pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ht/tm/3507.html?site=22&pl=wmp&rate=hi&ch=4
(due to moderation, you’ll have to copy and paste this link to you address bar)
About 3/4 of the way through this chapter, they show a Formula-1 race car hit a wall at 160 MPH. The car literally disintegrated, but since they used a strong carbon fiber cage around the driver, she walked away relatively unharmed. They even show an interview with her right after the crash.
So the secret seems to be a strong reinforced cage around the driver, but have the rest of the car crumple or disintegrate to help absorb impact.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Oooh 40mpg in a tiny car, what a revolution! (midsized 2009 Jetta diesel will get mid-high 40s on the highway and be safe) In Europe cars that size get 70mpg. Why don’t they let us have those? Come on GM get real and give us real fuel economy! Europe has had 60+mpg cars for years and you continue to tell us its impossible.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
#22 250volts wrote:
“It’s the damn ambulance chasers in this country that have driven the safety issues in the US and it’s well past time for some push back.”
AMEN !
And to think that some people actually believed that John Edwards was qualified to lead this country boggles my mind.
#28 law wrote:
“Damn socialists!”
Double AMEN ! Damn them all to hell !
#36 Grouch
Thanks for sharing. Sorry to hear about the loss of your friends.
On the subject of Kei cars, I happen to live in a midwest state where licensing them can actually be done. I know this because my brother recently licensed a 94 Suzuki Carry Mini-Truck. He uses it to drive the 3 miles on county roads over to his business. It gets 45+ mpg and is 4 wheel drive. He paid $3600 for it. The small cargo bed is big enough to load up a quad runner using ramps. The guy he bought it from is bringing them over in container loads. Many are already spoken for by the time they are delivered here. In order to enter the country, a speed restrictor is installed back in Japan. Of course, my brother took his off when he licensed it. His Suzuki can do about 60 mph. Most people are using them for hunting purposes (hauling deer in the fall). I’m told the importer has brought over a small number of 4/5 passenger mini-vans. That’s what I’m really wanting to get.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
GM needs to do this and other fuel efficient cars and truck regardless of the impending Volt introduction in 28 months, more or less. They as many as they can introduce over the next 6 months or less. I drove a 2008 Chevy Malibu LTZ yesterday. It was really nice. Had a 2.4L four cylinder for 32 mpg. Price was $28,000+. I will take a look at what Chevy introduces over the next 6 months, then decide what to buy until the Volt is available.
Go GM and Go, Go, Go Volt.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
______________________________________________________
July 4th, 2008
Happy Independence Day!
I wish a Happy Independence Day to Lyle, Bob Lutz, the GM-VOLT Team, and all you regular readers and contributors to this important VOLT blog site.
America declared independence from the King’s tyranny in 1776. Much of what America sought to bring to an end by way of the Declaration of Independence was the economic tyranny of the King’s taxes. These foreign imposed taxes robbed the American people from a reasonable pursuit of happiness. The King’s taxes in effect had put American’s into economic servitude; “the patient sufferance of these Colonies”.
Ironically, modern America has allowed itself to fall pray to a new King’s tax (OPEC). Every time we fill up our cars with gas we are voluntarily paying a foreign King’s tax; literally. Like in 1776, those dollars we are today sending to enrich the kingdoms of foreign lands need to instead stay in America to enrich America. Some of you may read this post and think it is over stated but if you put the math to it you will find that the self imposed tyranny of America relying on foreign sourced energy is as much economically depriving to America as was the 1776 Kings tax.
Like in 1776, there is today a revolution afoot by ordinary Americans that will bring an end to this new King’s tax by abolishing America’s reliance of foreign sourced energy.
The power of one.
______________________________________________________
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Let me guess 38.Brandon your talking about diesel cars that get 60 plus not gasoline cars. Toyota can’t even get over 36 mpg on a non hybrid.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
#32 Ray,
“Talk to all the managers of large citys and towns that have traffic lights and get them to coordinate them”
I’ll drink to that! We could save huge amounts of gas if lights were timed on main arteries. Years ago in Cleveland, I remember the lights on Carnagie (a main artery from East side to downtown) were timed at 32 mph. Each light had a little sign stating such under it. As you might expect, some people raced to each light and slamed on their brakes, waiting for the light to turn green. Most, however, played the speed.
Happy 4th. And lets not forget what this holiday is about.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
#43
In Canada in the big cities they have what they call “The Green Wave” where all the lights are timed to a speed of aboot 27mph and it works GREAT! There are signs telling when it’s in effect. You can zip through a large metropolis like Vancouver virtually without stopping. I remember having to stop at every 8th or 10th light so the cross traffic could go.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I expect a Volt-SS with a more powerful motor that gets sub 6sec 0-60. A123 batteries have power to spare, not sure about the LG ones.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I really like the Volt-SS idea.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Quite a few things to address
1) “In another remarkable clue, the report quotes an outside expert as saying “the Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine.”"
I hope its a complete e-flex fleet. Maybe they realized their entire line can be converted for cheaper than expected - even with limited battery it would be like a hybrid upgrade (in 2010) w/ added range later on down the line. (2015, 2010? battery replacement)
2) Don’t mention diesel when others are talking about gas.
Diesel as a fuel has 1.5x the energy. (not exact number, but close)
It is NOT equal to gas.
3) The MPG system is very misleading.
In Canada, we use the metric system (as you probably know).
Here, they advertise in MPG for a few reasons.
a) they can claim “awesome” MPG because we also use the imperial gallon, not the US gallon (at least the emissions/fuel economy ratings do)
b)because of this, anyone born >30 years ago who learned the US system thinks they are equivalent - they hear 30MPG for a car (US number) and then they see their “large” chrysler advertised at 35mpg and think “wow! I’ll save TONS of gas!”
What they don’t know is your 30-35 MPG car (i.e. cavalier/sunfire/cobalt is really 45 in imperial ratings.)
Using the metric system (or really, inverting the MPG number - 1 divided by MPG) will tell you how much fuel you are really using - rather than base it on how far you go based on fuel, it makes more sense to see how much fuel you can use based on a certain distance - you’ll see what I mean.
Using L/100k (because my excel spreadsheet is set up that way :))
20MPG = 11.77 L/ 100k - you use just under 12L of gas to go 100km, about 60 miles.
30 MPG = 7.85 L/100k
40 MPG = 5.87 L/100k
Seeing the amount of fuel used, you know the exact difference - rather than saying “I can go twice as far per gallon” - you know how much fuel you use to go a certain distance, so you can say “I use 6L less gas to go the same distance now.”
All in all, it measures the same thing - its just a different way of looking at things.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Grouch @ 36
Sorry, cars are much safer than motorcycles. Here are passenger car, truck and motorcycle occupant fatality rates per vehicle miles traveled, 2005, from NHTSA FARS. All numbers indicate fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles travelled.
Large Trucks: 0.36
Light Trucks: 1.14
Passenger Cars: 1.14
Motorcycles: 42.27
Motorcycles are 37 times more deadly than passenger cars. Interesting that light trucks and passenger cars come out the same.
