AND 
GM’s Future Volt and E-Flex Plans
While getting the first Volt into production remains GMs focus right now, there’s no question they have big plans for E-Flex in the future.
In case you missed it, in my interview with Bob Boniface , E-Flex lead designer, he states clearly that he is already designing future E-Flex vehicles.
In today’s Detroit Press, Volt director Frank Weber confirmed that fact stating "The significance of the project has increased,".
Chief engineer Andrew Farah said next vehicles to get E-Flex will likely be small and mid-sized ones, because the drivetrain would have to be modified considerably to be used in trucks and SUVs.
Weber also indicated that Volt updates would occur on a highly accelerated yearly basis as opposed to the usual 3 to 5 year cycles. He noted that nine areas on the Volt’s design where major improvements or cost reductions could be made for the next year cycle have already been identified.
Furthermore he told reporters that the first running prototypes with production-intent parts will arrive in the next 10 days with 50 expected by year end.
I have been advised by Mr. Farah that these will not have Volt skins, but will "borrow" the skin of another vehicle besides the Malibu that the present "Mali-Volts" are using.
Source (Detroit Free Press )
84 Responses to “GM’s Future Volt and E-Flex Plans”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
August 16th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Interesting. I wonder what kind of AER a small vehicle such as the Aveo could achieve. 50 miles or more?
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Strange, the production VOLT strongly resembles a Toyota Camry. I guess there are only so many ways to cheat the wind over the frontal area to get to that 1.2 drag coeficent.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:07 am
“already designing future E-Flex vehicles.”
“accelerated cycle”
I wonder if that means that there’s actually a chance of a wagon variant by 2012 when I’m ready to trade in my current car?
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:20 am
“Weber also indicated that Volt updates would occur on a highly accelerated yearly basis as opposed to the usual 3 to 5 year cycles. He noted that nine areas on the Volt’s design where major improvements or cost reductions could be made for the next year cycle have already been identified.”
Should we be positive or negative? Positive, in that the future has lots of possibilities? Negative, in that Volt gen1 will be a cake half baked, filled with already recognized shortcomings?
It’s great to think of things to come. Still, one worries that in dreaming about the future GM is losing its focus on getting a great Volt gen 1 actually finished. Just pushing out the door whatever has been done by Dec 2010 may not be good enough.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Article says,
He noted that nine areas on the Volt’s design where major improvements or cost reductions could be made for the next year cycle have already been identified.
———–
I am very curious to know what these 9 items are and whether or not the battery is included.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:24 am
The news that the prototype drivetrains are arriving in the next ten days is welcome. It puts Boniface’s remarks that the “representative body will not meet representative powertrain until sometime next year, and that’s in a developmental form” into perspective.
#2 Dr. Science
As for the Volt’s body shape, I doubt it will resemble either the Camry or the Prius. The Camry has a CdA of .7m^2, which is not terribly good — Lutz has said the Volt’s CdA will be better than the Prius at .58m^2. And the Volt will surely not look like a Prius.
The fact is that good aerodynamic designs can be conventional — the distinctive bubble design of the Prius is informed as much by marketing as by engineering. My guess is that the Volt will look more like a nicely done and distinctive Mitsubishi Eclipse, which has a CdA of around .54m^2, than it does anything else. But the fact is that it will be quite distinctive so it won’t really look like anything but a Volt.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:26 am
The more the better. Isn’t it fun following the future of the automobile?
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Obviously, this is where I say…. (all together now)
Let’s just get the Volt’s wheels on the road!!!
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Can somebody clarify drag coefficient terminology? The CD of the EV1 was advertised as 0.19. What is the CD of the Volt going to be? And how does the “Prius at .58m^2″ relate to measurements such as 0.19, 0.21, etc? And what is a CD “count”?
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Hey look,
We made it to Times OF India.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Business/33000_buyers_signed_up_for_GM_car_/articleshow/3359861.cms
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
#4
Ah…the issues of “leap frogging”. It is difficult to land firmly on solid ground.
It is easy to put a negative spin on releasing enhancements on a yearly basis…instead of 3-5 years. Besides, there seems to be enough “early adopters” (think…iPhone buyers) to just be the first on their street with a PHEV.
GM will need to start demonstrating their firm commitment to support the Volt owners. With On-Star, they should be able to monitor the vehicles closely. I understand that Toyota gave additional support to the Prius owners in the first few model years. Not that GM will not produce a great car in the first years…but any unforseen issues can resolved quickly with additional support.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Nothing to do with this article at all (what else is new, right?):
I just want to say, that I have great respect for Lyle. I wanted to just step back and be positive for a moment.
Alot of work goes into maintaining sites like this, especially once you achieve alot of membership/attention. (I run a small site myself with about 2,000 members…and it is a handful, so I can understand somewhat).
