GM May Share the Volt Powertrain With Ford

August 4th, 2008 | Posted in: Competitors

In a sign of the times, there are reports that GM and Ford may be working together on advanced powertrains.

In an effort to help each other in the face of recent budget cuts, GM first approached Ford about collaboration a month ago. Shortly thereafter, Ford’s board approved the negotiations. Since, several positive meetings have occurred.

As it can cost upwards of $1 billion to develop new engines, which is what the Volt program’s budget is at least though to be, collaborative efforts can save money.

Specifically when it comes to the Volt, the report indicates that Ford is " keen on getting access to the technology."

This would be a win for GM as well both through presumably licensing, and proliferating Volt technology. By expanding the base of production for E-Flex platform components, economies of scale could drive down costs considerably. This would create lower prices for consumers than GM might be able to achieve on it’s own.

Ford Faraday?

Source (Detroit News )

Popularity: 6% [?]

(7 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

Loading ...

Posted by: Lyle

142 Responses to “GM May Share the Volt Powertrain With Ford”

Rashiid Amul Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:19 am

Excellent news. This really should help both companies.
My hope is that GM only shares this with American car companies, but I suspect GM will go with whomever is willing pay the licensing fees. Mostly, I would hate to see them share it with Toyota.

[Reply]
Tom Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:26 am

Just to clarify the information from the original article. First, they are discussing a POSSIBLE collaboration to develop new engines and other UNSPECIFIED powertrain technologies. Second, the only information with regard to the Volt, comes from an “analyst” independent of GM and Ford, who stated: “I would THINK that would be part of it.” As exciting as a possible Volt collaboration may be, at this point in time, any evidence for it, although a reasonable inference, is tenuous.

[Reply]
Exp_EngTech Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:32 am

“Specifically when it comes to the Volt, the report indicates that Ford is ” keen on getting access to the technology.”

My translation…
Keen = Nifty = Neato = Boss = Electric Boss Mustang !

Exxcellent….
(tenting fingers like Mr. Burn’s)

[Reply]
jeremy Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:34 am

Well if thats what it takes to secure volt and electric cars im for it .
making things much cheaper much faster is a god send for everyone and its adoption mrore readily availible and possible
top it all off hey if theycan license huge thingsl ike power trains and battery tech from inhouse research gm will be around for alongtime to come i personaly dislike fords but thats me .
gm did take a huge step forward with ford hey if they unite eventually and become a poweerhouse with EVs im all for it . after all its alot more reliable alot more dependable. alot more cheaper .. lot less maintence and cleaner. then any other option out there. ++++ the infrastructure is already here for the most part making it alot easier to adopt.
another thought
even if its jsut another green car thats a feather in gms/ fords/ toyotas/ hondas/ mitsubishis hat.. thats alotta green feathers running around isnt there?
there will be aless of a demand for gas guzzlers and more demand for those green cars …. being that they are gonig to be more familiar with them soon.!

TAKE THAT OIL SHIEKS!

[Reply]
mikeinatl. Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:38 am

This is indeed a new world we live in. These guys were once bitter rivals.

Now perhaps they will cooperate for their own benefit and that cooperation will help to establish a broad base of support for the EV concept.

I really dont care if my EV has a GM logo or a Ford logo on it. As a matter of fact having additional product choices would be great. But having it made by an American company and having American companies lead the way in this new technology would be a dream come true.

Perhaps there will be a day when American automobile technology again dominates the world market.

I hope they can work it out.

[Reply]
nuclearboy Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:39 am

This is great news. The more cars that can be produced with E-Flex the better. I hope Ford and GM can come to an agreement.

I see the author at Detroit news put in a typical disclaimer about the VOLT.

“While it remains to be seen whether GM will succeed in bringing it to market”

The general public/media have no confidence in GM. This, in addition to the financial issues, has helped sink GMs stock. When GM succeeds in bringing the Volt to market, public sentiment will swing and I suppose the stock price will too (regardless of whether it makes money or not). I tried to explain this to friends at a party the other day and they were under the impression GM was ready to go under (not a good buy). I have faith that the 100 year old company is not going belly up at this time.

The volt could change public opinion dramatically about GM and this could lead to a big rise in the Stock price. I may even be able to afford a volt with all those capital gains.

[Reply]
NZDavid Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:39 am

I read in my local paper yesterday that Apain is going to require 1 million EV’s by 2014. So I guess the market will have room for all who want to play.

[Reply]
TLD Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:46 am

WOW - just wow. Times must really be gettin’ rough to make the big two work so close. It’s good to see though that they’re both willing to diversify. It could give us a better product in the end.

[Reply]
nuclearboy Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:50 am

The Detroit news article points out that they have recently worked together on a 6 speed transmission and that this future cooperation will be on various things that might/should include E-Flex.

[Reply]
RB Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:54 am

If it is to be a “Ford Faraday”, it will need to have an ultracapacitor.

(Capacitance is measured in Farads )

[Reply]
RB Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:00 am

The WSJ reports that there is to be a meeting of the GM board of directors tonight. No doubt they will discuss whether to keep or replace Mr. Wagoner as Chairman. I hope he stays.

If there is a change, however, it will undoubtedly be with a mandate to do whatever is necessary to right the ship financially. That means all projects requiring expenditures now in return for revenues in a few years are going to be reconsidered. That will include the Volt.

So if there is a change, we have to be prepared to speak up for our Volts quickly, so that the new CEO knows that we are out here. As most of us probably will not be talking to the CEO directly, we are going to have to find another way. Probably letters are best. FedEx letters likely are even better. Whatever, it has to be positive and constructive and say why we know that the Volt is a good idea for GM.

Maybe Lyle will give us helpful hints

[Reply]
Texas Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:00 am

Like I said, GM is just kicking butt these days. Did they hire some wizards from Google? It’s like they’re hitting good ideas all over the place and then jumping on them. In face of the possible collapse of the US auto industry I think a collaboration between the two is one of the best ideas I’ve heard in a while. Why didn’t I think of it? Way to go Guys! Let’s dry dock this sinking ship, fix her up and set her free to once again dominate the world.

#3 Exp_EngTech - Exxcellent… laughed out loud on that one.

[Reply]
Gsned57 Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:05 am

GM or Ford, doesn’t matter too much to me. Build em here, build em now, let me buy one!

[Reply]
Joe Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:12 am

mikeinatl@5

“Perhaps there will be a day when American automobile technology again dominates the world market.”

**********************************************************

I can not agree with you more. Losing industries one after another and another has to stop. If we lost the auto industry, it would be by far the biggest lost of them all. If it takes GM and Ford getting together, in whatever form or shape, to get on top again….I’m all for it!

[Reply]
Exp_EngTech Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:18 am

GM needs to get the E-Flex Propulsion System out as soon as possible. Like last year.

Reason ? A beefier version in a bare bones chassis could be used in the RV Industry. I don’t know if any of you have noticed the reports of massive layoffs by the RV Manufacturers. Of course, as the price of gas and diesel went through the stratosphere, Class A motorhome sales plumetted.

Here in northern Indiana (home of the RV) the economy is rapidly going from very bad to “man the lifeboats”.

An older brother of mine with almost 40 years in the industry has never seen it this bad before. In the past, any drop-off in sales of Class A vehicles has always been an important bellweather of the overall economy 9 months from now.

The US economy is going to get very, very, bad….soon.

[Reply]
Plug Free Volt Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:23 am

I think every auto manufacturer will be adopting a series hybrid powertrain sooner or later.

Might as well share the costs and spread the revolution.

[Reply]
Rashiid Amul Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:24 am

# 15 Exp_EngTech ,

Interesting you mention that. My wife and I drove past an RV dealership this weekend. She asked me, “I wonder how those guys are doing with the price of gas being so high?”
I guess now I can tell her. It does make perfect sense that they are suffering. It is very unfortunate IMHO. Good luck to your brother.

[Reply]
Statik Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:26 am

#2 Tom

You beat me to it. Good posting. I came away with the same thought after reading the article.

All this author has learned is that GM is talking to Ford about a possible “collaboration to develop new engines and other powertrain technologies”

Thats it, the rest is just the author putting in enough words to get paid for writing a article.

I love this sentence too, “A deal could give Ford access to GM’s Volt technology — if it becomes commercially viable.” So…they would get access to it ‘after’ it becomes viable? When is that? When it is on the market making money? Hopefully I will also have access to GM Volt’s technology at the very same time, lol.

Didn’t we just have a thread 3 or 4 back (”Ford: Mass Production of Plug-in Electric Cars at Least 5 Years Away”) with Ford ‘poo-pooing’ electric right now, saying it didn’t make sense as it couldn’t be made in substantial numbers for a very long time?

Again, I would like to say, building a electric car isn’t like splitting the atom, or building a rocket ship. It is a simple process, guys can do it in their basements, little piddley companies with a few million dollars can get them made, and cleared to be on the roads.