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/TSF05DATASUMMARY.PDF
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
…the report quotes an outside expert as saying “the Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine.”
OK… So, what’s an “outside expert” and why should I believe anything that he or she says?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
#48 MDDave,
I’m not surprised that light trucks and passenger cars have the same fatality rate. This is in line with crash test results.
Bottom line: Bigger cars & SUVs aren’t safer. Safety has more to do with the individual vehicle’s design.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
In general terms, and all things being equal, bigger cars are safer cars because they provide the most crushable space between you and the safety cage. We could argue all day long, but in reality what I have said is accurate. Having said that, we do know from sources like Consumer Reports, and National Highway Saftey, that not all cars perform equally. What we sometimes fail to consider though is that crash testing cars are generally judged by cars only in their respective classes. So even though a car may test very well in its category, what happens when the 6,000lb SUV that tested “excellent” in crash test collides with the 2,500lb Sub Compact that tested “excellent” too. As reality teaches us, physics are not forgiving. Just some thought on the subject.
Hawk
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Happy Independence day.
Good news about the Chevy Beat and multiple verions of Volt.
I still think cheap ethanol is the most important need that needs to be met. In the interest of National security, of course. I know GM is striving in that direction, but it truly is of national importance to accelerate its use. Hopefully are new president(McCain/Obama), not to mention governors, will understand that need. peace
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Furthering 47 canehdian’s comments:
mpg = 235.2146/ ltrs per 100 km
US gal = 1.2 Imp gals
5 l/100 km is the reference sweet spot for comparing european car performance since that’s roughly equivalent to 47 mpg.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
#51 firehawk72:
How do you explain that fatality rates between Light Trucks and Passenger Cars are identical?
See post #48 from MDDave for details.
When you look at real data, big cars aren’t safer.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
GM and lots of other people like ethanol. I have even heard they are going to try to make it out of garbage. If you look back to WWII you will find that the Germans ran their fighter planes on methanol. When they started running short of gas they switched over to methanol made from garbage. The process is old and well known. Please do not tell me that methanol can kill you—-so can gas. An engine set up to run on ethanol will also run on methanol. I am sure that with the new flex fuel systems that should not be a problem. I know there are problems with methanol. The Indy 500 and many other high power races have run methanol for years. They did that for a reason. It is a better fuel if done right.
Take Care
Arch
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
“the Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine.”
I sure hope one variation is a crossover with all wheel drive. I can park it next to my Volt.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
One thing I can say about the Beat is that it has enough bad-boy to knock the geek out of it’s small compact size. It’s also considerably larger and more utilitarian than the Smart car. I saw a Smart car parked in a Home Cheap-o parking lot just last weekend and quite frankly I don’t know how you could even bring home groceries in it.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
#45 voltman says: “I expect a Volt-SS with a more powerful motor that gets sub 6sec 0-60. A123 batteries have power to spare, not sure about the LG ones.”
If the battery pack is able to supply more than enough power to the electric motor over all operating conditions, then why skimp on the motor to begin with? Why not make a bigger electric motor standard?
The electric motor is small, light, and relatively cheap. In particular, the induction type motors used on the Tesla, EV-1, and Volt scale very well. For example, the motor used in the Tesla Roadster delivers 250hp, weighs only 70 pounds, and isn’t that expensive. In addition, larger induction motors are actually more efficient than smaller ones. This is the exact opposite of gas engines.
So it seems that giving the Volt a larger electric motor would be a fairly easy, cheap, and efficient thing for GM to do. With this in mind, I have to wonder why GM wouldn’t use a bigger motor to begin with.
I suspect that there are some areas of operation where the batteries only supply the 120KW max of the motor. In other words, I still suspect that a larger electric motor would require larger batteries to supply it.
By the way, the one great thing about the serial hybrid (a.k.a. E-REV or REEV), is that increasing peak power for acceleration doesn’t require a larger gas engine, since the range extender only supplies average horsepower.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Kent #33 Would you consider buying an electric motorcycle?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Skip #59
I would definitely buy an electric motorcycle as long as I can get it up to highway speeds and still have enough torque to get me out of a sudden deadly situation. There’s a motorcycle saying that goes, “When in doubt, give it gas!”. Also, the price needs to be reasonable.
Do you know of any company producing electric motorcycles?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
#55 Arch,
I don’t really care if it’s ethanol or methanol, as long as a flex fuel vehicle can run on either one.
In my mind, the real issue here is getting more flex fuel vehicles on the road. Once the percentage of flex fuel vehicles reaches a critical mass, gas station owners will have a real reason to sell E85. After this, ethanol and methanol production will ramp up.
Once a clear demand like this exists, people will find new ways of making ethanol and methanol that are more viable and cost effective than what we have now.
So the key to getting the ball rolling is to create the demand by getting a lot more flex fuel vehicles on the road. Right now, the percentage of flex fuel cars is relatively small.
It only costs car manufacturers $100 per vehicle to add flex fuel capability. With this in mind, I advocate a federal mandate that all cars be flex fuel capable within a short time period. The cost for this is relatively cheap, and it will definitely get the ball rolling. There would be no more chicken-and-egg discussions. With real demand like this, there would be no excuses for companies not to make and sell E85.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Arch #55
I don’t know why we’re not using more bio-fuels either. One of the problems with methanol is that it has even less energy than ethanol, 63K btu/gal compared to 84K for ethanol. Better than both is Butanol, which has 110K btu/gal and is less corrosive than either methanol or ethanol and can travel in pipelines. The problem with butanol is that currently the specific yield is so low that it would be tough to make it affordable. However, since it can run in engines designed for gasoline w/o modification, it could be used in the future.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
mien green, you have the conversion written wrong. 1.0 Imperial gallon = 1.2 US gallon. One US gallon = 3.79 liters, one Imperial gallon = 4.5 liters.
European mileage ratings are usually based on imperial gallons, so an identical vehicle that is rated at 50 mpg in Europe will get 41.65 mpg in the US, if rated under identical conditions. Many people will simply convert kilometers into miles, but will ignore the larger imperial gallon. However, the US has more strict emission requirements and additional bumper impact and safety requirements (additional weight) that will lower the mpg rating even more. The method used to determine the mpg rating can also vary. For instance, what vehicle speed was used to determine the highway rating? In the US today, your vehicle is much more likely to meet or exceed the rated highway mpg than those early EPA ratings that were based on a steady 55 mph on a level roadway. An aggressive driver that cruises at 80 mph will likely see less than the EPA rating. As they say, “your mileage may vary”.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Since this article talks about the Beat, I was wondering if anyone has taken a look at fuel economy in the UK? And then asked: Why not here? Why do they tell us it’ll be years when they’re making them already?