Lyle and myself converse quite frequently ‘on the side.’ Topics are generally all over the place, doesn’t really matter. (Unless I start making Volt T-Shirts with a half full glass on the back, lol).
With a site like this, Lyle is forced to make alot of hard decisions behind the scenes and burns through alot of his personal time dealing with it. Today he had another of those moments, no thanks to myself…go figure, lol. Although, the decision meant some potential future difficulties to himself, he chose a path to do what he felt was ultimately in the best interest of the site and the community at large, rather than what was easy. I don’t know if I would have made the same choice on my site…so you are a better man than myself.
I can honestly say I have never met anyone more professional or more committed to a project he believes in, (with no personal gain to be had), than Lyle.
I know this really doesn’t make alot of sense at face value. But I just wanted to publicly say ‘thanks’ to Lyle, you are a credit to not only GM and the Volt, but to all the visitors who come here. I have a tremendous amount of respect for you.
You are truly shaping the consciousness of thousands of people to the electrification of the automobile, and thus helping the environment and the world we live in…something to be proud of.
(…and people say I’m too negative)
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Does anyone else think the Volt looks similar to the 4-doot Acura TSX. Not this years model but the body from 2 years ago.
Personally i like the look of the Volt the more i see it.
Ya the concept was nice, but it was a concept. It had rawhide upholestry, and a golf cart engine for christ sakes.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Early on, we kept saying “KISS” and get a reliable Volt to market quickly. GM had to freeze the design at some point so they could move it forward. I’m glad they did. Being an electric vehicle, I’m sure that innovations will occur as quickly as innovations of other electronic technologies. Annual Volt updates are vital to keep pace with expected challengers.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
@Statik, #12:
>> (Unless I start making Volt T-Shirts with
>> a half full glass on the back, lol)
You could have said “half empty.” I totally call ‘closet optimist’ on you!!!
>> But I just wanted to publicly say ‘thanks’ to Lyle
ROGER THAT!! x20!
Mike-o
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
#14
I completely agree. Due to the nature of electronics vs an ICE small improvements to the subsystems can be implemented easily into the Volt. So why would they wait years when they can improve the volt every year. Traditionally with an ICE these improvements required new equipment or completely new engines.
Heck the improvements may even be software which even Volt 1.0 owners will probably get under warranty or fee based “service” upgrades.
The future of the electric car is extremely exciting. Give the cars a few years on the market and road and soon we’ll see people swapping engines, inverters and other electric components (aftermarket made or oem) and turning these cars into DEAMONS on the road like tesla, or getting 60-70 aer with economy tunes. The potential is very huge!
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
I’d like to see a minivan. Now that I have a kid. Amazing how much space the car seat, stroller, and sundries take up.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
#9 Folsomev – “Can somebody clarify drag coefficient terminology? The CD of the EV1 was advertised as 0.19. What is the CD of the Volt going to be? And how does the “Prius at .58m^2″ relate to measurements such as 0.19, 0.21, etc? And what is a CD “count”?”
You have the Cd, which is the dimensionless drag coefficient, and then you have the drag area, which is the Cd X Frontal Area of the car. This is what’s called the CdA and it has a dimension of square feet or square meters.
In computing drag both the drag coefficient and the frontal area area are equally important since you multiply them. A very low Cd with a very large A is going to give you a lot of drag and a large Cd with little frontal area can give you a low drag. Since every other factor in the drag equation is a given the only way to reduce drag is to reduce these factors, and CdA is the real measure of how a vehicle will perform.
The Prius has a Cd of .25 and a CdA of .58 m^2. The EV1 had a Cd of .195 and a CdA of .367 m^2. If you want to know what is possible, the Aptera has a Cd of .11 and a CdA of .093m^2.
You can read more about this here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficients
(Convert the drag area in ft^2 to m^2 by multiplying by .0929)
GM hasn’t released the Cd. All we have is the statement from Bob Lutz that the drag (aka drag area) will be better on the Volt than it is on the Prius.
The “counts” appear to be internal method that allows GM to quantify the aerodynamic impact of a design change. The idea that a “count” results in a change of “X range” is meaningless since this depends on the density of air and, more importantly, on the speed. Obviously GM has some internal standards which allows them to make that statement.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
I’ve spent a lot of time here reading about the Volt and coming here to express my views and reading about others views, its the best place to find out and keep up with whats new, I can’t imagine what it would be like without it. Thank you Lyle
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
From the article: “Weber also indicated that Volt updates would occur on a highly accelerated yearly basis as opposed to the usual 3 to 5 year cycles. He noted that nine areas on the Volt’s design where major improvements or cost reductions could be made for the next year cycle have already been identified.”
————————————————————————————–
This is extremely positive news. Not only will costs come down more quickly, but reliability and driving experience will improve more quickly as well.