The problem is the Lithium battery–availability and cost. No secret here at all, and GM is doing nothing when it comes to this most important part. GM is having a couple guys fight for a contract, while Toyota and Mitsu are developing their own and building plants (or owning parts of the companies that are).

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the “big three” circling their wagons and trying to weather the storm, I think it’s a good idea.

[Reply]
jeremy Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:28 am

the board of directors migh be lookin at the ford deals before they consider replacing mr wagnor but then again… it does make sense alot of compannys fire the good people then hire idiots at the very last moments spelling there ultimate doom
letsj ust hope those directors know volt is the best thing around in decades

[Reply]
Tim Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 7:31 am

I’d rather see a competitive product from Ford so the market can choose the best one. Necessity breeds innovation, but only competition can feed it, improve it and lower it’s final cost to the consumer. This sounds like the beginnings of a beautiful (and profitable) MONOPOLY. As usual, the consumer (or taxpayer) will bill bear the cost.

And by the way, Exp_EngTech (#15) “The US economy is going to get very, very, bad….soon.”

The “great” depression was just a trial run of what the Federal Reserve now has in store for us. Get ready for round II, the REAL great depression. Be sure to thank your congressman for following the Soviet lead in destroying the currency and economy by spending their nation into oblivion. Unlike the first “great” depression, the government cannot borrow it’s way out with more “great society” socialist programs this time. It’s already trying that and that is what is debasing our currency and causing oil to spike in cost.

Keep your powder dry!

[Reply]
NZDavid Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:09 am

#7 my bad. Apain = Spain

[Reply]
drivin98 Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:12 am

HaHa Ford! What a lame excuse for a car company!

*Looks at old Ranger in driveway.

Crap.

Seriously, this could be great news for both companies.

[Reply]
Dave B Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:21 am

Wow. Certainly opens up the possibility of more platforms much more quickly.

Perhaps now is the time to announce the battery contract so Ford can sign the “loser.”

Another thought…would GM want to license the technology so quickly before it has a chance to reap its rewards? Is it possible that there be a simultaneous release of a Volt and Ford-Volt? Wow.

[Reply]
Exp_EngTech Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:21 am

#20 Tim wrote:

“The “great” depression was just a trial run…”

I won’t disagree with you. My dad has been saying that for a few years now. The recent climb in energy prices have caused the economy to pass a “tipping point”. Important “dominos” have started to fall.

I’m in good shape. I’m one of those “bitter” people, clinging to my guns (multiple) and I own land to grow food on if need be.

Take Care

[Reply]
Tagamet Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:28 am

NZDavid@21
Thanks for the correction! You had me “Googling” APAIN (lol).
Be well,
Tag

[Reply]
frankyB Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:30 am

I could have been more exicited if it would have been a player that doesn’t overlap as much the same market as Ford does. Nissan/BMW/Audi/Mercedes would have been better and $$ is not an issue with them.

[Reply]
Morgan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:34 am

24 Exp_EngTech:

I hope you have your windows rolled up right about now. How hilarious that we live in the same neck of the woods.

In regards to that…the big Class A’s are already looking into the Serial Hybrid Diesel Electric buses for their RVs…3 MPG to 10 MPG is better than nothing I suppose. International has a crash program going and a little Canadian company has one on the road right now but is production backlogged.

The RV industry was worse than this in the 70’s…according to my dad at least.

[Reply]
Bernie Torbik Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:40 am

Ford wisely seems to be hedging its bets. Volvo is testing an electric-drive version of the C-30 http://hiddenbuzz.com/volvos-4-in-wheel-drive-electric-car-my-favorite-type-of-hybrid, but no imminent production plans.

The architecture is interesting, but it also seems more expensive and mechanically complicated than the Volt.

[Reply]
The Grump Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:45 am

I hate to throw cold water on this Volt lovefest, but you do realize you’re getting all fired up about a car which is (at best) a few years away. Don’t forget about “limited production” the first year, which may or may not be 2011 - Research and development are still ongoing. BTW, Jay Leno and Al Gore get their Volts first.

Also, this is a $40,000+ car that will cost you $800.00 a month, given 5% interest, no down payment or trade. How many of you Volt fans really have THAT much money to spend each month?

Too bad Lyle doesn’t have a “Remove my name” button - I joined when the Volt cost “comfortably under $30,000, had a 12 gallon gas tank, and looked as cool as the car show prototype. Now, it’s over $40,000, has a seven gallon tank (for now), and will probably look like a Cobalt with a facelift. And my personal gripe - how could anyone with a brain build an EREV designed so that the ICE could not recharge the battery, just maintain 30%? That’s just stupid.

Bob has changed the terms of the agreement, oh Volt faithful - pray he doesn’t change them further.

[Reply]
Cautious Fan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:47 am

I think licensing this tech, assuming it’s e-Flex, is a good strategy for GM. Short term, they get some cash when Ford pays for the tech. And by getting the tech out in peoples faces more that should quicken the acceptance and create additional pull. It obviously works well for Ford because the get the tech discounted at what it would actually cost them to make it. But I doubt GM would license it to Toyota or Honda, simply because those guys have enough money to develop it on their own whereas Ford does not. And just imagine the PR that would come from GM licensing tech to Toyota. No way Toyota would do that.

[Reply]
Aspherical Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:49 am

I believe this is great news! One of the biggest potential problems GM will have is the number people will pull the trigger and buy the E-flex powertrain in its “infant years.” By collaborating with Ford not only will get more E-flex systems into the market but it won’t appear as GM is the only American company that believes that BEVs will have a future…

[Reply]
Tagamet Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:55 am

The Grump@29

I suspect that if you email Lyle, he’ll gladly remove you from any further annoyances.

Tag

[Reply]
Bernie Torbik Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:57 am

It’s worth noting that Ford licenses Toyota’s hybrid technology and uses it for the Escape/Mariner hybrids. This has been of limited use to them as battery availability has hindered sales and delayed introduction of the planned Fusion hybrid.

[Reply]
Jason M. Hendler Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:02 am

I would think that Ford would have to buy/license someone’s finished design. Whether that is from Tesla, Fisker or GM, I am glad Ford has gotten off the stick and is finally moving instead of waiting and seeing. Given that Quantum Tech has been supplying their subsystems for some time and are proven, they seem to be the best choice for getting a high volume vehicle on the road the fastest, while GM’s approach may prove to be better for getting a high volume vehicle on the road the cheapest.

[Reply]
john1701a Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:11 am

>> GM is just kicking butt these days.

$15.5 Billion money down the drain last quarter alone. Two-Mode & BAS sales barely enough to even be considered niche. Many popular models having to be cut back. Rollout of Volt still 2 years away and high-volume production 7 years away.

Have you lost all perspective?

[Reply]
Volt Design Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:15 am

Here’s a short article by the designer of the Volt.
I think they got the price wrong.

http://www.portfolio.com/careers/job-of-the-week/2008/08/03/Car-Designer-Bob-Boniface

[Reply]
Estero Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:20 am

It appears to be talk at the moment. But, if it becomes reality, I’m all for it. We need to focus on rebuilding the manufacturing base in this country and this is a step in the right direction. JMHO

[Reply]
Dr.Science #11 on the list Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:29 am

The major benifit of joint development among US based automakers is standardization of components with little use of propritary items. Even small parts like light bulbs, HVAC components, brakes, even batteries and motors, will reduce the cost of development and replacement parts leaving the propritary issues to style & design, level of comfort, form & function, value & performance.
Why have 7 versions of bolt paterns for the same spec. component?

[Reply]
Marcus Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:35 am

Specifically when it comes to the Volt, the report indicates that Ford is ” keen on getting access to the technology.”

Yeah I bet…

[Reply]
wwskinn3W Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:39 am

6. nuclearboy - The volt could change public opinion dramatically about GM and this could lead to a big rise in the Stock price. I may even be able to afford a volt with all those capital gains.

WHEN OBAMA GETS THROUGH WITH OUR CAPITAL GAINS WE WON’T HAVE ENOUGH LEFT TO BUY GAS.

[Reply]
Spin Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:40 am

Don’t bet on Ford getting the E-Flex technology from GM anytime soon. With the expected limited supply of batteries, and GM incorporating this technology into other types of vehicles, there will not be room for a Ford E-Flex.

[Reply]
wwskinn3 Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:49 am

Perhaps the Big 3 should get together and build their own batteries. This might benefit all concerned as well as bring the price down. This could be a money maker for all 3.

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:50 am

#40 wwskinn3W
You had to throw “Obama” in there, didn’t you? Is comment #40 where the thread went off the rails? We’ll see.

[Reply]
Len Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:54 am

I liked what Bob Boniface said about not designing the character out of a car to get the last little bit of drag.

I also think under $30k is a more reasonable price if they want to sell large numbers.

With all the incentives that Obama has announced for alternate energy vehicles maybe it will null out.

I would rather the government just stayed out of it, but I don’t think that is reality. Maybe we could just have someone like Clinton for a president that has a clue about a balanced budget. The dollar has lost 1/3 its value under the present president.