Have a look at the VCA site. Use the Imperial gallon, select a manufacturer, and select 41-50mpg.
http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/fuelConSearch.asp
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
DaveG #61
Excellent ideas, I never thought of that or heard that stated in the media. Again, a tax credit could be used as incentive. This change over wouln’t be biased against new cars that are flex fuel either as both need the same fuel. A win-win for all, except oil companies.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Kent # 60 Short answer no, I do not know of an electric motorcycle like you describe. However they are coming, just like E- cars. There is one nice looking “scooter type” that will do 60 MPH. It is the “Vectrix” and can be found here: http://www.vectrix.com/portal/
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
There’s a magnetic motorcycle from Japan.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Re GM’s financial status:
“Now’s the time to buy”. Well, maybe not, but you sure couldn’t lose much per share.
JMO,
Tag
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
#66 Skip
Thanks for the link but the Vectrix won’t work for me. 90% of my riding is on the highways and I need at least 70 MPH with plenty of torque to spare.
#67 Daveo
What’s a “magnetic” motorcycle?
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
MDDave # 48,
I’m not arguing that motorcycles are safe, I’m arguing that cars are dangerous, too, and that MarkinWI is naive and dumb to put his safety completely in the hands of the people who designed his car. He has to be an aware and active participant in the process at all times.
I was trying to argue that this is true for both motorcycles and for cars — they’re both wheeled vehicles that travel at highway speeds. The car will soften the blow (as the statistics you provide (which I’ve seen before) indicate), but if he goes around driving like his 4-wheel vehicle makes him invincible, then I believe he has some unpleasant surprises coming. I fear for his safety — and for mine.
I sold my motorcycle and am not an active rider — but the lessons learned while riding remain. This “cars safe, motorcycles dangerous” slogan is just plain wrong — the statistics you raise that say “motorcycles are much more dangerous than cars” are a much better take on the issue. The problem is that MarkinWI seems to think that his car will protect him no matter what — which is wrong. Which is why I came out with my clue-by-four swinging.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
This is an interesting website about changing over used cars, which is much more exspensive. http://www.change2e85.com/servlet/StoreFront
May be better to buy a new Chevy Beat.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
#62 Grizzly and #61
Everything you stated is correct. There is another part of the equation. Methanol has a higher octane rating than ethanol which has a higher octane rating than gas used today.
Engines are more efficient at higher compression ratios. One of the reasons diesel engine are more efficient. One of the problems with gas is that as you up the compression ratio it begins to give off some nasty by products. We got rid of the high octane fuel along with high compression engines because of this problem.
Now when it comes to methanol and ethanol we need high compression engines to to take advantage of the high octane ratings of these fuels. Everybody will tell you that E85 will give you less mileage than gas. They are correct—-UNLESS you build the engine to burn ethanol. Jack up the compression ratio and it becomes more efficient and will give you the same mileage. The same goes for methanol. If you jack the compression ratio up high enough methanol is a better fuel. Thats why race cars have used it for years. The one thing that I do not know is what kind of by products are given off by ethanol and methanol with the higher compression ratios.
Take Care
Arch
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
#40 N. Riley - Glad to hear you liked the Malibu LTZ but I take it that the price was a little much? For what it’s worth, I just purchased an Aura (same thing, basically, with a little different look) that is also a 4 cylinder, & its MSRP was $22,000. I ordered it so I was able to pick what I wanted & eliminate what I didn’t. A couple of compromises - I wanted leather & power front seats. I got cloth & a power driver seat only. Wanted the 6 speed, but it was not yet available & I got a 4 speed instead. I do have a sunroof (gotta have that) & nice chrome wheel covers that look great with the silvery-blue exterior.
Real world mileage? My husband & I recently took a trip to Dallas from our home in the Austin area & got 32 on the road, 2 miles more that the EPA figures. We fought a headwind on the way home & didn’t get as much, but with normal conditions, I’d expect 30-32 easy. I get 26 in combined driving (27 when AC is off), 23-24 in town, all of which exceeds EPA.
I love the little Aura & it will do fine until time for the Volt. Go Volt!
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Arch #72
Correct you are about the compression ratio. Not sure how that would affect enrichment though.
One thing is for sure, EVs are the future (not hydrogen!) but we’re going to need an alternate liquid fuel for some time to help kill off oil. Since ethanol is the predominant bio, more and more cars will need to be made to run on it, and they’ll need to be optimized for it. Eventually as we move toward pure electrification, it’ll be used only as a range extender, and eventually not at all. This won’t happen overnight so it’s significance can’t be understated.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Okay, now I’m excited about future VOLT styling. The photo of the “Beat” is far better looking than the VOLT Concept (version 1 and version 2). Why can’t they drop in the electric powerplant, leave out the range-extending gas engine, get 25 to 30 mile range out of it as a 2-seater, and call it a day? The blurb at the top suggested a price range for the Beat at $10K. They can’t make it a VOLT Coupe and put it out for $25K ??? I think we could sell those all day long if they could. Especially if it goes 40 miles with or without gas powered range extension.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Grizzly # 74
“Correct you are about the compression ratio. Not sure how that would affect enrichment though.”
Well in the old days when I was racing we use to punch out the jets in the carb 32 to 34% when we switched from gas to methanol. The smaller jets we ran in hot daytime races and the larger ones for cooler night time races. Just what we did.
Take Care
Arch
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
#74 Grizzly says: “…but we’re going to need an alternate liquid fuel for some time to help kill off oil. … Eventually as we move toward pure electrification, it’ll be used only as a range extender, and eventually not at all.”
I think liquid fuels will be around for the rest of our lifetime.