Steady yearly improvements have helped make Toyota and Honda what they are today. I hope GM starts using this model more aggressively moving forward.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
#12 Statik and others
Agreed — Lyle has done a wonderful job with gm-volt. It has been and is a great service to the community of people interested in the Volt. We are at the same time supportive of GM’s efforts and yet independent of them, a balance Lyle has maintained well.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Good to see that GM is moving the E-FLEX tech on to other vehicles as well.
Ditto on the comments regarding Lyle. If it wasn’t for Lyle I wonder what would have happen to the VOLT’s progress? Great job, Lyle!
GO GM, GO VOLT for 2010!
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I have a suggestion for GM how to label VOLT for different markets:
1). Chevy VOLT FX (for FlexFuel: E85 and Gasoline)
2). Chevy VOLT DX (in Europe, for Diesel fuel model)
3). Chevy VOLT NGX (for Natural Gas model).
Eugene Capatina
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Okay, a little ‘poo-pooing’ now:
“Weber said the automaker has already identified nine areas on the Volt where it expects to make major improvements or greatly reduce costs in the second year of production. It can’t make those improvements in the first year, or it would delay the quick timeline the automaker is on for the launch of the car.”
Pulling my thoughts forward, I’m glad I’m not in California/New York for once. Kind of sucks if you happen to get a new one, you also get a immediately inferior one.
Other news of interest:
Due to ‘market conditions’ Toyota officially killed the FJ Cruiser -and- future plans on the ‘Supra’
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/08/16/fuel-costs-shift-toyota-product-plans-fj-crusier-and-new-supra/
Mustang has a new site (very twirlly), teasing on the next gen Mustang (which just so happens to come out at the same time as the next Camaro):
http://www.fordvehicles.com/the2010mustang/
Pics of the concept (I doubt the scissor doors or moonroof (sound familar) will make the cut), kinda looks…exactly like the Camaro, doesn’t it?
http://www.thetorquereport.com/mustang_g.jpg
http://www.rawhorsepower.com/Giugiaro_Mustang.jpg
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/articles/uploads/2010_mustang_continues_to_amaze.jpg
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Statik # 12
I agree. I too am very thankful for Lyle and everything he does.
And Statik, you are a very cool guy. Thanks for really showing the positive side of you. Be well, my friend.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Other news,
Toyota killed the FJ Cruser today..and scrapped the future Supra, “market conditions”
Ford launched it’s new Mustang mini-site (very twirlly), teasing on the next gen Mustang (which just so happens to come out at the same time as the next Camaro):
http://www.fordvehicles.com/the2010mustang/
Pics of the concept (I doubt the scissor doors or moonroof (sound familar) will make the cut), kinda looks…exactly like the Camaro, doesn’t it?
http://www.thetorquereport.com/mustang_g.jpg
http://www.rawhorsepower.com/Giugiaro_Mustang.jpg
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/articles/uploads/2010_mustang_continues_to_amaze.jpg
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Link to new Mustang site,
http://www.fordvehicles.com/the2010mustang/
You can google the concept, looks just like the Camaro. (I doubt the scissor doors or moon roof make the cut, lol)
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Article said:
“Chief engineer Andrew Farah said next vehicles to get E-Flex will likely be small and mid-sized ones, because the drivetrain would have to be modified considerably to be used in trucks and SUVs.”
What if GM would apply the E-FLEX power train to full size pick-ups (for ex. to Silverado and others). As far as the battery is concerned, I would use two T shaped batteries inverted and placed under the truck bed where there is plenty of room incorporate two VOLT’s batteries (2 x 400 lbs = 800 lbs.). The extra weight would help the truck’s ride. Just an idea to expedite the E-FLEX full truck production and help the CAFE numbers.
Eugene Capatina
ektina@cox.net
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
+1 for the truck side.
I hope one of these future E-Flex vehicles is an iteration of the Colorado “crew cab” truck.
Don’t forget, there are a lot people who would love to have a truck that doesn’t bankrupt them at the gas pump.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Statik #12:
Regarding what you said about Lyle, very much agreed! Well said.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Just got home, all this praise heaped on Lyle, and had to join in! Where would we BE without this site? Well, I’d be stuck in the middle of nowhere, without much hope of things improving in this country. Granted, I’m STILL stuck in the middle of nowhere, but thanks to Lyle I have some hope that something postive may be coming. When I was scouting out TV spots for Lyle, I headed a lot of them “One man CAN make a difference!”, and it’s so true.
With all the waiting, diversity of opinion, and views that range from hinter to yawn, it’s amazing that Lyle’s kept the site going - let alone thriving (and with no known homicides to date).
Well, I better stop or Lyle’s head will be too large to lug around on his shoulders.