[Reply]
DonC Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:56 am

#18 Statik - “The problem is the Lithium battery–availability and cost. No secret here at all, and GM is doing nothing when it comes to this most important part. GM is having a couple guys fight for a contract, while Toyota and Mitsu are developing their own and building plants (or owning parts of the companies that are).”

I think battery technology is moving too fast, even if a game changer like EESTOR doesn’t work out. I think it’s a better idea to go the third party route than to try and bring battery production in-house. The whole integrated production idea, where if you wanted to make steel you bought an iron ore mine in South America and then a shipping line to transport the ore and so forth is very mid-19th century. It’s not that effecient.

Your point about electric cars being made in garages is a good one. Granted these garages are prodicung cars in very small numbers, but pure BEVs just aren’t as capital intensive as ICE cars. Plus they’re a lot more electrical than mechanical. (Electricians may be better able to work on these cars than the service people at your existing car dealership). Electric cars seem to be a very disruptive technology, especially given the burden of the dealer and supplier networks shouldered by GM and Ford.

Tesla has announced that it’s a car company not a car, and they may be on to something.

The e-flex cars like the Volt have to be appealing to GM (and Ford) because they allow them to maintain the huge advantage they have in ICE design and production. I can’t imagine an upstart company turning these out in any numbers.

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:56 am

#44 Len

Holycrap! Did you just throw a “Clinton” in there? This thread is doomed.

[Reply]
Ernie V Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:08 am

this ‘licensing’ thing is ok but watch out GM .remember what happened
to the hybrid technology for your big trucks . it was licensed to chyrsler which lately undercuts its pricing for its equivalent trucks !

i guess , desperate times mean desperate housewiv… err .. desperate measures !

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:13 am

If we are going to turn this thread political, please start the branching with references to Gerald FORD or GENERAL George Washington.

[Reply]
#DA Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:37 am

#3 Exp_EngTech

“My translation…
Keen = Nifty = Neato = Boss = Electric Boss Mustang !”

Don’t get me too excited. A 100 MPC Mustang with a 0-60 time of 5.5 seconds….I’d sell my soul for a ride like that….

–
DA

[Reply]
N Riley Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:39 am

After reading the article, I say go, go Ford and GM. I think it would be great. The collaboration between two of the world’s largest automakers could only be good for both of them. They need all the help they can get from one another to compete against Japan, Inc. Toyota gets all kinds of funding, research and assistance from the Japanese government which is a big advantage for them. Maybe if Ford and GM can cooperate it will give them some help in fighting off Toyota.

I say go for it GM and Ford. Include Chrysler if it makes sense to do so.

[Reply]
noel park Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:42 am

#37 Estero:

Amen!

#47 Ernie V:

Being of a somewhat older demographic, I recently downloaded an extensive list of e-mail/text message abbreviations to help me to try to stay in the game. WYSIWYG -What You See Is What You Get, for example.

I was raised on “Desperate Times Call For Desperate Measures”. I have said it many times here. As you comment is going to be ever more frequent in the future, I propose the following:

DTCFDM

If you insist, we could use:

DTMDM. It does have a nice rythmn to it, actually.

Or how about a compromise:

DT=DM?

Anyway, it sure is true. It’s the first thing that came to my mind when I read Lyle’s post. Better this than annihilation! Can anyone say merger??? The true “merger of equals”, LOL.

[Reply]
Jeff M Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:43 am

Never mind GM & Ford sharing technologies…. CNBC this morning had a lead in (I haven’t seen the story itself yet) that rumors and/or speculates that GM & Ford could actually merge!

Hopefully I can catch the full story… however it seems a bit impossible as mergers don’t usually happen between two companies both on the brink of bankruptcy. Not to mention passing antitrust muster with the FTC.

Reply to “The Grump”… I agree w/some of what you said… however I disagree with your belief that the genset should actually fully recharge the vehicle’s battery pack…. that would make no sense at all. Why would I want to burn my liquid fuel to inefficiently and at higher cost compared to plugging in with cheaper and more efficiently produced electrical power from your power company (or even better your own home solar and/or wind system)? Not to mention you would be aging the battery faster (cycle life).

[Reply]
Jim in PA Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:45 am

#40 wwskinn3W

I am also worried about a decrease in my capital gains portfolio. Maybe I will have my butler look into it after I get back from the polo match.

Seriously folks, don’t destroy this website by turning it into yet another bullhorn for your political views. It is obvious that there are conservatives and liberals here, all united by their enthusiasm for an American auto revival and by their distaste for OPEC. Why highlight the differences between us? What does that gain?

[Reply]
Toyoda Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:47 am

#50 N Riley
I totally agree about Japan. In fact former Toyota employees are in many influential position within Japan Government. Over there the Corporations and Government are totally intertwined. Basically, it is one giant Good’ol Boy network with everbody washing each other’s back. Not exactly fair competition.

[Reply]
RB Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:50 am

#36 Volt Design — Thank you for the Boniface link.
I liked his comments.

[Reply]
Mark Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:55 am

excellent news…

[Reply]
noel park Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:56 am

#46 & #48 ThombDbhomb:

In that spirit - DFTT!

(Even though I agree with you, as I’m sure you know.) Anyway, SFSG. Ain’t it fun? I just make ‘em up as I go along.

#50 N Riley:

Amen. For about the 100th time, BTW.

[Reply]
Dave B Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:58 am

Jeff M @ 52 said,

“Never mind GM & Ford sharing technologies…. CNBC this morning had a lead in (I haven’t seen the story itself yet) that rumors and/or speculates that GM & Ford could actually merge!”

CNBC reported a board member of GM making this statement not long ago which was quickly shot down by the other board members. I’ll look at your source but it could easily be the same member. I do not desire a merging of the two because it has the precursor of Chrysler or AOL written all over it. Yes to sharing the technology, but let’s keep them as separate as possible.

[Reply]
Jeff M Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 10:59 am

Bernie Torbik, regarding the Volvo C30 ReCharge…

Just in case anyone thinks that prototype is in response to GM’s Volt… that particular concept has been around for at least as long as the Volt.

In addition the Volt’s design is essentially the same as GM’s 1999 “range extended” EV1 prototype… which was essentially the same as Volvo’s 1992 ECC prototype. To be fair even the Volvo ReCharge C30 copies from 1901’s Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid that also had 4 hub mounted motors.

Sadly when Ford aquired Volvo in 1999, within a few short months Ford had Volvo kill their EV programs

[Reply]
Ernie V Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:00 am

noel ,

to toyotans , gm merging w/ ford is the merger of equals …….equal losers !

[Reply]
TDJ Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am

With all of the grief that Ford has taken around here recently with their “5-years out” comment, I think this is good news. I own a Ford Escape Hybrid and it is a fantastic piece of technology. I’m getting between 40-50 MPG on it this summer in short trips (under 15 miles) with a bit of hypermiling. And it’s an SUV to boot!

Having both companies work together on pushing this stuff forward would be great for everyone involved, IMO.

[Reply]
Joe Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am

Statik@18

“Again, I would like to say, building a electric car isn’t like splitting the atom, or building a rocket ship. It is a simple process, guys can do it in their basements, little piddley companies with a few million dollars can get them made, and cleared to be on the roads.”

***************************************************************

Making such a statement does not show much intellect. Maybe you ought to find a job at GM and show how to build the Volt and save GM all those hundreds of million of dollars.

[Reply]
Tesla Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:14 am

#62 Joe
I agree, almost all of those small companies have been working on EV technologies for 5-10 years and still are not in full production. Getting and EV on the road in volume production is NOT an easy task. GM is using very expensive Supercomputers for design work, and building half-billion dollar production facilities, things that the smaller guys can only dream about.

[Reply]
N Riley Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:15 am

#28 Bernie Torbik

Thanks for the link. Did you notice another youtube film about a battery change station that would swap out a depleted battery and replace it with a freshly charged one in only a few minutes. It is done automatically. I have provided the link below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0SB5psrVCM

Also, take a look at ZENN’s youtube product film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsBkxFS4lag

[Reply]
kent beuchert Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:17 am

Just last week Ford predicted 5 years before any type of electric
propulsion. Much bigger than this collaboration would be a merge - this would allow GM/Ford to apply some leverage against outrageous UAW salaries. Those salaries is the sole reason GM and Ford (and Chrysler) are having so many problems. Union
always always try to shift the blame on management and are aided by their union-controlled media and press, which cons the public into believing that a few overpaid CEOs has any siginificance. It’s all
a choreographic con of the public, carried out for the past 50 years, ably assisted by paid-for politicians, usually Democrats. Free market my ass.

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:24 am

#57 noel park

I hope I wasn’t feeding the trolls. In my mind, troll feeding involves Newtroll’s third law; for every inflammatory action, there is an equal but opposite reaction. I didn’t counter any poitical position. I urged people to stay focused on the topic. I don’t want to be considered a troll feeder. If a troll starts something, things can get crazy real fast. I tried to be a spark arrester, not gasoline on the fire. If things go crazy anyway, as they have doing lately, I realize I can’t stop the frenzy.