Ulf Bossel is the head of the European Fuel Cell Forum. He is very against using Hydrogen for transportation, and he is very much for plug-in cars. Here’s a quote from his last presentation at the forum:
“Heavy duty and long distance transport by land, air and sea will be powered by ‘the last drops of oil’ or hydrocarbon biofuels”
See here for more details:
efcf.com/reports/E17.pdf
So it looks like we will have a mix of biofuel and electric transportation for the foreseeable future.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Kent
Here’s that magnetic motorcycle. It’s actually an electric magnetic-hybrid motor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUXhJZZRUIg
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
63 57silver
You’re right. My bad. I meant to swap units when I reversed the two volume types in my table to get a conversion factor greater than 1 and then promptly got confused.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Its a start just like the LI battery.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-methanol_fuel_cell
Take Care
Arch
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Well looks like both of them are in the game.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-ethanol_fuel_cell
Take Care
Arch
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
All you cagers need to respect the biker. If you can barely see a biker in your review mirror that means he can be passed you in way less than 1 second easily. Also just about every liter bike sold today can go 0 to 60 mph in less than 3 seconds without any effort. So you cagers need to realize just how extremely slow and disrespectful you really are. Most cagers are nothing more than frozen obstacles (like those orange cones) in the road to your average biker. So next time you see your friendly neighborhood biker GET OUTA THE WAY.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Grouch @ 70
I see your point. I will also add that one “problem” with the statistics from the NHTSA is that they don’t take into account the individual driver of the vehicle. For example, I’ve seen statistics — although, I don’t have a link at the moment — that show that drivers of motorcycles are several times more likely to be killed in an accident in the first 2 years of riding than after that. I probably shouldn’t generalize, but a fair number of the motorcycles that I see are driven totally recklessly — weaving in and out of traffic, passing between cars, and generally going too fast. Because motorcycles tend to attract a disproportionate number of young people, thrill seekers, and adreneline junkies, the proportion of motorcycle drivers that are reckless is probably going to exceed the proportion of passenger car drivers that are reckless, So, if you operate your motorcycle in a safe manner, you are certainly going to have a lower risk than what the statistics show because you, as a safe rider, are being lumped in with the statistics that cover the reckless people too. Although, no mater how safe you are, I still bet that motorcycles are many, many times more deadly than passenger cars…
I think this same sort effect has an impact on the light truck fatality numbers. To me, it is common sense that light trucks are going to be safer than passenger cars because of their weight and height advantage. However, being an owner of both an SUV and a passenger car, I know that I am much more likely to take the SUV when it is snowing or I know I am going to have to ford a creek, for example. Those sorts of driving decisions would probably increase the fatality rates for SUVs over passenger cars. So, if the stats for the two come out equal, which they do, I bet that there is actually a slight advantage to the SUVs due to the more extreme driving conditions that they encounter. Having said that, the difference is probably really small.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
This is a great site for fuel cell info:
http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/news1.html
MHTX.COM has a great a hydrogen fuelcell for a scooters. There has been a lot of work done at JPL, I believe, on methanol fuelcells. I forget who holds the patents now.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
CC Rider:
Those hypermilers driving those Prius cars in the HOV lane are a nightmare. My granny drives faster than those Hybrid yahoos. I think some people got their DL from a bubble gum machine or maybe a cracker jack box. The heard Woz (The Apple Computer Genius) got busted going 110 mph in a PRIUS, I didn’t realize those cars could go that fast, because I am always passing them on the roads here in Big D.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
The title of this article doesn’t match the body. I think the article title is also true though. Even the GM execs said that the e-flex platform would be used for other models and styles. Since the e-flex/volt test mules seem to be performing well, it wouldn’t surprise me to see several models quickly introduced. The Volt is the flashy hot looking first version of e-flex.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
The Chevy Beat looks like a car for teeny boppers or someone in their early 20’s.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Grouch #36. I am truly sorry about the loss of your friends and family.
You are absolutely correct. You can not build something to be idiot proof. My commute is 50 miles each way. I see idiots everyday, sometimes just by looking in the mirror.
[Reply]
July 4th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
I think the Volt and the Beat are great ideas, but here’s my problem with both of them… they don’t exist. As far as the Beat goes, having a car that you cant sell in the US until it is totally re-engineered to meet US emissions and safety standards is the same as having nothing at all. It’s literally back to the drawing-board and start over from square one, but everybody’s acting like we’ll be seeing the Beat here anytime soon. It will be many, many years- if ever. Regarding the Volt, I think it would be exactly what the US needs IF it can be priced affordably so that middle-class and working-class people who currently drive Hyundai Accents and Kia’s could afford it. But they are talking about $35,000- $40,000 per vehicle! That means that it is not affordable by most buyers of automobiles in this country. If they can’t produce them to be sold at a much more reasonable price ( IE. half that much ), then the Volt comes down to being nothing more than a politically-correct, hyped-up gimmick that will never be sold in large enough numbers to have any real effect on the environment or the average American’s fuel consumption. Rich people will be able to afford them to assauge their enviro-guilt. Whoopty-freakin’-doo. The rest of us will have no chance of being able to afford them. I WANT to buy a reasonably-priced plug-in hybrid. I really do. But I don’t see anybody selling one now, or anytime soon. It’s really, really frustrating that the Auto-makers simply are totally and completely inept at giving the American consumer what they want and the country needs. We need cheap, plug-in hybrids NOW, and all I see from GM is a bunch of smoke and mirrors about imaginary, yet-to-be-totally-redesigned Beat’s and 40K guiltmobiles for rich people. I hope GM does go bankrupt. The idiots don’t deserve to be in business.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Ty@89,
Thanks for your uplifting remarks. As with many early versions of technology, they often start expensive and unavailable to the masses. As they reach ecconomies of scale, the price most often comes down so that the great unwashed can afford them. If you’re still believing that the Volt is all smoke and mirrors, either you are new here, or haven’t been paying attention. I share your frustration that it’s taking time for this to happen, but It sounds like you’d prefer that the company which is trying to actually market the vehicle we need to go belly up - since the idiots don’t deserve to be in business. Might you instead have a solution?
Be well,
Tag
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 12:21 am
I am amazed that in a web site that promotes the Volt some contributors argue about ethanol vs. methanol. Either fuel is fools’ errand. We should realize that these fuels especially ethanol are the wrong solutions in the first place. The future is electrification of transportation whatever methods evolve for generating electricity for the grid. Harvesting ethanol is crazy considering the amount of government subsidy. The cheapest range extender is going to be gasoline the current high prices not withstanding. Once the Volt type vehicle appears on the market in significant quantities, gasoline demand can be curtailed and the price will moderate. No need for exotic fuels.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Tag- Sorry to be the gloomy gus, but GM has a history of being full of it when it comes to electric vehicles. When I see them actually selling the Volt at a price that working class people can afford, then it will cease to be smoke and mirrors and I will admit that I was wrong. Until then, it’s all just talk and promises. 35K-40K cars that only a select few can afford are irrelevant, and are not what we need. Ditto imaginary, redesigned Beats that simply don’t exist except in GM’s public0relations department.
That will be quite an economy of scale indeed if they do manage to lop off over HALF the price from the Volt- which is what they would have to do to make it affordable and therefore relevant. I have my doubt that that is going to happen, but for what it’s worth, I hope you are right and I am wrong. I really do.
Just out of curiosity- has GM lived up to your hopes and expectations in the past? Do you think they ever really wanted to sell the EV-1, or was it just a public relations stunt like I suspect the Volt is?
As for solutions, well, as a conservative republican It pains me to advocate for government solutions to problems that can be better solved by market forces, but in this case I think that the auto-makers dont really have a vested interest in switching to plug-in hybrids, and it’s critical for the nation that they do so- hence I am forced to come down on the side of massive government intervention in this matter.
The primary reason for my cynicism is all the money that the dealers make off of servicing and selling parts for internal-combustion and transmission-based vehicles. Ever tried to change your own sparkplugs on a late-model Nissan? They intentionally make it hard or nearly impossible to do the work yourself like you could in the old days They like the current business-model just fine and I suspect that they plan to just try to make smaller, more fuel efficient internal combustion cars if the government doesnt step in and change the rules of the game at a fundamental level.
At this point, it’s becoming a national emergency and I do advocate for absolutely draconian CAFE standards and for a mandate that if an auto-maker wants to sell cars in the US market, then a certain percent have to be plug-in hybrids.
When it comes down to a choice between selling AFFORDABLE plug-in hybrids or not selling any cars here PERIOD, THEN you’ll see GM get serious about this thing. I don’t think they are serious now at all, and I guess we will see which one of us is right 5 years from now. Again- I hope you are right and I am wrong.