Be well and prosper, Lyle,
Tag
PS Statik, check your meds (g).
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Yeah, thanks Lyle,
Excellent work that must take hours each day.
If I ever know anybody that needs brain surgery I am going to tell them to look you up!
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
I second the opinion of Statik and others who think Lyle is doing a great job. He really is and there is no way for us to show our appreciation, except continuing coming back to this site and follow the Volt’s development.
Thank you, Lyle and thank you, also, GM.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Everything I have been reading the last few days give me more belief the Volt is well on schedule. GM is making really good progress on some very difficult manufacturing processes. More power to GM and I now believe the Volt will change everything we know about cars and one day, trucks.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Actually I take it as a good news that GM already identify what can be improved and plan to do so each year. It’s part of a known approach (being “Agile”) that Toyota and Honda have been using for years.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
OT:
GM CEO Rick Wagoner will be on The Charlie Rose Show on Monday August 18, 2008 on your local PBS station, check local listings for scheduling. Also (Maximum)Bob Lutz will be on the show too. See http://www.charlierose.com for details as the shows scheduling firms up. I think the show has already been taped.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
@23 Eugene Capatina:
I have a suggestion for GM how to label VOLT for different markets:
Well, this *IS* General Motors. They’re going to label them:
* Volt LT – The stick-shift, no A/C, no ABS, no side-impact airbags, no CD player
* Volt LT1 – Automatic transmission comes standard, CD player, some gee-gaws like “fog lamps” and “electric seat adjusters”, but not very many extras come standard because they’ll leave all those for the:
*Volt LT2 – Engine is 20% bigger, ABS, side-impact airbags, traction control.
*Volt LTZ – All that plus leather seats, automatic climate control, sunroof, a wing on the trunk, and the bottom half of every body panel covered in plastic.
I tell ya, if this Volt has no traditional transmission, and only one engine size, GM’s executives that set up the “standard options for each trim” are gonna rev… um, revolt…
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Option list (A), 12 KWH battery, 16 KWH battery, and 24 KWH battery. But unless the battery energy density improves, the 24 might not fit into the design space.
Option list (B) Hardtop, Ragtop, Hardtop convertible. But with the short trunk, there may not be room for the Hardtop to fold into.
BTW, Lyle, could you have your 3D graphics guys take the picture of the Cruze, and morph it into a possible production Volt using the front and end pictures we have. I think your guys could come pretty darn close to scooping everyone.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
When I hear “yearly updates”, I think “Avoid the first few generations, because they will suck”.
I really would like to see these major changes or additions after the first few generations:
1. Four-wheel hub motors (for more efficient traction control).
2. Less steel and more aluminum and composites (like the EV1 for lower weight and less rust).
3. Dual-fuel range extender (CNG + Gas, for true flexibility).
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
I think all who post here, even occasionally, second the sentiments expressed by Statik. Thanks for bringing this up Statik.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
I think it is fairly obvious that batteries (etc.) are going to improve radically in the upcoming years.
Being an owner of a 1st gen volt will be bittersweet. Sure you will have the newest and greatest from GM, but within a year you will be almost completely obsolete and people won’t believe how much you paid for so little range. The depreciation is going to be huge.
I guess in some ways it will be good that only the rich (or very well to do) that have little care for economics will be able to own one.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
“I tell ya, if this Volt has no traditional transmission, and only one engine size, GM’s executives that set up the “standard options for each trim” are gonna rev… um, revolt…”
I believe the general understanding is that there is no transmission per se, just one gear.
This could change, however.
Tesla started out with just 1, and they have moved to a 2 gear system now.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Statik and everyone else here.
I truly appreciate your support and words of encouragement.
To me this site is really about the community and collective power of social media. It isn’t because of me that GM has recognized this site, it is because of us.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Lyle,
I don’t know how you do it, fulfill your daytime job duties, manage an extremely active website, and still find time to appear on radio and television shows. It truly is amazing.
I’d like to thank you for the website, the professional standards that have been set (and most of the membership adheres to), the access you have to GM technical and executive personnel, and for the VoltNation event.
As Bob Lutz himself mentioned, this interaction with the public on this type of a project is unprecedented, and all of us owe you a great deal of gratitude.
Thanks again for all your efforts.
Bill
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Van #38 says,
Option list (B) Hardtop, Ragtop, Hardtop convertible.
——————
I have said over and over again that I would not pay $40K because the masses cannot afford it and I will stand shoulder to shoulder with them.
However, a fully loaded convertible would make me seriously rethink that opinion.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
If a Volt costs 40K and is basically a 20K car with a fancy drive system, then an E-Flex pickup with two batteries and two electric motors that provide 4-wheel drive could reasonably be expected to cost somewhere around 60K. That’s not a price point that many pickup truck buyers are comfortable with. I think GM has the right idea keeping E-Flex in the smaller vehicles for now until the technology matures a little better. I’d love to see the technology shifted into the mini-vans pushing the Soccer Mom Army around the country. That would do wonders for our dependency on foreign oil!