I recently rescued a dog from the local shelter. As it turns out, it is a wolf-dog. When I see him focusing on somenting he shouldn’t, I need to quickly re-focus his attention to something less primal. That is what I tried to do when this thread started looking like it was going emotional. I don’t think I was responding, in-kind, to a political statement.

Sometimes, a well timed word can moderate unfolding events.

[Reply]
George K Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:31 am

#29 The Grump
“how could anyone with a brain build an EREV designed so that the ICE could not recharge the battery, just maintain 30%? That’s just stupid.”

I understand some of your complaints. But, I have to tell you that this is a big reason why I switch horses from waiting for the PHEV Prius. Beginning in ‘05, I kept reading about people converting their Prii to a PHEV in their garage, and yet was very disappointed in what Toyota was saying, mainly nothing or false info.

Then came the Volt team, with GM being very open about the Volt progress. As a result, we hear the good as well as the bad.

I still prefer that we know where we stand.

Also, the Volt is designed to reduce if not delete our use of gas, and pollution. While the gas engine could charge the battery, it is far less efficient then plugging in. So, why would you use the extra gas and pollution to charge up the battery so you don’t have to use extra gas and pollution. You’re already there, so let the EREV do its job and you’ll use less gas and pollution in the long run (and it will cost a lot less, too).

[Reply]
Exp_EngTech Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:32 am

News Flash ! News Flash !

Media Reporting…”Morgan Freeman Seriously Injured In Car Accident”

I just knew this was eventually gonna happen if he kept…
Driving Miss Daisy.

OK, OK… I know that was crude…but funny.

[Reply]
GM and Ford to share technology? » Hybrid News Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:39 am

[...] http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/04/gm-may…ain-with-ford/ [...]
David Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:40 am

Now if we could get our politicians talking cooperation in solving some of our energy problems we might could make some real progress. I think GM/Ford are thinking “outside the box” which is great!

[Reply]
wwskinn3 Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:45 am

61. TDJ - how did you get an Escape Hybrid. My dealer here in Texas says they have never had one and cannot get one. He said only way to get one here is to order it and wait till next year.

[Reply]
nasaman Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:48 am

36 Volt Design…… “You said, “Here’s a short article by the designer of the Volt. I think they got the price wrong. http://www.portfolio.com/careers/job-of-the-week/2008/08/03/Car-Designer-Bob-Boniface”

Actually, I think the Conde Naste article got the Volt’s price “under $30,000″ RIGHT! My rationale is this…..

The Volt should be a relatively low-risk, inexpensive car to produce in quantity …..except (perhaps) for the battery. And the numerous problems GM & others are having getting NiMH batteries has NOTHING to do with advanced-technology Li-Ion batteries needed for the Volt. Remember that NiMH automotive batteries have been manufactured in quantitiy for over 10 years. During that time Nickel has become very expensive —enough so that Li-Ion batteries, for which Lithium & all other components are fairly cheap, are already cheaper to make (even in small quantities) than NiMH batteries.

My own detailed study of the research on automotive Li-Ion batteries convinces me that GM (& others) have been over-stating battery cost in large quantites by as much as 3:1. The real cost of a prismatic-cell 16Kwh Li-Ion battery complete with cell monitoring, temperature control, etc in quantitiy should be roughly $3,000 (not $10,000 as GM keeps saying). So why are they inflating the battery cost and, as a result, the Volt selling price? There are several possible reasons….

1) Conti/A123 and CPI/LG Chem don’t want to spend, at their own risk, the huge amount of money needed to design/build a highly-automated factory required to bring the battery cost down to ~$3,000

2) GM doesn’t want to invest heavily in the same type of highly-automated battery factory because they don’t own the technology and therefore won’t recover those investments thru sales to others

3) The tried & true marketing approach of “under promising & over delivering” —i.e., telling the world the battery cost forces them to sell the Volt for $37,000 (say) instead of $30,000, THEN LATER SURPRISING CUSTOMERS WITH A $30,000 VOLT WILL RESULT IN INCREDIBLE GOOD WILL!!!

The GM/Ford collaboration might, among other things, give the battery suppliers (or GM/Ford, if they decide to invest in battery manufacturing) enough added incentive to make the automated factory investment needed to get battery cost down to about $3,000.

So how does GM both “price to the market” (sell the 1st 10,000 Volts for $40-50,000 each) while also garnering the tremendous good will they need and would achieve by selling subsequent Volts for $29,999??? Easy….. call the 1st 10,000 Volts the “Signature Series” and attach gold-plated “Signature Series” emblems at strategic locations on the car ….another tried & true marketing device!*

*Hey, they might even offer a deluxe “Signature Series” version for another $2,500, complete with a laminated Certificate of Authenticity permanently attached inside the glove compartment door and hand-signed by the car’s creator, Bob Lutz!

[Reply]
MDDave Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:04 pm

The Grump@29

OK… So, you had me going there for a while, and then you said:

…how could anyone with a brain build an EREV designed so that the ICE could not recharge the battery, just maintain 30%? That’s just stupid.

Why is that stupid? I believe the 30% charge was picked to maximize battery life. But looking at it from a more practical perspective, It’s cheaper to charge at home than by the ICE. Think about it this way, If the car can maintain its operating parameters with a 30% charge, then there is no benefit in having the ICE charge the battery beyond that. Personally, I wouldn’t want to get home after a 40 mile drive and find that the battery had been charged to 100% by the ICE, rendering the plug-in capability useless.

[Reply]
Statik Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:09 pm

#62 Joe

“Making such a statement does not show much intellect. Maybe you ought to find a job at GM and show how to build the Volt and save GM all those hundreds of million of dollars.”

______

Productive post. I like it when you insult other posters.

Complete lack of facts to back up why you are insulting me…but I’ll give you my points of reference regardless of your crasp nature.

For 12K (6k pounds) you can buy the kit to convert your SMART to a EV yourself. Not handy enough? These for another 10K they’ll will do it for you.

http://www.everything-ev.com/smart-conversion-parts-kits-choice-of-systems-p-393.html

As for it being not possible for ‘regular Joes’ to create a EV, there are currently no fewer than 30 conversion/manufacturering places in just California, right now.

Also there are courses on ‘how-to build EVs’ offered all over the country, and at major schools. In almost all of these classes the ’students’ convert a car to a EV as a class project.

http://evconversions.ca/?cat=7

There is daily stories about cars being converted to EVs on just about every auto-enviromental site.

Of course, I couldn’t be right that the only thing holding back EVs from the road is the battery right?

Lets check out that SMART again for a example. How much cost does it add to the price for a fancy Lithium pack over the old lead acids to give it a 100 mile range? An additional $36,000! (18K pounds) Wow, that seems like a number that might hold back sales a bit, rather than the ‘technology’ to build them.

(Check the pricing down at the bottom of my link).
http://www.everything-ev.com/conversion-of-customer-supplied-smart-p-202.html

/rebut if you like, but try to not be a jackass and leave your condescension off the site, it is uncalled for

[Reply]
Jackson Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:21 pm

Ford licensed Toyota’s system for it’s SUV-based hybrids, and now find they are the poor step-child; held back from the table until the Master is fed.

Given the ambiguities of the article, I strongly suspect that they are collaborating over the future of the two-mode hybrid system.

Ford, like GM, is heavily invested in very large vehicles; for which the 2-mode is ideally suited. If GM can recover some of the costs of developing it through license fees, it could help them ‘over the hump’ to the next big thing: the Volt.

With local-grown (if not in-house) components, Ford would be free to spread their hybrids across many brands, including their very popular pickup trucks. As a bonus, Toyota gets another sock in the jaw.

I’m sure Ford wants the Volt technology. It’s good to want things. Short of a merger, I doubt they’ll see it much before 2020.

[Reply]
frankie Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:24 pm

#49 DA

I’m in line with you. I just purchased a 2008 mustang V6 (love it!) If Ford could build a 100 MPC 0-60 6.0 sec. I would sell my Taurus and have 2 Mustangs! Don’t get me wrong guys I like GM, but the look of the current Mustang is terrific! Like someone earlier said, I hope the volt doesn’t look like an upgraded Cobalt. I like the idea of plugging in my car, but when you get to the 40k range looks start being important because you are getting into a different type of consumer.

[Reply]
Ash Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:26 pm

Hey Lyle,

Maybe you should buy the URL http://www.gm-ford-volt.com

Ash

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:26 pm

Statik

You have repeatedly demonstrated superior intellect. Stay above the fray.

[Reply]
DonC Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:33 pm

#72 nasaman

I’d love to go with your scenario, and every piece is logical and plausible, but at the end of the day I think it was a typo or mis-statement.