Peace and Long Life,
Ty
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 12:45 am
There is no way GM is going bankrupt. The last time I checked they had $500 BILLION in hard assets. It would take more than 10 years to go thru all that. These financial investors/analyst that spread these rumors all have an agenda that they are pushing. Don’t listen to any of it. Some of these clowns in Wall Street need to go back to school and learn something.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 12:55 am
I hope the Beat comes in better colors than that gangly green. Maybe a Passion Pink, Renegade Red, Silky Silver, Gonzo Gold, Monster Melon, Lush Lavender, Bold Black, Rocket Red, Loud Lemon…you get the idea.
I just hate GREEN.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Hypermiller #85-
Just wanted to correct you slightly on the “Woz”. He wasn’t busted doing 110 in his Prius, he was only doing 104. Take my word for it, I live in the Bay Area and so does he. The local newspaper, San Jose Mercury News wrote about the Woz’s ticket but printed it at 105 MPH. The Woz wrote in to the editors and corrected them with the 104 MPH citation.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 2:30 am
“”"”In another remarkable clue, the report quotes an outside expert as saying “the Volt is going to have far more variations than people imagine.”"”"
Best news I have heard in a long time and the 10,000 dollar auto is great news to my ears also, showing that GM at least can produce inexpensive vehicles and also KNOWS that not everyone can afford a 35K car.
Looking forward to E-Flex cars and trucks. HInts at moving in that direction may not be hard concrete numbers and time lines but it is a first step in that direction.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Ty Harris #92
“Just out of curiosity- has GM lived up to your hopes and expectations in the past? Do you think they ever really wanted to sell the EV-1, or was it just a public relations stunt like I suspect the Volt is?”
*** *** ***
The answer is that the EV-1 was a MANDATE! You do understand what a mandate is don’t you? In case you don’t, a mandate basically states that you WILL do something whether you “want to” or not. Capiche? GM handled that mandate no differently than Toyota, Honda, Nissan or Ford to name a few. How many more times are we going to jump through the same hoop on this site?? The past is the past and let’s let it go.
Times change as do people and those that live in the past will die, plain and simple. It’s time for people in this country old enough to legally buy a beer to stop allowing low-budget documentaries to do their thinking for them.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 5:34 am
The Chevy Beat is the focus of an article in today’s (July 5) wsj online.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 6:26 am
1. High compression yields NOx or the percurser to acid rain.
2. I hope one of the variations the VOLT comes in is BEV. Are you listening TAGAMET?
3. The Chevy Beat would make a lovely electric car where do I buy one?
IN OTHER WORDS MY NEXT CAR WILL BE ELECTRIC.
Ok TAG you have your positive suggestions no get down to business and give me my electric car.
TED
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Finally, GM is considering taking cars they make for other markets, and bring them home. What the #$%@# took them so long.
I would not dismiss the ability of GM to get the cars certified to US standards quickly. Without actually talking to the engineers, we don’t know what components have to be modified and integrated. The changes could be fairly minor. I’m not saying they are, but the could be. While safety and emissions cert normally takes awhile, that can be accelerated too.
It always amazes me, always, how so many people look at a car like was their clothing.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 7:35 am
#84 jeff,
Here’s a great site for fuel cell info by the head of the European Fuel Cell Forum:
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 7:41 am
Dave G
I believe you answered your own question in regards to light trucks and cars. Light trucks and cars would in most cases be virtually equal in weight and size except for the truck being slightly higher from the ground. Again, we could argue all day about those advantages and disadvantages. This is what you should focus on as it was what I pointing out in my previous post. All things being equal, (build quality, same steel usage, curtain airbags, whatever…in general terms, bigger and heavier is safer. But I would like to follow that with any nut that says my car or truck is automatically safer because it is bigger or heavier or both is simply not informed.
Did you notice the difference between large trucks, light trucks, and cars. Which one was safer? Large trucks by a LARGE margin. Think about that. I am not arguing that bigger is automatically safer, but in general terms and all else being equal, the bigger and heavier a vehicle is the safer it is against cars of lesser weight and mass.Most people don’t know either that for years, decades even, light trucks, trucks, and suvs did not have to meet the same strict safety mandates as did cars.
I hope you understand my position on this. And the more research you do on the subject, you will realize that this position is correct. If you still doubt this, just think about which vehicles you would rather get hit with in a sub compact. I bet you wouldn’t pick to get hit with a Suburban, Excursion, or 18wheeler. I would imagine you would rather have an accident against a Honda Fit, or Nissan Versa woudn’t you?
Hawk
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 8:05 am
With the current political climate,it might be possible to bring some fuel efficient cars from Europe to the U.S. as is.
Think about it. People are really upset about gas prices. Small cars have huge wait lists. Politicians are desperate to do something in order to get re-elected, but there don’t appear to be many options to make a difference before the election.
If Congress temporarily eased emissions standards for small cars, and allowed small European cars from GM and Ford to sell to the U.S., this could help significantly in the short term.
Remember Katrina? Refineries were hit hard, so the U.S. government temporarily eased gasoline blending standards that aim to reduce smog in urban areas. This helped a lot with the supply of gasoline while the refineries were rebuilt. So there is precedent to temporarily ease emission standards during a crisis.
I’ve heard standards in the U.S. are based on emissions per gallon of fuel. If this was changed to emissions per mile driven, even temporarily, then some small efficient cars from the Europe could be sold here.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 8:12 am
#102 firehawk72 says: “Did you notice the difference between large trucks, light trucks, and cars. Which one was safer? Large trucks by a LARGE margin.”
Note that the fatality rate is related to the number of miles travelled. Truck drivers drive lots of miles, and unsafe driving could cost them their job, so it’s no surprise that large trucks have a very low fatality rate per mile.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 8:32 am
#103 Dave G
They have to deal with US safety standards too.
#102 Firehawk
Safer design has little to do with what you’ld prefer to be hit by. Personally, I’ld prefer not to be in accident at all. So, handling and breaking are important. There are a lot of other factors that go into a safety analysis. Bigger can be better but not necessarily so. Nimbler is always better assuming everything else is the same.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 8:41 am
I think hydrogen as a fuel for cars is a bad idea. Anything — ethanol, methanol. . . “any”ol
or lithium/ nano-lithium if possible. I don’t think I can be swayed into hydrogen.
http://www.methanol.org/
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 8:46 am
GM should take all their unsold SUV’s and convert them into 2 mode plug-in hybrids, e-flex or fuel cell vehicles. At the very least, I hope GM can re-cycle the metal.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Trying my best not to sound condesending, but are you guys reading my whole post or are you just trying to just read something out of them to argue about? We are talking about surviving an accident. Anybody would rather choose to not be in an accident, as if that actually takes some real thought. We actually agree on quite a bit, but lets stick to the topic at hand. In reality, “all things being equal”, the bigger and heavier a vehicle is the safer it is in an accident against lesser vehicles of size and weight. I wonder why boxing has weight classes? Is this to say any heavyweight will defeat a lighter class? Of course not, but in most cases the heavyweight would win rather easily. I will cease to comment on this further because continuing to do so seems rather futile and the topic keeps changing. Case in point, who is thinking about naming a lightweight to fight some heavyweight. Come on guys, this isn’t complicated…just give it a rest.