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
Tesla attempted to start out with two gears and moved to one, with the help of new IGBT’s not available until ‘08
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
All of the discussion about rapid yearly improvement leaves me still interested in Volt gen 1, but not as much so.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
If you guys don’w stop sucking up to Lyle he’s going to get a big head. Who does he think he is a brain surgeon.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
#38 Lurtz,
The Volt has no transmission and the motor acts as a generator. Power options won’t be necessary but maybe battery options are a possibility. A 20 mile AER options would be awesome for those of us who don’t have $40k for the 40 mile range.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
#24, #26, #27 Statik (Me)
No I didn’t lose my mind, posting the same thing three times. I think the ford site got flagged as spam…so it got delay posted.
#43 Lyle
“To me this site is really about the community and collective power of social media. It isn’t because of me that GM has recognized this site, it is because of us.”
I always appreciate your perspective.
/keep on trucking…only 30-?? months left to go, (=
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Canehdian & Scott – yeah, I knew that, that was the basis for the joke about GM executives not knowing what to do with it
The basis of three out of four of their usual trim levels is inapplicable.
(IMO, GM’s “LT, LT1, LT2 and LTZ” are unintuitive and too byzantine to someone unfamiliar with GM cars, and are a turnoff to Honda and Toyota customers who stray into a Chevrolet lot.)
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
…And another thing: you guys complaining that GM will improve the Volt over successive generations, or that those iterations come faster than the usual 3-5 years, making you less interested in the first model:
You should be wishing GM will be so lucky.
Volt 1.0 isn’t even due for two years if it comes at all, and 1.5 or 2.0 or whatever can only come if 1.0 is successful.
And props to Lyle. You win gold in the Olympics of grassroots GM fandom.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
One of the big selling points of the Volt is its simplicity – much fewer moving parts than a normal vehicle. Do we really want GM to add a transmission? (Actually it doesn’t matter what I think, or what you say – If Bob Lutz wants a tranny in the Volt, everyone gets a tranny, whether we want one or not).
Right now, MY transmission is beginning to fail in my Honda Odyssey at 103,000 miles. I’ve had to have 6 automatic transmissions repaired in my life, and they are very expensive to fix. Think about the huge amount of torque that will be generated from the Volt’s electric motor.
That much torque on a conventional clutch pad might be too much for a manual off-the-shelf transmission clutch to handle. Ceramic clutch pads are used in heavy trucks, but they tend to be too “grabby”, thus unsuitable for passenger cars. Automatic trans tend to be too bulky, and impossible to fit into the Volt.
Finally, any two speed trans, manual or auto, would have to be built from scratch in order to fit into the Volt. There is simply no market anywhere for a two speed transmission. (OK, maybe Zen, and other niche cars not meant to go over 30 MPH). Bob has been trying to avoid custom Volt components to lower the Volt’s cost.
Summation: Chevy Volt = good idea. Transmission for Volt = bad idea.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
#54, The Grump
You had to repair 6 automatic transmissions?!
Good grief. You should start driving a standard shift.
————-
On a more serious note, I will answer your question.
No, we don’t want GM to add a transmission to the Volt.
As you said, adding a transmission is a bad idea.
It just creates another point of failure, and we don’t need that.
Not to mention the extra weight.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
From the blog:
“Furthermore he told reporters that the first running prototypes with production-intent parts will arrive in the next 10 days with 50 expected by year end”
*** *** ***
This had to happen. There is no way they could delay getting vehicles on the road for long term testing any longer. Even as it is the testing cycle is going to be short and I’m sure they’re going to use special techniques to simulate 2-3 years of road testing.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
RB #148
“All of the discussion about rapid yearly improvement leaves me still interested in Volt gen 1, but not as much so.”
*** *** ***
I’d have to agree, and if I’m not mistaken GM has already stated that Gen2 will use ultra/super caps in addition to the battery. One thing is for sure, with yearly upgrades year 2 is necessarily Gen2 and year 3 >> Gen3 and so on. With technology this new you’d almost have to expect this, it’s not as though they’re working with off the shelf parts with known performance/failure rates etc.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Rashiid Amul #55
“As you said, adding a transmission is a bad idea.
It just creates another point of failure, and we don’t need that.
Not to mention the extra weight.”