The piece you’re missing is that you are probably correct in thinking that the battery guys don’t want to commit to the investment unless GM guarantees volume. You’re probably also correct when you suggest that GM doesn’t want to do this. In fact, given its financial condition, such a guarantee would be severly discounted (aka not worth much). So, given your analysis, how do you produce the volume you need to drive prices down? Simply put, you’re assuming a solution to the (intractible) problem you’ve described.

I think what you’re saying is that GM could use the signature series idea to establish strong demand, and then use this demand to convince the battery guys to commit the funding needed for volume productio. Is this right? The problem I have with that is if getting 30,000 people to sign up for a car that doesn’t exist doesn’t show demand potential I’m not sure selling ten thousand will do the trick either.

On the oher hand I’m intrigued by the “Gang of Ten’s” energy bill. That bill has a provision for a $7500 tax credit for zero emmision or alternative fuel cars. A Volt that used E85 should qualify for this, no? That would drive the price to $30,000 right out of the blocks.

[Reply]
GM Volt Fan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:40 pm

I like it. I’ve read that Ford has been focused on some parts of the fuel efficiency puzzle while GM has been focused on other parts. Ford has been focused on direct injection turbo engines and lightweight materials while GM has been focused a LOT more on batteries and hybrid technology like the E-Flex powertrain.

If GM and Ford can collaborate and accelerate the introduction of the very best fuel efficiency technologies then I’m all for it. They need to share some of the risks in order to be able to share the rewards if the car technology they collaborate on turns out to be a huge success.

Let’s face it, both Ford and GM have their backs against the wall trying to take on the Japan, Inc. and their auto industry keiretsu. They need to be buddies these days and “circle the wagons” in order to get the American auto industry thriving again. I’m sure they both admit that they messed up by not developing enough fuel efficient small and medium size cars that get the rave reviews from the car magazines and reviewers. The Detroit 3 didn’t have a very diversified portfolio of cars. They definitely didn’t have something to compete against Toyota in hybrids at the time they most needed it … right NOW.

Now they can turn things around. If they collaborate, they can bring awesome new automotive technologies to market sooner and at less cost to us car buyers. It would be great to say the least if we end up being able to get a Volt for $30,000 like they were talking about when they first announced it.

I just saw an energy speech by Obama on CNN and I’ve seen speeches by McCain on energy. I think Obama would probably be better for Detroit to get these new technologies going, but BOTH of them know that cars like the Volt are going to be a KEY part of the solution to wean us off our addiction to oil.

Obviously, when billionaire oilmen like T. Boone Pickens are saying that we can’t drill our way out of this mess, the American people KNOW we have to make some big changes to our energy policies. We’re going to HAVE TO go to new technologies like plug-in hybrids or we’d really be screwed if some “stuff” happened in the Middle East to a pipeline or with Iran or whatever. We’d be in for another gas price shock. The next time it might soar to $8-10/gallon … especially with all the growing economies around the world like India and China.

This latest gas price shock is a big “check engine” light. We better deal with it or we’re going to blow the engine and be on the side of the road walking. One of these days, the oil traders will yawn when “stuff” happens in the Middle East … because America gets almost all of its energy from our own backyard. I lot of it could come from our local electric utility just a few miles away from where we live. Sure beats getting it from Iran or some other fatcat oil shiek regime that tends to support Islamic extremists.

Obama and McCain would be smart to do lots of photo ops with the Volt in the background once they release the production version. If the car is somewhat ready to drive around before November, GM ought to let both of them take it for a test drive maybe. That’ll get good publicity for the Volt from the 24/7 news channels. Then this blog might explode with new people posting stuff. Lyle might become a bit of a celebrity by the time “Volt Nation 2009″ rolls around.

[Reply]
N Riley Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:42 pm

#53 Jim in PA

“Seriously folks, don’t destroy this website by turning it into yet another bullhorn for your political views. It is obvious that there are conservatives and liberals here, all united by their enthusiasm for an American auto revival and by their distaste for OPEC. Why highlight the differences between us? What does that gain?”

_______________________________

I couldn’t agree with you more. I, for one, have espoused political views in the past and probably will do so in the future. That being said, I feel that we should continue our discussion of this common goal and try our best to leave politics with the politicians as much as possible. It is a “dirty” business and they are well trained to handle it.

I say Go GM and Go, Go, Go Volt. And, of course, Go Ford and Chrysler.

[Reply]
pauln Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:42 pm

Meanwhile, Toyota has its own Deathwatch on the Volt, Fisker Karma, and Tesla Whitestar: http://tinyurl.com/5dfbht This came out in an informal lunch between EVWorld Founder Bill Moore and Toyota’s Advanced technology Chief Bill Reinart. I can’t supply the original link, because its in a premium subscription newsletter from EVWorld.

[Reply]
GM Volt Fan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

Oops. I accidently said a verboten word in my earlier post. I wish Lyle would tell us what triggers that “moderation” thing.

[Reply]
john1701a Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

75 >> Ford licensed Toyota’s system for it’s SUV-based hybrids,

It never ceases to amaze me how long a misinformation like that lives on.

There is only a patent agreement, where both parties have ownership of their own (though similar) design.

There is no license and never has been.

[Reply]
DonC Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 12:58 pm

#80 GM Volt Fan - “Obviously, when billionaire oilmen like T. Boone Pickens are saying that we can’t drill our way out of this mess, the American people KNOW we have to make some big changes to our energy policies.”

I dunno. This reminds me of the remark — I can’t remember exactly how it goes — that no one has ever gone broke betting against the intelligence of the American public.

Maybe at some point in the future people will get it, but a this point you have more than fifty percent thinking that lifting the ban on offshore drilling will effect immediate price decreases and sixty-eight percent thinking the oil companies are responsible for the higher prices. I’ve even seen a lot of this silly stuff here as well.

The broadcast media also doesn’t help. It’s all stupid “he said this, he said that” or “he flip flopped here”. It’s horrible. I haven’t seen one even semi-serious look at peak oil or world demand or oil subsidies in developing economies or anything real. How many stories can you run that simply say “the price of gas has gone up, people are upset, and they want to know why” and then show some person pumping gas or commenting on how it’s hard to pay for gas. It’s just sad.

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:03 pm

#79 DonC

GM thinks “People Will be Lined up to Get Into This Kind of Vehicle.” Volt demand depends on Volt pricing, among other things. The battery people have a good idea what an economy of scale will do to battery costs. If low battery costs can result in an affordable Volt, I think GM can guarantee volume. Well, maybe not gaurantee. But, it seems like a risk worth taking.

[Reply]
Ted Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:04 pm

Post #33 Bernie and post #75 Jackson - FORD DID NOT LICENSE TOYOTA TECHNOLOGY FOR THE ESCAPE HYBRID!!! This seems to be the myth that won’t die. Do some research before propagating this falsehood. Ford did independent development and found many of their patents to be similar enough to Toyota’s that they approached Toyota about some cross-licensing. Also, many of Toyota’s hybrid patents could probably be successfully challenged in court, which Toyota probably recognized.

[Reply]
Jackson Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:04 pm

I don’t think what I said was wrong. But if I was:

1) Ford didn’t invent the system used in it’s hybrids, they used Toyota’s (either through direct agreement short of a license, or Ford’s reverse engineering, settled currently by a cross-licensing agreement after the fact)

2) They are currently waiting for parts, notably batteries, from Toyota, or Toyota’s suppliers because of Toyota’s desire to sell as many Priuses as possible.

True? False?

EDIT: I didn’t see the late explanation that it was apparently legitimate co-development, in which both parties found it cheaper and safer to cross-license. I honestly didn’t think this was the case. Sorry about that.

Is Ford’s hybrid program in any way captive (for parts or batteries) to Toyota’s?

[Reply]
wwskinn3 Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:16 pm

HOW COME WE ARE NOT GETTING FREE OIL FROM IRAQ TO HELP PAY FOR OUR COSTS FOR THE WAR. SEEMS FAIR TO ME.

[Reply]
Aspherical Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:18 pm

#72 nasaman

You are on the right path. The Li-ion battery pack shouldn’t cost $10,000. GM has a bad reputation of initially quoting a program for 3 million units over so many years, then changes it to 2 million once the design is completed, then 700,000 by the time production starts, for example. Then, the supplier is near break even or get to the point where they are shipping a $20 bill in each part. The problem here is that we don’t know how much volume GM requested from Conti and LG. Hopefully GM can properly adjust those values so the battery suppliers don’t have to artificially inflate the price…

[Reply]
Zen Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:19 pm

#78 ThombDbhomb - Feeling elite much? You’re sooooo much better than THOSE people.

[Reply]
chevonly Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:26 pm

GM is missing the boat again, americans hate american car companies in general period, they need to emulate the chineese way of doing business come out with a new model called the Toyuda or the Hondu and americans will go crazy for the car. Plus dont forget the youth market give the car an adjustable spoiler that goes to a maximum height of six feet and a sound system with 5000 watts of power and the intellegent youth of america will love the car. Call the new model the P duddy three or gangsta mobyle uno. Nothing better than the sell out to the competition why not have a spot on the car for advertising to bring down the cost of production I would love to drive a car down the street with a big Viagra logo on the side if they will pay for my battery and my ride if you catch my drift. Every thing is for sale in America for the right price, is this a great country or a dying joke you be the judge.