Hawk
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Amazing how history repeats….
Back in the 70’s the Fed’s decide to change the national speed limit to 55mph. Now, here we go again, and they are pushing to lower the national speed limit.
We are so reactive to problems, when with just a little foresight, we would have realized that this day was coming. I really thought this day would come in the 90’s, but it has arrived.
Oil is a non-rewable resource, we (USA) have only a small percent of this resource, it will run out. We are consuming this resource at a break neck speed. We are just now entering the curve of supply = demand. The next part of the curve is going to be ugly! When demand exceeds supply, we start talking about war and all it’s ugly ramifications. The old 1990’s model predicted entering the curve in about 2030-2040, but the increased demand from China and Asia are pushing this date up. If demand increases be 7% a year, then within 10 years we will would need to DOUBLE our supply. This cannot happed, so you see the problem.
If you think gas is expensive now, just wait a year or two (maybe sooner), and it will not only be expensive but you will be sitting in lines to get it. Government rationing will become reality, and we will be going to war with more countries as we struggle to feed our oil machines. But of course war is a HUGE consumer of energy, which will push the rationing of fuel even harder, as we need to feed our military machines. This will be the time when we start to really feel the pain that our ancestors felt during WWI, when they actually felt the impact of war. Today, we support our troops (some do), and the war (again, some do, others don’t), but we really sacrifice little in the ways of inconvience.
So, here we are, 2008, and we are just now developing alternative methods, to reduce our dependencies on oil. In my opinion this is MUCH to late, and unfortunately this will result in more than just high gas and inconvenience’s….
You can say “better late, than never”, but that’s the easy out. We continued building bigger and less efficient vehicles though the 80’s and 90’s, and 2000’s. We knew this was coming, but we stuck our heads in the sand and just grinned as we drove down the road (alone of course) in our gas guzzling SUV’s. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
The world is going to change dramatically in the next decade. I hope for the best, but I prepare for the worst (don’t ask what I am doing, you will just laugh…at least today you would)
Happy day after the 4th of July! I hope we can say the same in the coming years.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Firehawk,
Your point is taken.
I well designed large vehicle beats a well designed small vehicle in safety.
End of discussion…right?
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Ty,
I too am a conservative (I vote based on the candidates though). Gov’t intervention has rarely, been as effective as market forces. I won’t sell out that principle no matter how much I’d love a Volt in my driveway YESTERDAY. 2010-1025 will be the period looked back on as the times when transportation moved to electrification. (it takes 15 years to “turn over” our currently owned cars).
I agree that I hope you are wrong (g).
Grizzly answered the very old saw of the EV1.
Ted,
What color BEV do you want?
Tag
PS Ted, I’m unclear as to why you seem to think that my “positive suggestions” have anything to do with getting you a BEV. I do see the Volt as a stepping stone toward BEV’s but first we have to get by the public’s range anxiety.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 10:17 am
I don’t know where everyone got the “safety” issue from in this article. All I saw was “small car”. If GM sells it here, they HAVE to crash test it here - period. We will know soon enough how well the Beat survives the standard crash tests.
———————————————
#75 Gordon - “Why can’t they drop in the electric powerplant, leave out the range-extending gas engine, get 25 to 30 mile range out of it as a 2-seater, and call it a day?”
I just don’t understand why anyone would want a BEV car that can travel 15 - 20 miles max (don’t forget, you have to return 15 - 20 miles home to refuel, or you’re stranded without fuel). Such a car isn’t practical on the highway - you can only drive for 15 - 20 minutes before you are forced to return home. BEV (battery operated vehicle) = no ICE (internal combustion engine). Get a Smart if you can deal with having a 15 - 20 mile leash around your neck at all times. I could never accept such a range limitation.
I’ve said it before - never underestimate Range Anxiety. People want choices - the Volt gives them choices. You want a BEV? Just refuse to fill the Volt’s tank, and you’re on pure electric. If I want to go farther, I can - just add gasoline. If you remove the ICE from the Volt, you get a Smart.
So just get a Smart, and you won’t have to wait 28 months (and probably longer) like the rest of us.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Man, I hope they roll the variants out quickly, or at least announce them.
I love station wagons, in fact, the Volt is the only car I’d consider buying that isn’t. I’d hate to order my Volt only to find out a couple months later a hatchback or wagon will be available soon.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 10:51 am
I would love to see a volt pickup. A larger battery and motor of coarse. 40 miles per charge and a 50mpg would make $35k truck a sweet deal. Also increasing the quantity of batteries and lowering the cost/unit. A power port for power tools/power tool charging would make it a contractors dream machine.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 10:51 am
MDDave # 83,
For example, I’ve seen statistics — although, I don’t have a link at the moment — that show that drivers of motorcycles are several times more likely to be killed in an accident in the first 2 years of riding than after that.
My anecdotal experience would back this up 100%. In retrospect, the first 1000 miles I rode on a motorcycle were probable the most dangerous thing I’ve ever done. And that includes many things that I’d only rather talk about with a beer-NDA in full effect. After that, though, I learned how to handle the machine and I learned my own limits better, and I learned when a bike isn’t the right tool for a particular trip.
Another statistic that I saw (I don’t have a reference) was that taking motorcycle safety training vastly reduced ones chances of being hurt in the first couple years of riding. The quality of the instruction I received from the MSF was excellent, but I suspect that a big part of the reason for those statistics is that most of the people who show up for these courses are the people who already care about safety.
I’ve certainly seen my share of wheelie-riding sportbikers on the road, particularly in the heavy traffic on the beltway around Baltimore. I’ve heard that doctors and nurses call those machines “donorcycles” — and I’m not about to argue with that assessment… After I saw that, I understood why my girlfriend had such worries about my riding.
I’m looking forward to riding again at some point, but I’m not in any hurry. Being out in the wind and being one with the environment through which you travel, is quite an experience! But, it’s not without its costs — and the added risk of being run over by someone sipping coffee, talking on their cell phone, and reading the paper while driving their Tahoe is something that keeps me from gawking too much at the bikes I see.
Firehawk72 # 102
Did you notice the difference between large trucks, light trucks, and cars. Which one was safer? Large trucks by a LARGE margin.
What that means to me is that large trucks are probably driven by people with commercial drivers licenses. (They didn’t specify whether a “large truck” is a tractor-trailer, of a Dodge Ram 2500 — looking at the other classifications, I assume that it’s the former.) A CDL means more training, more experience, higher expectations when it comes to safety and courtesy…. And that is means fewer fatalities.
If a tractor-trailer operator were to push into a line of stopped cars on the Interestate (cars do stop en-masse from time to time), how many fatalities do you think would result? If a passenger-bus crashes, how many of the passengers are injured or killed?
I rest my argument.
I hope you understand my position on this. And the more research you do on the subject, you will realize that this position is correct. If you still doubt this, just think about which vehicles you would rather get hit with in a sub compact. I bet you wouldn’t pick to get hit with a Suburban, Excursion, or 18wheeler. I would imagine you would rather have an accident against a Honda Fit, or Nissan Versa woudn’t you?