*** *** ***
Good points! The biggest problem with a tranny is that it’s a heat producer through friction and that means it siphons energy from the drive train. I’ve always wondered what kind of ICE gas mileage would be possible if they didn’t require a tranny.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
# 55 Rashid – There’s a bit of a story behind my aversion to manual transmissions.
When I was 18, I had just left a store, and was heading home. it was raining, and my shoes were wet. I intended to stop behind the car in front of me at a left-turn signal. However, my left shoe, being wet, slipped off the clutch pedal after I had stopped, and my car lept forward – right into the rear of the car ahead of me at the light.
I learned a lesson or two that day. 1) An accident at age 18 can make your insurance quickly become very expensive, and 2) Automatic transmissions are much, much safer than a manual transmission. Manual transmissions also take too much of the driver’s attention – shift, shift, shift, shift, shift, shift, shift – don’t they ever get sick of shifting the damn thing?
IMHO, manual transmissions are simply not designed for humans. Humans have two feet, and manual transmissions require three feet to operate – one for the clutch, one for the brake, one for the gas pedal. That’s why manual transmission cars roll backwards on a steep hill after a stop – the driver is trying to use two feet to do the job of three feet. It doesn’t work very well. I always give the driver ahead of me plenty of room for rollback on the steep hill I take home every day, just in case they are driving a manual transmission car.
I’m not putting down the manual trans fans out there, shifting is just not my thing. If you can put up with all the tedious constant gear shifting, God bless you. I don’t have that kind of patience with machinery.
———————————————————–
And if you need a laugh after all that grumpiness, check out the Disney movie trailer for “Beverly Hills Chihuahua” opening Oct 3. It even made me laugh – You gotta admit, Chihuahuas are funny.
http://x.go.com/389477?eid=000001651&uid=1795E643-6B7F-43D3-849B-57D1FC86E734
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
With 30 months until “the big day” (less if they could make it July 4th, 2010 – think about it), I’ll buy the first Volt I can – even if it means selling the other kidney. A) because I still think that V 1.0 has to be “right” before it’s released, or there won’t be much of a market for a V 2.0., and B) because it’d be literally the chance to purchase a piece of history. When I’m old(er) and on grool in the Nursing Home, I’ll be able to flash a toothless smile at the nurse and say “I owned a Volt when they first came out back in ‘10! It could only go 40 miles without using gas – back before they outlawed the stuff. Now I can go that far in my nuclear powered wheelchair…. Hee *COUGH* Hee”.
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
“Furthermore he told reporters that the first running prototypes with production-intent parts will arrive in the next 10 days with 50 expected by year end.
I have been advised by Mr. Farah that these will not have Volt skins, but will ‘borrow’ the skin of another vehicle besides the Malibu that the present ‘Mali-Volts’ are using.”
__________
GM will be using these 50 “borrowed-skin” prototypes to test the Volt’s powertrain, etc. Maybe they are also testing these “borrowed skins” for their own E-Flex powertrain.
If they discover that some of their existing cars can get 20+ AER then maybe the E-Flex revolution is closer than we think.
Lyle, please try to find out which “borrowed skins” are being used.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Lots of concerns like those by GXT below about GM’s comments regarding annual improvements to EREVs.
“Being an owner of a 1st gen volt will be bittersweet. Sure you will have the newest and greatest from GM, but within a year you will be almost completely obsolete and people won’t believe how much you paid for so little range. The depreciation is going to be huge.”
Are you friggin kiddin? What would have them do? Sit on the improvements because you don’t want someone to get a better version of the car than you have? The opportunities to improve EREVs is one of the huge advantages of this drivetrain and one that everyone should look forward to with tremendous anticipation.
While the first Volts sold will undoubtably have the worst EREV drivetrain, they will likeky be head and shoulders above all competitive small sedans offered. Should buyers choose inferior products because they don’t offer such great opportunities for improvement?
By the way, nobody said 1st year Volts won’t benefit from any of the improvements. Control software will surely be one of the most important of the nine areas of annual improvement. The are probably one or two other areas that 1st gen Volts will also be able to take advantage of.
As for resale value: How do you think competitive 2010 models models will fare in comparison to the Volt? They will be taking it on the chin much worse.
The technology will improve rapidly but that’s a good thing. The sooner gen 1 gets on the road, the sooner the clock starts in earnest for this continuous improvement. I can hardly wait!!!
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Another big thank you to Lyle. As appreciative as many here obviously are, GM should be doubly so.
(Quote)
August 16th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Tag #60
I guess this means if we see you in a Gen-1 Volt you probably got the dialysis option installed. I see you’re stiiiiilllll hopin’ for that early Volt arrival!
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 12:20 am
#59 – The Grump
” I always give the driver ahead of me plenty of room for rollback on the steep hill I take home every day, just in case they are driving a manual transmission car.”
—————————————–
Thank you for being a courteous driver! I am just fine with my clutch but I swear some idiots practically try to shove me through the intersections on the hills in Seattle. Usually I’ll roll back on purpose just enough for them to panic, and without fail I’ll have plenty of room at the next light.