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:28 pm

#91 Zen

Thanks, I’ll take that as a compliment. Keep practicing your Zen, you’ll get there.

[Reply]
doggydogworld Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

#74 Statik, I agree it is not hard to build an EV. But it is hard to build a cost-effective, performance-competitive EV/PHEV with a battery that lasts the life of the car. To my knowledge it’s never been done. GM is trying to be the first, which is no small challenge.

An E-Flex deal with Ford would cut costs for all sorts of minor components. But it makes the battery supply situation worse. Since battery supply is clearly the limiting factor, such a deal is questionable. It only makes sense if GM does not plan to ramp Volt volume.

[Reply]
Rashiid Amul Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Ah, McCain, Obama, Clinton, Bush. I just love politics. It makes everyone come together and be joyful.

[Reply]
GM Volt Fan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:42 pm

The insiders in the oil drilling business probably KNOW that even if Congress opened up offshore drilling today that nothing would probably happen for at least 2 years … not even the seismic underwater oil exploration stuff to see if there’s even any oil in their new leases that Congress would give them.

Not one drop would come out probably for at least 5 years … and not much oil at that. Not enough to lower gasoline prices much. I don’t think the oil companies have enough petroleum engineers and exploration ships to do much of anything now. I hear most of their exploration ships are all leased out in Brazil or somewhere. A lot of this stuff on TV and the radio has that distinctive odor of BS. It’s politicians doing their usual “half truths and distortions” thing because average people don’t know the WHOLE story like the insiders do.

Maybe Exxon Mobil and Chevron just want to lock up those leases so that OTHER foreign oil companies can’t get them. Who knows? The oil companies seem to be sneaky dudes. From the customer’s financial interest point of view, it doesn’t matter what oil company does the drilling. It doesn’t matter if it’s an oil company from China or Norway or whoever. Why? Because the price of oil is set globally on those commodity exchanges. Oil goes into one big global bucket. If any oil company from any country drilled offshore in America it might help a little bit with gas prices … IF they could start getting oil out of the ground right now.

GW Bush’s father is the one who banned oil companies from drilling offshore in the first place. Somebody in the 1990s messed up. They didn’t factor in the growth of China and India obviously. I think this offshore drilling issue that some of politicians are outraged about is more about helping out particular American oil companies than it is helping bring down gas prices for Joe Sixpack at the pump.

Hopefully, in 10 years or so, we won’t have to worry about all these political hot button issues all caused by oil. This product called gasoline and diesel causes all kinds of upheaval and problems all over the world. It might end up causing some really bad wars in the future if we don’t do something it.

It’s time we try REALLY REALLY hard to beat our addiction to oil this time. This time we really mean it. No more messing around with this demon. This time we’re going to rehab for oil addiction and we’re actually going to beat it … permanently. We need our cars to switch to a much healthier diet of electricity from clean sources. It’s long overdue.

I’m glad that GM and Ford are going into this big collaboration. We need Big Auto to take on Big Oil. In the next 10 years it looks like we’re going to have real “smack down” because of our oil addiction. GM and Ford look like a pretty good wrestling tag team to me. America ought to be rooting for the Detroit 3 to get us out of this mess.

[Reply]
Eugene Capatina Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

To GM,

I would extend this offer (the E-Flex power train technology) to Chrysler to increase the demand for batteries and other vital components necessary for VOLT success.

Eugene

[Reply]
Eugene Capatina Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 1:56 pm

(continuation)

The E-Flex techology could save the American pick-up trucks and full size SUVs if the mileage of these popular vehicles could reach 70 MPG (or, better…) thanks to the VOLT power train.

Eugene

[Reply]
Jackson Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 2:15 pm

Hey, everybody. Why so tense?

Maybe we should try decaffienated coffee!

(nothing will quiet this bunch down like some solid Volt news/pics)

[Reply]
Murray Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 2:16 pm

After reading through these posts and seeing the dreaded politics come up (ugh) and even someone daring to label our Canadian friend Statik as mis-informed (we all know the contrary)

I just would like you all to think of a classic tune that applies to this post and the idea of AMERICAN (big auto) even discussing things such as ‘collaboration’ on something as important as electrification of the automobile!

I would like to recommend we all take a listen
Track 1 from Abbey Road (or one of countless covers)
….
Here come old flat top … he come groovin up slowly…
….
….
One thing I can tell you is…You got to be free…
Come Together….right now
….

[Reply]
jeremy Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 2:25 pm

even if we do drill in those places and find oil.. it wil l go over seas anyway we export alot of oil to japan and such soo guess what we wont see it anyway .. prices wont be changed at all it will remain the same because.. by the time we get that poil out… we will have taken out many milions of barrels of oil from the rest of the wold.. if not a billion .
soo sorry to say it wont help us now

[Reply]
TDJ Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 2:35 pm

#92 chevonly

Yes, the trouble with auto industry is those darn kids with their loud music! Start digging the hole now.

[Reply]
Grant Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 2:47 pm

I know it isn’t a popular veiw, but I’d LIKE multiple vendors for this kind of tech, as it will both increase quality and decrease costs. In this case, though, I am surprised that a merger concept hasn’t got more attention. The two largest U.S. Carmakers could come together, and, under a new company, very effectively sever ties to their past. Including cutting a LOT of promises they made before, sadly, but that WILL happen by the end of this.

Back to the car, the main reason I want a plug-in hybrid is the ability to use a range of energy sources. I can have gas, ethanol, electric, etc all in one handy unit, and even probably plug it in as a backup generator for the house later.

[Reply]
Jackson Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 2:53 pm

We need to do everything, not just one side or other’s favorite solution.

There is enough lead time for possible production of new oil from offshore exploration/drilling that we needn’t fear it’s effect on the development of electric vehicles. Two, even five years is very optimistic. From what I hear, a more realistic estimate would be a full decade. Oil will continue to be a volatile commodity with an overall upward trend over the next ten years, continuing to support the development of alternative energy.

This will also be true if, in 10 years, they actually find something new offshore, and bring it to market. Worldwide demand will have risen enough in that time to offset such gains.

It’s not an issue of whether or not we want to lower prices ten years from now as much as it is choosing the speed with which it skyrockets. If this is a button with a ten-year delay on it, we’d do well to press it now.

And, if we don’t also make agressive progress towards getting off of oil over this next ten years, we’re fools.

We’re bigger fools if we think we can do it in just ten years. We’ll need all the time we can get.

/ I don’t like coffee, anyways

[Reply]
ThombDbhomb Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 2:59 pm

Why Ford? I assume a party would enter into a strategic alliance with any company that would benefit them. In this global marketplace, why not other automakers? How about Toyota? That would be a powerhouse.

/ducks and covers

[Reply]
noel park Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:01 pm

#66 & #78 ThombDbhomb:

I know. It’s just that it makes me cringe that your well meant comments might trigger it off. It doesn’t take much. As my wife used to say (well yell actually) when I would start to tickle or otherwise tease our then 3 year old (now 28, as of Saturday!) “DON’T STIR HIM UP!!! I am trying my best to just grit my teeth and let this stuff slide.

#72 nasaman:

Nice to see your learned byline here. Maybe we could pick up our Volts in Detroit and have dinner with Mr. Lutz. I dunno, though. I think I’d rather have mine in a plain brown wrapper and knock 500 bucks off the price.

#97 Eugene Capatina:

Makes sense to me. GM Volt Fan has it right at #80 when he speaks of “keiretsu” and ” circle the wagons”.

“If we do not hang together, most assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

Benjamin Franklin

[Reply]
Guy Incognito Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:03 pm

What could be a better indicator as to how bad things are for the auto makers than for 2 of the big 3 to agree to work together so as to avoid bankruptcy & extinction.

[Reply]
Jackson Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:18 pm

There are many ways to generate electricity … this could be one of them:

http://www.technologynewsdaily.com/node/10142

Interesting news on the Coal front …

[Reply]
Bernie Torbik Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:24 pm

#87 - Ted:

I’ve checked my facts concerning Ford’s licensing of Toyota’s hybrid technology and suggest that you check your facts. Unless both of these sources are in error http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Escape_Hybrid and http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E6DE153EF933A25750C0A9629C8B63 my original statement is correct.

[Reply]
JEC Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:27 pm

#74 Statik

I love it when someone lights you off! You come back with more facts and links then my wife has shoes.