I’d rather not have an accident. And the way I do that is by looking out the window of my vehicle and avoiding them.
Granted $#!t happens, and that’s why I have airbags, crumple zones, and all of that good stuff in my current vehicle. But it’s not like we’re playing bumper cars out there. I’m most comfortable in a small nimble car with a lot of airbags, and I’ve avoided more accidents than I can count. I don’t have a perfect record, though, which is why I feel I can comment on this. Even a little fender bender is a raw, noisy, smelly, hassle-filled, emotional, and generally unpleasant experience. It’s MUCH better to avoid that kind of thing in the first place, than to “win” the collision.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
I would buy a Beat today, if it was avalible. Better yet, a Montana pickup.
Alas, I have to believe that, if GM said “Go” tomorrow, I would be surprised if the Beat got here ahead of the Volt. Even so, it will fill another market segment, and they need it. The Montana pickup too, by all means.
I cannot understand why they don’t just raise their game with the Aveo. it is small enough, light enough, and US certified. It just has a weak power train that can’t equal the mileage of the competititon. Just do a much better job of the tweaking they are doing with the Cobalt XFE, and get the mileage up to 40 highway/33city to equal the Yaris. This is something that could be done very quickly, and would give GM some priceless bragging rights.
I mean, we got the mileage of our S-10 up 2 mpg by just lowering it 2″, adding a big chin spoiler and a bed cover, and a light set of wheels with skinny tires. Come on guys, it’s not rocket science. Get some weight out of it and sharpen up the engine management system. Down the road get a better auto trans and you might really have something.
Someone on the Fastlane blog said “The Aveo is a decent car in search of a drivetrain.” Right.
I swore that I would never buy a Daewoo, but desperate times call for desperate measures.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Good!
Cheapest: Volt M class - NiMH used primarily as a buffer to allow max power from the generator; may or may not be plugged in.
Cheap: Volt L20 - 20 mile electric range
Moderate: Volt L40 - 40 mile electric range
Expensive: Volt L60 - 60 mile electric range
Most expensive: Volt EV - pure BEV with 100+ electric range
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
#85 Hypermiler:
You are right that some minor celebrity did get busted for going 110 mph in a Prius. It was here in Southern California. It was the son of some well known politician, maybe Al Gore or one of the Kennedys. Apologies to both families if I have the name wrong. Can anyone else remember?
# 87 Rashiid Amul:
“The Chevy Beat looks like a car for teeny boppers or someone in their early 20’s” Are you talking about me again? All the more reason to buy one, IMHO. My wife says that I’m never going to grow up. I sure hope not, LOL.
Come on Chevy, do it! Where do I put my money down??
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Green Beat- regarding the alternate colors you are hoping for on your new Beat ( Passion Pink, Rocket Red etc. )- Is “invisible” considered a color? Because that’s the only color your non-existent, imaginary, yet-to-be-totally-redesigned US-Marketed Beat is going to be.
Grizzly- Your faith that the tiger has changed it’s stripes is touching and quaint. I hope you are right, but I doubt it.
- Ty
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Noel Park- Regarding your question “why dont they just raise their game with the Aveo”- The answer is that they arent serious about selling cheap, $10,000.00 40MPG Beat-like Cars. If they were, then obviously the Aveo would have been the place to do it, and they chose not to. What they are interested in, is selling $45,000.00 Volts that will take the place of the high-priced, large SUV’s that they made so much money off of for so many years.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Ty #119
“Grizzly- Your faith that the tiger has changed it’s stripes is touching and quaint. I hope you are right, but I doubt it.”
*** *** ***
It’s not about the tiger, it’s about the world we live in and economic reality. It’s that simple.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
#120 Ty Harris:
I take your point, but there is no way that they can make enough Volts at any price to generate enough cash flow to keep going. Like it or not, they are going to learn soon enough, if they haven’t already, that its just slightly better to sell cheap high mileage cars than it is to sell nothing at all.
Also, if you look at the prices on the Toyota, Honda, Nissan, et al, websites, I don’t think that they sell many Yarises, Fits or Versas for $10,000. More like $15,000 to $17,000 with any decent equipment package. The only $10,000 Aveo is the totally stripped loss leader with no air. The first tolerable equipment package puts the MSRP up over $14K. If they got better mileage, maybe they could do better.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Noel, I think that if they could figure out how to sell the Volt for under 20K and still turn a profit, that they would sell like hotcakes if the price of gas stays over 4.00/gallon. Whether or not it’s possible to do that I don’t know, but I question whether GM has any real interest in even trying . As I argued in an earlier comment, GM likes all the money it makes on service and parts for internal-combustion engine-based vehicles. Electric and Plug-in Hybrid have much less to break and service, and GM has no interest at all in losing all that money. I think that the only way GM ( and Ford is much worse ) will ever put their heart into making a plug-in car like the volt available to the masses is if the Government steps in and mandates that a certain % of the cars they sell will be plug-in’s, or they dont get to sell any cars here. Then it will truly be a case of finding a way, or going out of business permanently. The uncertainty of survival has a wonderful way of focusing one’s priorities. I think the volt will just be a 40K car for a few rich people to assuage their enviro-guilt, and little else. I want to be wrong, I really do. If I could buy a volt today for under 20K with an electric range of 40 miles, I would actually get one with no hesitation. That’s what GM will have to come out with if they want to prove me wrong, and if I am proven wrong, then I’ll admit my wrongness with my pocketbook by giving GM my hard-earned money for a new Volt.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Ty #123
“I think that the only way GM ( and Ford is much worse ) will ever put their heart into making a plug-in car like the volt available to the masses is if the Government steps in and mandates that a certain % of the cars they sell will be plug-in’s……”
*** *** ***
They don’t have to. CAFE standards set in 2007 have raised the bar for 2020 so high that no fleet of ICE cars could ever meet it, even if they were skateboard sized! Add to that that companies like Phoenix, Tesla, Zenn and other competitiors can and will only make electrics in an era of $4/gal and rising gas prices and you’ll see the writing on the wall.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Ty said (sounding more and more like a troll)
” I think the volt will just be a 40K car for a few rich people to assuage their enviro-guilt, and little else. I want to be wrong, I really do. If I could buy a volt today for under 20K with an electric range of 40 miles, I would actually get one with no hesitation. That’s what GM will have to come out with if they want to prove me wrong, and if I am proven wrong, then I’ll admit my wrongness with my pocketbook by giving GM my hard-earned money for a new Volt.”
I’d like a $200 Cadillac. I really would. If GM would just ocme out with one of those, I’d know they really wanted to sell me a car, but I know they won’t. I want to be proven wrong, I really do, but….
Be well,
Tag
PS GM doesn’t make money on repairs. Dealers do. And there has been plenty posted here regarding concerns about dealers losing that income.
[Reply]
July 5th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
I just visited my local Toyota dealer today and inquired about getting a hybrid car. The sales lady laughed out loud. They are all sold before they come off the truck and the waiting list is pretty long. I might be able to get a Prius for Christmas, but not guaranteed. I could probably get a Hylander Hybrid by Labor Day. Sticker Price only across the board, no rebates, no special financing. At least they aren’t price gouging, but who wants to pay 40K for a Hylander Hybrid that gets 26 MPG when my VW Passat is paid for and gets 28?