Regarding the auto vs manual, the one great quality of a manual is better mileage compared to an auto, with rare exceptions.
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 2:06 am
Thank god. I was really worried there was going to be a delay getting this technology into the other GM brands. With Toyota pushing Prius not just as a model but as an entire sub-brand within the Toyota umbrella, GM can tout E-Flex as the greener Prius. As much as I want to hop on board and push Chevy as the new quality global brand that it deservedly is becoming, I’ll always be embarassed to drive one. I really want to embrace the e-flex system, and the sooner they put this into a Saab, the sooner I think they’ll hit the jackpot. E-Flex will really catch its stride AND profit potential once it jumps into the higher end. And while Cadillac is positioning itself as GM’s top luxury brand akin to a Mercedes-Benz/BMW, I’d rather comparison shop a Saab, an actual European product, against a BMW than a Cadillac any day.
Reiterating: GM…put this sucker into the 9-X BioHybrid and just build it. Its design won the award for best concept at Geneva, it’s already the most aerodynamic concept in GM’s recent portfolio, it’s a kammback- i’d go far as to say it’s more volt looking than a volt in that it has a more futuristic vibe. In fact, the day you unveil the Volt, tell us that you’re working on just that. And while you’re at it, make it E100 compliant, I sure hope that Coscata ethanol deal you’re working on for $1.00/gallon ethanol is panning out. You’ll simultaneously inject value back into Saab, but also a bit of Saab’s techno funky Scandinavian chic might rub off on GM. Win-Win.
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 2:39 am
Saab 9-X BioHybrid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VCOSZutYsA
So pretty.
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 5:22 am
Thanks Lyle,
You are the man. I will continue to email ideas to you though I have not heard back. Give me the first GEN 1 Volt that comes off the line destined for Florida.
Take Care,
TED
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 5:34 am
LYLE FOR PRESIDENT!
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 6:41 am
#57 Grizzly (on changes each year)
Thanks for the supercap reminder for gen2.
Acceleration could get a big boost, almost for free if supercaps recharge on braking.
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Grizzly,
Yeah, I figure that they can track of my dialysis with OnStar and send help if needed.
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 9:11 am
That Saab is nice looking but what’s it’s AER?
The “unveiling” is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU_8k5LJU-A&NR=1
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 9:49 am
#57 Grizzly said “if I’m not mistaken GM has already stated that Gen2 will use ultra/super caps in addition to the battery.”
I must have missed that one. But, if it is true that is surely good news.
The battery technology is likely to change with v2, v3, etc. Volt v1 will use lithium. We hear about nanowires and a host of other battery technologies in research labs around the world. There was even a report just a couple days ago that Firefly Energy is talking with 3 automobile companies on 2 continents about their MicroCell 3D^2 technology. It will be interesting watching the Volt battery technology evolve over time.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that Volt v1 will use a transaxle to power the wheels. Perhaps we’ll see wheel motors in Volt v2 or later.
These are truly exciting times! Who knows what tomorrow might bring?
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 9:53 am
I am not sure it will need a boost if they use A123 batteries. I have five 2.3 Amp Hour A123 cells that I am using to power a model airplane. I put it on a wattmeter to make sure the prop I was using was not causing the motor to draw more than 60 amps which is the rating of the motor controller. It was drawing 52 amps. That is roughly 22 times the capacity.
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 9:53 am
I want to add my two cents worth of appreciation for the work that Lyle has done and for the Volt community that gives this site a powerful heartbeat. I usually visit this site daily and its unusual for me to not find some bit of inspirational news; some information that provides me with greater optimism for where our beautiful planet is headed. If you do that for me I know that you do it for countless others and that all adds up to a really big deal.
Cheers,
Mark
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Continual improvement of the Volt is of great importance,but…..also, unless these improvements are designed to be retrofitted to the earliest production cars, GM will suffer from the adverse publicity.
In order to facilitate mass production of the Volt, GM could contract to some other manufacturers to take over GMs closed plants to produce either the Volt or one of the other “later developements”.
As the hybrid cars have been developed (and failed to be marketable over the years) I drew up the design and construction of the series hybrid back in 1970 that as far as I know is just what the Volt will be. It’s just too bad that I wasn’t able to do anything with it.
But, good luck to GM for having the people with the sense and foresight to do something with the concept…………OF
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
RB #70 Estero #73
Yes I agree that the supercaps are huge, especially for effectively capturing regen braking. If you really think about upgrades it’s staggering what’s possible. Since the design has to be frozen very soon they obviously have to stick with the basics if this car is to hit the streets in 2010. But there’s a lot that can be upgraded and improved like….