Like Sgt. Joe Friday would say…”The facts maam, only the facts”

[Reply]
N Riley Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:40 pm

I work for an oil company and I can not figure out why oil is so high. It has mostly due to speculation. Did you notice that when the president canceled the Presidential Ban against off-shore drilling the price of oil started sliding. It has not stopped yet. I do think talk about more drilling which increases supply (even 5 years out) has an effect on speculative oil prices. So, yes, I say drill now and drill everywhere. We need all the oil we can get to off-set that taken over by other developing countries. Remember, we have 20 to 25 years, at least, before we can switch most of our cars and trucks off petroleum. There will be an increasing demand for oil world-wide for another 5 to 10 years. As we switch and conserve, oil demand will decrease if the rest of the world will move to alternate fuels as well.

When you talk down the economy and the price of gasoline as it is being done every day in the “main stream media” it has an effect on the populace. The old saying that “if you tell a lie long enough it will become the truth” has never been more true than it is today. Plus the fact that we have a large percentage of the population who believes just about anything put out by the media and politicians.

One month ago today we were selling Regular Gasoline for $3.98 per gallon at our pumps. Today we sell it for $3.70 per gallon. Talk of future supply of crude from Brazil and from our own reserves is the only factor I can see that has changed. And this price is going down again tomorrow by another four cents, at least.

[Reply]
Prison Watts Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:41 pm

#108 Jackson:
Another way to generate some electricity could be to take the millions of prisoners who currently sit on their fat a@@ and play video games and watch TV and get them on recumbent bikes that are hooked up to the power grid. The more juice they produce the better food they get.

[Reply]
N Riley Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

#103 Grant

Even if Ford and GM collaborate on future drive train technology, both will make separate changes to it to tailor it to their needs. You will still have competition and each automaker will innovate. So, I see no real down-side to a deal between Ford and GM.

For those who are asking why not Toyota:? Well, it is bad practice to “go to bed” with the party that is trying to kill you off. That would be very bad for GM to be view as having to go “hat in hand” to Toyota and the Japanese government. No thanks!

[Reply]
GM Toyoda Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 3:54 pm

GM and Toyota are already in bed together. They share the same Toyota Matrix / Pontiac Vibe manufacturing plant in Kalifornia.

[Reply]
Morgan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:00 pm

112 N Riley:

Spot on. The most hilarious thing I read today was about Toyota’s tech guru making an “off the record” comment about a deathwatch for the Volt and Toyota is researching zinc-air and expanding NiMH because Lithium is scarce and will only get rarer. I read that thinking…hmm…Zinc and Nickel aren’t the most abundant things either. I remember reading an article a few months back about Zinc being in dangerously short supply.

Do people really believe in the cult of Toyota enough that they think they can hand wave technological innovations into existence? Other than HSD (and that is up for debate given the Ford licensing arguments) name one ground breaking revolutionary vehicle technology Toyota has brought into existence?

This is the same company who, even now, have 25% of the vehicles for one product line with built in standard back up cameras and no monitor to view the camera feed nor can you purchase a monitor from Toyota Parts. The remaining 75% have cameras and monitors.

[Reply]
F O R D Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:02 pm

In a Ford GM joint-venture who is the pitcher ?

FORD = First On Race Day

[Reply]
Lexus Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:06 pm

Toyota invented the self parallel parking car. Truely ground breaking - Look Ma No Hands !

[Reply]
Auto Innovation Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:10 pm

Actually the entire Auto Industry has changed little in the last 100 years. The most improved part of the automobile has been in Electronics not in the mechanical engine.

[Reply]
RB Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:10 pm

#110 N.Riley on price of oil

There are some more immediate factors in the oil price decline, such as driving being down in the US (consistently and unexpectedly) and fairly high oil inventories going into the fall.

People often mention speculators, but as every speculator in oil sells as well as buys, I have not seen any evidence that they cause any net difference in prices except, perhaps, for a few hours.

[Reply]
Cautious Fan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:10 pm

#110 N Riley

You asked a question and I suspect you know the answer, but here’s my understanding. Oil prices today aren’t being driven by a current supply shortage, but by expected future shortages. Speculators believe that supply can’t grow at the predicted rate of demand. Therefore in the near future they see oil as becoming more valuable. Wanting to get in on this early, they’ve bid the current price up. These investors aren’t evil, they are performing a necessary market function.

If the speculators see a fundamental change in future demand or supply, this price is reduced. Oil had a huge drop when Bush repealed the ban, and it’s also had solid drops when new US demand forecasts came out, so there’s probably some of both occurring.

If it weren’t for the oil speculators, I doubt GM would be doing the Volt, at least for a few more years until the actual supply shortage hit. Thanks to the market signals we can get a head start on the problem. I hope GM gets significant first mover advantage for the risk they’re taking

[Reply]
Len Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:16 pm

Exxon made 11.8 billion in profits in the first quarter and 12 billion in the second quarter. The other oil companys are looking at large profits. That may have something to do with the price of gas.

As I said before, I expect the price of gas to continue to decline up to the election.

According to the Department of Energy if the ban were lifted tomorrow it would not have a significant impact on production before 2030.

Our entire economy is based on oil. Plastics are made from oil, even alternate energy sources need oil either as a material or lubricant. We need to stop burning it. I agree with the poster who said we should view this like the oil warning light.

Automobiles like the Volt will help us to move tward a more sustainable way of living. Hopefully we are not the last generation, we need to stop behaving like we are.

[Reply]
W Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:19 pm

Gas is getting CHEAPER.

Thank you G.W. Bush !

[Reply]
POTUS Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:23 pm

#121 W:

We are working very hard to keep oil price declining.
You’re Welcome and thank you fellow Americans.
And don’t forget to vote Republican this Fall.
Your friend,
George W. Bush
POTUS

[Reply]
Van Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Ford Faraday
Ford Farred
Ford Farago

[Reply]
Mike-o-Matic Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:44 pm

@115 F.O.R.D.

>> FORD = First On Race Day

That ain’t the way I hear’ed it. How ’bout “Found Off Road, Dead” … or “Fix Or Replace Daily.”

Sorry… I don’t like to get involved in religious wars, but you drew my fire here

[Reply]
Brad G Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:48 pm

At least Ford and GM are working together, unlike the Democratic House Leadership and the rest of the House.

[Reply]
Brad G Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:54 pm

#105 ThombDbhomb
Why Ford? I assume a party would enter into a strategic alliance with any company that would benefit them. In this global marketplace, why not other automakers? How about Toyota? That would be a powerhouse.
===============================
I’ve been wondering about this also. The only reason I can figure is that in GM’s view, Ford is not as much competition to GM as Toyota is.

I also like the fact that US companies are helping each other out in the Global Marketplace.

[Reply]
Jim I Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:54 pm

Ford Faraday?

How about:

Mercury Megawatt

or

Lincoln Lightning

[Reply]
Tagamet Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 4:59 pm

It’s going to a looooong time until 2010. At that time things should get interesting one way or the other. But it’s going to a looooong time until 2010.
JMO (but I bet that I ain’t alone..)
Be well,
Tag

[Reply]
Tagamet Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 5:02 pm

Volt Jolt? (on sooo many levels - some good, some not so much)
Be well,
Tag

[Reply]
Cautious Fan Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 5:15 pm

#120 Len

What is your theory behind high oil prices? Most people view oil as a global commodity market. With a commodity item, prices are governed very strongly by simple supply & demand and future expectations of such. Do you suspect something else?

I would agree with you that we need to move away from oil, but I trust the market to tell me when and how badly, not a news pundit. I heard someone say the other day that we shouldn’t get hydrogen from water because, “what’ll happen when we run out of water?” In the same sense, I agree that we should move away from oil, but I personally can’t tell when the best time is. What if we should’ve stopped 100 years ago before we started using it all.

[Reply]
Jim I Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 5:19 pm

Statik #18: “Again, I would like to say, building a electric car isn’t like splitting the atom, or building a rocket ship. It is a simple process, guys can do it in their basements, little piddley companies with a few million dollars can get them made, and cleared to be on the roads.”

Although your statement may be factual, it is not really accurate. Most of the home built vehicles are single quantity, not for sale, and most of the conversion kits you speak of, allow them skip over government crash and safety testing, as they are being installed in cars that have already passed those tests. Many of the current electric cars available have three wheels, again bypassing most federal laws for cars, as they are considered as motorcycles. And even the most well funded, such as Tesla, have still only produced a handfull of vehicles.

GM is really the first major manufacturer to try to do a real E-REV type car, with real warranty and service, through a real dealer network. And even if they only do manufacture only 10K vehicles the first year, it will still be more than most other manufacturers have done in total.

Doing a design like this from the ground up is a major undertaking. Integrating all this hardware with electronics and software, and making it work for a worldwide market is, IMHO, more difficult than building a rocket ship, as it has to be completely reliable for the average driver to get in and go, without an army of techs to get it ready for a single launch. (no offense to nasaman!)

I think that making simplistic comments about what is involved is insulting to the thousands of people that are working to bring this project to market.

Anyway, that is how I see it……………

GO GM! - Go GM Volt Team!!! Jim I - #1196 on the GM-Volt.com List

[Reply]
Statik Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 8:22 pm

#131 Jim I

You and I have had our moments in the past, but this is the way to make a rebuttal.. You have a opinion and you state why. We have different opinions, but we can co-exist.