Where’s my dad-gummed VOLT!
[Reply]
July 6th, 2008 at 12:50 am
Tag- OK, so you are likening my request for a sub 20K Volt to a request for a 200.00 cadillac? You are just making my point for me- namely that working folks and average americans arent going to be able to afford the darned thing! And if that’s the case, then what does all this hype and hullabaloo amount to? Nothing, that’s what. If affordable Volts are as likely as 200.00 caddilacs, then what are we arguing about? It means that the Volt amounts to nothing but a publicity stunt with little-to-no real effects on the average american’s fuel consumption because they can’t buy one, right?
As far as GM making no money directly on parts and service, I doubt that, but since I’m not an expert, I’ll take your word for it. However,the loss of all that money would certainly have an effect on dealer profits, and therefore would effect what they can afford to sell the vehicles for- which would IN-TURN would effect how many they can SELL- which obviously DOES increase or decrease GM’s profits. Will you not concede that line of reasoning?
Also, there is the question of re-tooling and re-training every plant, supplier, and assembly-line in America to manufacture a completely different type of vehicle. That’s one other reason I can think of why the auto-makers are dragging their feet on plug-in’s for the masses. I am sure there are a lot of other reasons too- but whatever the reasons, It’s clear that they are NOT being serious about converting over the whole fleet to electricity, because the Volt is never going to do that. I predict that 5 years from now, plug-in hybrids will be less than 1% of the vehicles on the road- if that- which is not relevant to our nation’s need for fundamental change. For what it’s worth, I really hope I’m wrong.
Regarding your “troll” comments, I take that to mean that you think I have ulterior motives or that I am insincere or have an axe to grind. I assure you that these are my true feelings and opinions.
I am just a completely fed-up, and totally frustrated American consumer who is tired of all the windbag promises and publicity stunts from the auto-makers and from the politicians. I’m only singling GM out, because they are pretending to be doing something of relevance here, whereas Ford is at least being honest about the fact that they arent going to even TRY to build a plug-in hybrid until they finally get a government mandate shoved down their throats.
EVERYBODY knows that we need fundamental changes in this country in the areas of energy and transportation, but NOBODY actually seems to actually be willing to do what needs to be done to fix the problems!
It’s like the enviromentalists who scream about the planet’s immenent destruction due to carbon emissions, but refuse to allow us to build more nuclear power-plants- which is the only source of power ( aside from clean-coal, which they also hate ) , which can give us the energy we badly need AND simultaneously drastically reduce carbon emissions.
In the area of transportation, we obviously need to switch the MAJORITY of American vehicles to plug-in hybrids NOW- as in a total transformation over the next 10 years, and yet there’s not a single one out there on the road today. Honda gave up, GM is talking maybe rolling out a 40K guiltmobile 2 years from now that nobody can afford, and Ford- ( damn them! )- is doing absolutely NOTHING.
If we had ran the Manhattan Project on this kind of timetable with this kind of a sense of urgency, we still wouldn’t be finished with the CP-1 reactor yet under the bleachers at Staggs Feild. It’s absolutely infuriating!
Thanks to all for listening to me vent, and thanks very much to the purveyors of this blog for the forum and for not censoring me.
Grizzly- I’ll concede you a nice point about the CAFE standards, but in a way you are also making my point that the only way to get the auto-makers to do anything and to quit dragging their feet is to shove a mandate down their throats. Next, lets do what California failed to do when they killed the electric car, and mandate phased-in percentages for plug-in hybrids.
[Reply]
July 6th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Apparently the Beat is in the upcoming Transformers movie.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/06/09/chevy-beat-in-transformers-2/
That’s HUGE publicity for it.
It might actually take off, especially if aimed at a younger crowd.
[Reply]
July 6th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Reference #128 canehdian:
And not necessarily just for the younger crowd either: I’m anything but younger, and given that the Volt is at least two years away (and longer for me as a practical matter since I’ll wait a couple of years post-introduction for GM to get the Volt’s price down and the inevitable bugs out), I’ll need something more fuel efficient in the interim. I’m single and live in an urban environment so a reasonably priced vehicle like the Beat (even with an ICE) would serve me well. You can like or hate GM, but you have to admit that they’ve getting base hits with vehicle styling lately if nothing else. I think this will be an important factor in the coming, inivitable compact, fuel efficient vehicle wars between manufacturers.
Though I would prefer a four-door compact, I like the Beat’s styling enought that I could live with it as a two-door. But lo-and-behold, take a look at the last image in Autoblog gallery:
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/new-york-auto-show-2007-chevy-beat-concept/
I could live happily with any of those vehicles. Canehdian makes a good point though: For maximum effect GM would really need to have the Beat ready at the time of the Transformer 2 movie realease (tentatively next summer). Let’s imagine a viable environment next summer: Release of what will likely be a blockbuster movie showcasing the Beat, a younger driving crowd out of school, even higher gas prices, hip styling (yes-this matters to that younger crowd), and a fuel efficient vehicle priced for that younger crowd (not to mention the masses at large).
I think GM would have a major hit on its hands; especially if they could release two and four-door versions of the Beat (double major hit if they could offer BEV variants-but I wouldn’t expect that within a year-Indeed, I’ll be impressed if GM can even bring ICE versions to market in a year).
Those like myself who follow this forum on a regular basis know that the Volt is a top priority for GM. I think they to make the Beat another, even more immediate priority.
[Reply]
July 6th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Lyle, it would be great if you would interview the industry expert who was quoted about the Volt variations:
Jim Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics, an automotive consulting firm in Birmingham, Michigan
Or maybe a couple of experts–they might have some info and thinking that this Volt site would highly value. Thanks!
[Reply]
July 7th, 2008 at 3:05 am
[...] GM Marching to a New Beat — Expect Mutiple Volt Versions: So has General Motors gotten the memo, after all? After a crusty Wall Street Journal article questioning the company’s overall marketing strategy, the GM press is suddenly full of encouraging news. First came word that GM might be eyeing a Stateside version of the Beat minicar. Now there are rumors of a light truck along the lines of the Montana (now sold in Latin America). On top of this, GM is hinting that the Volt may come on more “variations” than previously expected. We’ll see. (GM-VOLT Blog) [...]
July 7th, 2008 at 5:12 am
ONE OF THE COOLEST THINGS EVER!!!
GM Volt … convertible
[Reply]
October 13th, 2008 at 10:43 am
A Volt SUV? SOLD AMERICAN!
Nowadays, it just doesn’t matter to me HOW LOW gasoline gets.
It seems to me that the volatile price of crude has burned us all for the last time as regards our tolerance for it. I don’t care if it were nearly free, I refuse to change my mind regarding getting a Volt.
Even if a Plug-in SUV only got 25 miles on electric due to a higher wind-resistance profile (i drive 50 to 60 miles a day), I would get it in a heartbeat.
Dan Petit. Austin, TX.
[Reply]