1. Further refining the ICE/Genset to be more fuel efficient and a better performer with E-85
2. Further optimizing the supercap/battery combo for range and performance.
3. Wiring the AC induction motor and controller so that from 0-5K rpm it’s a torque-ster and from 5K-13K rpm is a horsepower machine. This would still allow for transmission-less efficiency but perform like it had one.
4. Provide and economy/performance mode selection.
5. Add back the 12 gallon tank I desperately want.
And on and on……
(Quote)
August 17th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
To Lyle: Just keep it going, buddy! I am just amazed at how few trolls and civil this site is! It is fun to be here, and I can’t wait to see the first Volt.
To everyone else:
Of course every new model year of the Volt will be better! That is the nature of the car business… If you are going to wait until the car is perfect, you will wait forever. You have to decide when it makes sense to you to purchase, and then buy what is available. It is exactly the same as buying a computer.
I have a question about Statik’s and Tag’s math. They both said 30 months to go. That would put delivery of the first Volt to the showrooms at Mid February, 2011. Did I miss something???
If delivery is still supposed to be November, 2010, that would be just under 4.5 months in 2008, plus 12 months in 2009, plus 10 months in 2010, or a total of 26.5 months. If you want to make it the end of November, that would be 27.5 months. We flew (HAHAHAHA!) past the 30 months to go date back in May!!!!!
Lets not make this wait any longer than we have to, OK???
(Quote)
August 18th, 2008 at 8:00 am
#29 Regarding trucks.. I am sure GM plans on rolling this out to meet CAFE for trucks, and green its big truck and SUV offering..it will take som etime though..
#41 Depreciation I think on Gen 1 Volts will be huge..but the resale value of such a game changing auto may increase..it will be a modern classic car..think about it..first generation, limited production..if you have a gen 1..keep it pristine for about 10 years, it WILL Appreciate then..like a model T or a split window vette…
(Quote)
August 18th, 2008 at 9:26 am
Jim@78
Even with my both shoes off, I ran out of digits upon which to count, so I “rounded up”.
A) I like your math much better (do you have a calculator)?
B) I’ll stick to my theory that the Volt will come out 6 months before predicted, so subtract 6 from your total and it seems like it’s just around the corner!
Thanks and be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 18th, 2008 at 11:37 am
I think the below would be the major improvements to reduce cost and/or increase performance.
1) Use 10KWH battery instead of 16kWH and extend the SOC operation to around 15 – 95% (8Kwh) by using ultracapacitors to compensate for low amps at extreme SOCs. If the 16kwh battery cost
is 10000$ then they can easily reduce the cost by 3000$ for 10kwh battery with ultracaps cost included.
2) Enhanced Electric Motor.
3) Enhanced HVAC.
4) Low Power Wipers and Stereo.
5) High efficient power electronics.
6) Improved ICE efficiency. May be 1.0L four cylinder with direct injection ?
(Quote)
August 18th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Change every year is nothing new. Think about 1556, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 Chevys, for example. Similar under the skin, but almost like different cars from the outside. People loved it. The buzz every fall was intense waiting to see what would be new for the following year.
The 63-67 Corvettes look very similar from the outside, but evolved every year under the skin. Disc brakes, big block engines, and many small upgrades as opportunities and/or problems arose.
Our 1917 Chevrolet had thermosyphon cooling. The 1918 introduced a proper water pump system. A huge one-up on the Model T. Any proper racing Model T had an aftermarket water pump.
While body styles stay similar longer now, the technical upgrades continue year by year. The Volt will only follow in a tradition as old as the automobile.
(Quote)
August 18th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
noel@82
Did Columbus discover cars over here? 1556 is a loooong time ago (g)
Be well and proofread(wink)
Tag
(Quote)
August 18th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
noel #82
“Change every year is nothing new. Think about 1556, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 Chevys, for example. Similar under the skin, but almost like different cars from the outside. People loved it. The buzz every fall was intense waiting to see what would be new for the following year ”
*** *** ***
This is EXACTLY the magic Lutz/Wagoner are trying to recapture. T’wood be nice to think that every vehicle was “unique” to the core but that’s not a reality. Platform sharing is here to stay and has yet to hit it’s zenith. The problem with “publicly held” “accountant run” GM is that it was and IS boring and detrimental. It’s a crying shame that it took nearly 3 decades of continual market share slide to realize this.
When people call for Wagoner’s sig. below the bottom line they fail to understand that HE is the future and the board agrees. When you understand GM’s position and it’s problems you can only subscribe to one camp, the short run or the long. The former would/could possibly have produced some more favorable recent income stmts but it’s all about the future. Sometimes you’ve just got to believe and really believe that red ink will flow before you’re BACK in BLACK. NO car company has a better/greener future plan than GM. Dig deep and hang on, it’s a matter of courage and staying the course!
(Quote)