There is no offical “I win” in these posts. No one gets a big checkmark beside their name. We are best served to be cordial to one another at least on a one-to-one basis.

Saying something like, “I think that making simplistic comments about what is involved is insulting to the thousands of people that are working to bring this project to market” is perfectly fine, it’s not a personal attack, but rather a observation of how my statement may be interpreted to those directly involved.

Even more than that, it is completely accurate, it is insulting to them, they should be unhappy about it. It is no secret I think this project is needlessly over-complicated, over-promised, over-budget and the design is completely unnecessary to be viable.

I think if GM would have slapped a 50kW pack into the trunk of a Cobalt and marketed it just with a sign that said, “It goes 175 miles, yours for $39,000″ they could have got it out 2 years earlier, built twice as many…and sold everyone they could make.

…but all that doesn’t matter to much to me right now, because they still have a real good shot at being “first.” That is why I am here, that is why my name is on the list. Speaking of myself only, If you get the first EV out GM, you win my business, if Mitsu/Toyota beats you…you lose, simple. I’m pretty sure alot of people, even who post here, won’t sit around and wait for a Volt, if another EV is readily available….but some will.

/such is life

[Reply]
bruce g Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

We have Ford versus Holden arguments in this end of the world but they are mostly written on the back of toilet doors.
Hard to comprehend.

[Reply]
Jim I Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 11:40 pm

Statik:

I agree that just tossing out insults gains nothing, and I thank you for your comments.

But like you said, we disagree about this, and I would like to point out two things for you to consider from your last post:

1. You said “It is no secret I think this project is needlessly over-complicated, over-promised, over-budget and the design is completely unnecessary to be viable”. But on the other hand, you don’t seem to have a problem with taking a factory built Prius, and adding a third party battery pack and charging system to it. Do you really think that is a good long term solution? I sure don’t. There is no single point of responsibility for service on the vehicle. And if there are long term problems with the PHEV add-ons, Toyota has the right to walk away and say, “this was not the car we sold you, so all warranty bets are off”. I see the GM Volt project as being a company wide solution that will be made available to many different vehicles, all designed to be built and serviced by that same corporation. Does that make it more complicated and take longer to implement? Sure. But I also think it is the correct long term strategy, which is something that GM had lost sight of, and which you have pointed out on many occassions. I just do not think it is right to beat up GM for finally getting a good idea and seeing it through to completion. And I really do not think that now is the time for a hacked up quick fix. They need to do this right………..

2. You also said “I think if GM would have slapped a 50kW pack into the trunk of a Cobalt and marketed it just with a sign that said, “It goes 175 miles, yours for $39,000″ they could have got it out 2 years earlier, built twice as many…and sold everyone they could make.”. I do not argue that point, but there is a flaw in your logic. Where exactly were they going to come up with large quantities of 50KW battery packs at this time? As you said in post #18, “The problem is the Lithium battery–availability and cost.” I agree with that statement. The batteries are what is holding up the Volt project. I do not think there is a company on the planet that can produce the quantities required with the long term reliability needed at this time. That is why you are not going to see 100K Volts produced in 2012, and lets not forget that they only require 16KW packs for the E-REV design. I suppose they could assemble 3-4 thousand small computer batteries like Tesla is doing, but as has been discussed here previously, the long term reliability (10 year life and 7,000+ charging cycles) of that approach is in question. And there is still the large quantity availability problem.

That is why it is not all that easy. Sure it would have been nice if back in 2004, we all had been told by the magic genie that in June, 2008, gasoline would spike to prices never thought possible in the USA and the rest of the world. Then, maybe, this project, and many others would have been ready to go about now. Since that did not happen, we have to wait for all of the manufacturers to get the vehicles we now want and need out to us. Some will be thrilled with a micro BEV car with a 50-80 mile range. Many will buy the Prius, since availability will improve, with new plants being set up. Personally, I do not like the Prius parallel hybrid design, and although it is an excellent piece of engineering, it is not what I want for an electric vehicle. It is the E-REV type vehicle I have been waiting for. You will get the benefit of grid based charging, without the problems of range anxiety and without having the ICE directly connected to spinning the transmission and wheels.

Again, that is how I see it.

As Tag says, the next 28 months are going to seem like a really long time!

[Reply]
nasaman Says:
August 5th, 2008 at 12:29 am

79 DonC…… You said, “….I think what you’re saying is that GM could use the signature series idea to establish strong demand, and then use this demand to convince the battery guys to commit the funding needed for volume production. Is this right?”

No —if you re-read my post #72 you’ll find that I’m saying two essentially unrelated things….

1) That a GM/Ford collabaration could considerably reduce the cost & risk of investing in a highly-automated battery factory themselves and/or increase the willingness for either Volt battery bidder to build their own factory because of the larger sales potential (to Ford as well as to GM) —battery cost should drop to about $3,000 this way, allowing the Volt to sell for <$30,000

2) That the marketing dilemma of angering those (like us) who heard or expected the Volt would sell for under $30,000 while recovering as much of the Volt development cost as they can, could be resolved by offering the first 10,000 or so Volts as “Signature Series” cars* for $40-50,000 each & the following production for <$30,000 (base price)

*Each of Chevy’s 4,000+ dealers would get 2-3 “Signature Series” cars to be sold for $40-50,000 each (as classics, these would appreciate, not depreciate, in value —probably even more than a ‘57 Bel Air has appreciated)— GM, their dealers & Volt’s first buyers all win!

[Reply]
Tagamet Says:
August 5th, 2008 at 8:21 am

Jim I@133
Well said!

Nasaman@135
I agree with this post’s first premise about the battery situation. I’d only “tweak” the second “Signature Series” suggestion such that it would be badged “Presient and Patient Volt Fan Edition”. You can guess who I think they should go to. (g).
Be well,
Tag
cc: Bob Lutz

[Reply]
Joe OBrien Says:
August 5th, 2008 at 10:12 am

Excellent News

[Reply]
Jim Mbongo Says:
August 5th, 2008 at 2:07 pm

I just don’t get it.
After all the criticisms GM has endured since the very first day they announced plan to built Chevy Volt, now they want to have a part of it? Who’s going to be the next: is you Toyota? Honda? Chrysler? or Nissan?

[Reply]
Jack Says:
August 5th, 2008 at 4:30 pm

#54
“I totally agree about Japan. In fact former Toyota employees are in many influential position within Japan Government. Over there the Corporations and Government are totally intertwined. Basically, it is one giant Good’ol Boy network with everbody washing each other’s back. Not exactly fair competition.”

It’s not like that could ever happen in America. Rice, Bush, Cheney were never involved in private companies and even if they were they wouldn’t be helping those companies reap record profits. No sir.

[Reply]
Grizzly Says:
August 6th, 2008 at 11:09 pm

Toyoda #54

“I totally agree about Japan. In fact former Toyota employees are in many influential position within Japan Government. Over there the Corporations and Government are totally intertwined. Basically, it is one giant Good’ol Boy network with everbody washing each other’s back. Not exactly fair competition.”

*** *** ***

I’ve been trying to make this point for quite some time. It’s amazing to hear all who bellyache about Uncle Sam helping out GM in a time of need when whatever they get would pale compared to what the Japanese Govt has given to their companies like Toyota over the years. Remember also that it’s not as though their market has ever been open to GM, Ford, and Chrysler. They’ve had pretty much a free ride, yet you hear the stupidity of the left on just how great Toyota is.

Free trade is a good thing, but it’s got to be reciprocal. Japan has always been set on protecting it’s market from foreign competition and making absolute sure that it’s companies forsake profits for market share (domination). This is not in dispute, and it never hurt their efforts that our congress is largely “For Sale”.

[Reply]
Brian Says:
August 8th, 2008 at 5:36 pm

Ford really does not need GM, the Volvo electric drive train is the way forward. In wheel electric/brake motors, not an inboard electric motor and drive train. If the drive shafts, brake rotors/hubs and all the hydrolics are dumped, then the wheel weight is within 5lbs. The only mechanical brake are the emergency/parking brakes. This means all control is electronic, cheaper, simpler, lighter. The leader in, in wheel motors is PML Flightlink, a UK company, their best motor produces 120kilowatts/700nm of torque (about 150hp) The hybrid Volvo C30 is based around a version of these motors. They have a demo car based on the BMW mini that is mouthwatering.

Spec 150mph top, 0-60 4.5sec, 21Kw battery, 15Kw genset under trunk floor 400 miles on battery, 900 miles combined 80mpg.
No impact on carrying capacity 200kg heaver than standard car.
Total power 480kw 2800nm torque,

Zapp and several others are going down this route, so the Volt is out of date before it even hits the streets and there is better battery technology than A123 coming down the line.

[Reply]

GM May Share the Volt Powertrain With Ford

142 Responses to “GM May Share the Volt Powertrain With Ford”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts