GM Has More Than Two New E-Flex Vehicles Already at Scale-Model Stage of Development
As Bob Boniface, GM’s E-Flex design director told us in a recent interview, his team is already in the process of designing additional E-Flex vehicles. We have also heard that the drivetrain at present is only suitable for small and mid-sized cars. To build an E-Flex truck or SUV would require new engineering.
Bob gave some more specific details to the Financial times of London indicating that he already has more than two new E-Flex vehicles at the scale-model design stage. He also told them the design studio is expanding beyond its current 50 employees to handle the new demands.
Bob had also mentioned that the design team now has a lot of knowledge and a good foundation under their belt from designing the Volt aerodynamically such that they can start in a more advanced position in designing new E-Flex cars.
Since the Volt is on a three year development cycle, and there are only two years left, it shouldn’t surprise us that GM is already working on successor models. It is betting heavily on E-Flex being the next major drivetrain for automobiles.
The image above is a frame from a very recent video inside the E-Flex design studio, and one might imagine some of those other structures under blue tarps may indeed be some of these future models.
Source (FT )
Popularity: 2%
Related posts:
- GM’s Brand New E-Flex Design Center
- Full-Scale Fiberglass Production Chevy Volt Model Has Been Completed
- Is GM planning an E-Flex Cadillac?
- GM Building New Design Center For Upcoming E-Flex Fleet
- Chevy Tacuma: E-Flex Microvan?
(6 votes, average: 4 out of 5) 
Loading ...
88 Responses to “GM Has More Than Two New E-Flex Vehicles Already at Scale-Model Stage of Development”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- GM’s CEO Arrives to Capitol Hill in Chevy Volt Prototype, Senate Hearings Underway
- GM CEO Will Drive Volt Mule Inside Washington DC Today, UAW Agrees to Drop Job Bank
- GM: Out of Time, Out of Money, Out of Options
- GM Submits Long-Term Viability Plan to Congress: $18 Billion Needed
- Detroit 3 Viability Plans Go To Congress Today: GM’s CEO Will Drive to DC in Hybrid Malibu
- GM-Volt Exclusive: Bob Lutz Details Volt Mule Energy Use in Highway Driving
- GM’s Canceled LA Auto Show Conference: Was it Going to be the Volt Battery Contract Announcement?
- Flextreme Concept Wins Prestigious Design Award, Still Not Production Intent
- What Would Happen to the Chevy Volt if GM Failed?
- GM Viability Proposal Leak: CEO Likely to Work for $1 and Brands Likely to be Shed
August 17th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Great. But I am curious as to how many different ways an aerodynamic car can be made. It seems limited to me and eventually, once again, all the cars will look the same.
Am I wrong? And if so, how?
August 17th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
…I think I’m only down for waiting for the Volt.
And Rashiid, you are right if GM is going to give us the ‘we had to dumb it down for XX points of drag’ excuse for all these ‘new models,’ then they are all going to end up the same.
If your goal is to achieve ‘Prius-like’ numbers…your probably going to end up ‘Prius-like’
Side note: I don’t want to brag, but I currently have 4 ’scale models’ in production on my workbench downstairs…they also seem to be on the 3-year plan.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
If small cars do begin to look the same, the fault lies not in how many different ways the vehicles can be manufactured, but rather the problem will be one of aesthetics.
A little bit of imagination can produce small cars with superbly low drag coefficients while at the same time looking new & futuristic; exactly what the consumer will want.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
When did the “scale model design stage” happen with the current Volt? How far along is that compared to where the Volt is now?
As a side note, the photo quality on this site is very inconsistent. I think the photos themselves are fine but they are often greatly compressed (or something) when displayed on the front page. This topic is different because it’s a frame from a video clip, but I’m sure others have noticed the chunky photos in previous posts. Good to get those things cleared up to give newcomers a good impression…
August 17th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Go GM go.
Yes, there will be limitations in aerodynamics. But the cars don’t all have to look the same or even have the same aerodynamic drag coefficients. Some may have better areodynamics than others. What the different cars will offer will probably be different stylings for people’s differing tastes and uses such as sedan, sports car, coupe, station wagon, hatchback, small pickup or small van. Also in addition the the Chevy Volt, there will probably be Saturn, Pontiac and Cadillac versions. There are lots of possibilities.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Hopefully they are also working on reducing mass, and not just the battery pack but the frame, etc.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
New e-flex models under development - requiring additional design studio staff…
Encouraging to see GM continuing to invest resources on vehicles at the leading edge…do they have enough resources (cash) left to make the vehicles a reality, as has been discussed on many previous threads?
My hunch is by the time the Fall 2010 EREV rollouts draw near for GM and others, increasing interim publicity and interest in things green will significantly drive up demand. If GM can last, I still believe they’ll sell all they can make.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I hope they comeout with a bunch of new models. But…not all that look the same.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
I think GM will create a sub-compact E-Flex variant, similar to the Smart car. This design could be ported over to commercial vehicles too.
I have always felt that the small delivery vehicles that the post office uses would be some of the first commercial vehicles to go partially or completely electric. They only carry one occupant, a relatively small amount of cargo, and don’t stray very far from their home (charging station).
Thinking long-term, within a few decades even large vehicles like eighteen wheelers and construction equipment will be electric. The industry will start small, however, with consumer-grade vehicles like the Volt.
August 17th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Just like we have been saying. The Volt power train will spread to all of GM’s cars before long or the existing vehicles will be replace or supplemented with Volt like vehicles. I think this great.
August 17th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
No reason to believe they will look the same. I think we will see a station wagon or small suv version. That would certainly not look like the Volt. Just look at the FlexTreme design. That is certainly different from the Volt.
August 17th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
NO!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient
check out the Tatra T77 (1934)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_T77
lower cd than a prius…
Tell me it ain’t a beauty!
August 17th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
I believe we’ll see in a few years, advancements in battery tech (chemistry/manufacturing/control mgnt) that will allow a brick to have a 40 mile AER.
With this in mind, it would be nice to have a choice between different types of E-Flex vehicles:
Sedan (Volt)
SUV (Vue)
Sports car (Sky)
Truck (Colorado)
August 17th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
That one under the blue tarp on the bottom right has a pretty flat and high back, sorta like the Saab 9-X biohybrid concept, just sayin…
August 17th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
The one on the left looks, to me, like it might be a hatchback and the one on the right looks to be the wagon (or small SUV) i’m hoping will be available by 2012 when I’m ready to trade in my Forester.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
The toyota corolla and honda civic are the most boring cars out there and they sell tons of those things. I don’t think GM really needs to worry about all the cars looking the same when manufacturers only now are starting to care a lot about aerodynamic drag. Maybe in the future it could be a problem for people that want a different looking car but as of now there are so many cars out there that look more or less the same.
This forum has talked a lot about the different GM divisions and how they duplicate most of the cars and slap a different label on em. A good way to save on weight and improve AER is to switch to a carbon fiber frame (Boeing 787). Although it would cost more, they could dedicate a division to carbon fiber, have essentially the same car like they do anyways but get more AER out of it and charge a little more. Just an idea
August 17th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
#14 psklenar says,
The one on the left looks, to me, like it might be a hatchback and the one on the right looks to be the wagon (or small SUV) i’m hoping will be available by 2012 when I’m ready to trade in my Forester.
—————-
If it is AWD like your Forester, then I’m there.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Now that designers are actually encourage to think out of the corporate box (and GM has changed the corporate box them selves) there will be limitless ideas on the shapes of future vehicles. Just look at cars. They all have doors, wheels & glass. Yet the designs are endless. Some instant classics. Some cool for a few years. And as said above as technology advances a “brick” will get 40 miles or much more per charge. The muscular looks will be back. How cool are some air craft. Look at the 50’s when wings and jet engine ports were very stylish parts of some fantastically beautiful cars. Look at todays air craft. Imagine those design themes going into a sleek fantastic car. Here comes the future,,,and you can ironically thank expensive oil for it.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
The question, “Will all cars start to look the same?” Is a very thought provoking question. Let me ask people if that would really be a bad thing. Do people really care what an airliner looks like? A train? A bus?
The world is filled with people all wanting to eventually have the freedom to move about like people in developed nations. Do you think there will be enough resources on earth to provide a new vehicle every 5 years or so for every person that wants one only to have the old one crushed and put in a land fill? If you run the numbers the amount of resources needed for that is unbelievable.
What if we took the passion out of transportation? Look at a movie like Minority Report. Within the city, all the cars were identical. You got in it and told it where to go. The vehicle was connected to an information grid that allowed it to get you where you wanted to go without risking accidents caused by human error (real mistakes, as well as mistakes caused by poor judgment - taking drugs, drinking, showing off, etc.).
If we did take the passion out of transportation, we would be able to create the most efficient, renewable and safe personal transportation system for the world’s population. It might not be like it is today but it also wouldn’t be as wasteful. Do we really want people to be choosing Hummers just because they can afford it? It’s a complete waste of resources not to mention causing a safety hazard for people that would like to drive more efficient vehicles.
Thus, lately I have been thinking that we should take the passion out of daily transportation. It would definitely make the world much more comfortable for everyone and we can then do other things to differentiate ourselves including the actions we take, challenges in life we accept, etc. You have to admit that a huge proportion of the world’s young men feel that if they owned a Ferrari that they could get their dream woman.
How about we keep passionate driving to the track and to specialized environments that do not interfere with efficient and safe personal transport. Just a thought.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
The two others have already been announced:
Chevrolet Volt
Opel (Saturn) Flextreme
Cadillac Provoq
August 17th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Lyle,
Thanks for this excellent site. Keep the updates coming…
August 17th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
On the bright side, this means the chances of there being SOME model I can afford is actually quite good. Obviously, the Cadillac is beyond a teaching salary, but given the inevitable refund of some of my money the government will provide as these things become better known, I will probably have one as my next car. Greater volume almost always means lower price.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
#18 Texas,
Most people are passionate about things they own, especially big things like a house or a car. People generally aren’t that passionate about things they use but don’t own - planes, taxis, busses.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Will all the aerodynamic cars look the same? Not necessarily. Does the aeordynamic F-15 Eagle look the same as the aerodynamic F-16, how about the aerodynamic SR-71? Does the super aerodynamic Aptera look like the EV-1? What about the Volt, from what we’ve seen of it, will it get mistaken for a Prius? I don’t think so.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Texas
The problem with your idea of cookie cutter cars and maximized efficiency is that people love there cars, and want them to be somewhat unique. Cars are a reflection of us and our personalities. Even those that cant afford a nice house, often have a nice car they love and have put time and money into. Identical cars in other countries might work, but you would have a hard time selling it to Americans. I think as the E-Flex system improves over time, that most future automobiles can be very efficient despite there configuration.
August 17th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Go GM! I am rebuilding a 72 GMC long-bed pickup truck. My father gave it to me when I went to college. If an e-flex powerpack was available I would remove the current drivetrain and replace it with an e-flex drivetrain. I know the truck is on the heavy side, but it has plenty of room for a larger battery pack and larger electric motor.
GM should realize the potential of selling thousands, if not millions, of e-flex powertrains for the rebuilders. Why stay with gas when I could be driving an electric truck for under $20,000. The old body and cab are in great condition.
Go GM- we need this technology and we need it now.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
#15 gsned57 Says: “A good way to save on weight and improve AER is to switch to a carbon fiber frame (Boeing 787). Although it would cost more, they could dedicate a division to carbon fiber…”
————————————————————————————–
Carbon fiber is expensive right now, but it doesn’t have to be that way. I believe the raw materials for carbon fiber are fairly cheap. If someone could figure out a way to bring down carbon fiber manufacturing costs, then it could be cheaper than steel.
Actually, there is a group that’s working in this area. See the recent Nova program “Car Of The Future” for details:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/program.html
The section on carbon fiber is about 1/2 way through chapter 4.
While I disagree with Amory Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute over their promotion hydrogen fuel cells (a.k.a. Fool Sells), their development of new carbon fiber manufacturing techniques and aerodynamic designs is extremely positive.
By the way, if you haven’t done so already, watch the entire Nova program. It’s well produced, covers all the bases, and the “Car Talk” guys are very funny. The program also features the Volt prominently toward the end.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
There is at least concept that we know of, the Opel Flextreme and the Cadillac Provoq.
So a smaller, simpler car then the volts and a more high end Cadillac… make any sence?
For the Provoq, it may be too early as it is a much bigger car and I’m not sure the current platform could work with it… may be our in house number cruncher can verify this one…. but the Opel Flextreme seems to be an easy choice.
#26… Indeed, I watched it and well worth it… also agree on the foolcell
August 17th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
#14 psklenar,
#16 Rashiid Amul,
I too am waiting for a small E-Flex station wagon. Something like the Saturn Flextreme, only with a gas/E85 engine and no Segway compartments. I like the look of the Flextreme concept, but I hope they have enough cargo area behind the rear seats.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
#1 Rashiid Amul
I think it’s because there’s more than one way to get a 0.3 or 0.2 drag coefficient. There’s more than just ONE shape that can yield the same coefficient. Cars are generally “swoopy” so as long as they don’t look like a cube, then many different aerodynamic designs will always be around.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
They gotta be going for a truck next. The need for trucks hasn’t gone away, just the affordability of powering the vehicle has. They’d sell tons of EFlex trucks without trying.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
#1 Rashiid
I think you’ll be very happy to know just how wrong you are. Yes you have to have certain things in common but if you look at the cars at the site listed below you’ll find some huge differences. You can click through to see all the different shapes but my favorite comparison is that the Tucker — yes the freaking Tucker from the movie — has basically the same Cd as the Prius. I think you’ll agree those cars could not be different looking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficients
August 17th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
In one of the videos Maximum Bob and his sidekick just about came out of their seats discussing how great it would be to have a Cadillac with great performance using E-Flex, referencing how the Fisker Karma was a great idea. (I think they were thinking margin tho Bob was probably thinking 0-60 in five seconds).
I’d love one of those and my guess is it’s on the list.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
I really getting to have a hatred of those blue shrouds. lol.
I agree, the E-Flex drivetrain is the way of the future.
Looking forward to my Opel.
August 17th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
#29 Mike D - Here’s one “cube” you may want to take a look at - from Nissan. 37 MPG, with ICE power up front, and electric motor assist in the rear.
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/02/the-nissan-cube.html
August 17th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
I recently read an article that stated that in 2007 China had 327,000 auto accidents and 82,000 deaths. I am pretty sure China doesn’t have near as many cars on the road as the U.S. , yet twice as many deaths, what gives ?. They must be really bad drivers, have really bad cars or really bad roads, maybe all three. I know when I visited Taiwan a few years ago, they drove like maniacs. The closest place I would compare Taiwan drivers to would be Italy where everyone ignores street signs. Be grateful you live in the U.S. everybody, we have it much better than most.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
I am highly doubtful that they will all look alike as there is no way to make an E-Flex Silverado (in the future) to look like a Volt, without people questioning GM designers’ sanity. Obviously, battery sizes and engine architectures will vary to suit each vehicles needs while keeping a similar brand image. My guess is that one of them will be an aerodynamic E-Flex coupe but I do not think it will look like the Volt but carry on by similar aerodynamic principles. I’m quite sure they don’t think they can sell different cars if they look alike. That hasn’t worked so well for them in the past (can you say Cavalier/Cimmaron?) Trust me, they’ll look different.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
I would say a small SUV would garner some attention.
Now we see why the Volt couldn’t make do with an 8 kilowatthour Altair battery pack - not enough power, regardless of its ability to
provide the capacity.
I’d like to see an E-REV Soltice or Saturn Sky.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Shared battery between different models. That is cool. So if another type car gets totaled, I can recover the battery for use in my GM eRod. Works for me.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
DonC #31
“Tucker — yes the freaking Tucker from the movie — has basically the same Cd as the Prius”
*** *** ***
That is very hard to believe, especially with the high blunt windshield huge flat bumper/grill and the sunken bays on the front. I’m wondering if that’s a mistake or if maybe they used a different measure wrt those figures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Tucker_Sedan
August 17th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
Good to hear they’re planning multiple models (it was to be expected, really..
)
I’m guessing one of their next models will be something like the pontiac vibe, its kind of like a small suv/wagon, yet not quite.
They seem to be selling well, apparently.
Make it electric, and they’ll sell even more. (as long as its not $40,000!
.. I just like to bring that up because it seems to anger some people that it comes up all the time.. well guess what, price is the #1 factor in cars for the masses. The e-flex platform is designed for the masses. If you don’t have to worry about costs, you get a tesla, or some other type of car.)
August 17th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
#18 Texas - “The question, “Will all cars start to look the same?” Is a very thought provoking question. Let me ask people if that would really be a bad thing. Do people really care what an airliner looks like? A train? A bus?”
People don’t care about buses or trains because they aren’t their buses or trains. They don’t demonstrate to the world the owner’s lifestyle choices or their wealth or anything else. Hence no one cares what they look like.
Cars do all those things so having all cars look the same isn’t going to happen unless human nature changes or the government goes despotic. Which means not anytime soon.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Totally off topic: Today on the radio a news report said that GM considers the Nov 2010 date an external date, but they are working to an earlier internal date as a hedge against Toyota bringing out its PHEV in 2010.
Does anyone have the print story, cuz my recollection could well be flawed?
August 17th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
#22 Dave G, #24 Tom,
That’s exactly my point. The passion causes the excessive waste in our transportation system. It was OK in the past because resources (oil, materials) were so abundant. Now you have to agree the situation has changed drastically. From China and India coming on strong (as well as many more countries), to the stagnating global oil production, etc. Transportation is not the frivolous luxury it was in the past. Just think of the impossible situation of 1 billion people in China driving Hummers.
How about this… I own two bikes. One is for public transportation and one is for sport. The one for public transport is inexpensive, bland, safe, nobody would want to steal it, gets me from point A to point B and I’m very satisfied with it and wouldn’t really be too concerned if it was stolen or vandalized.
Next I have my sports bike. A marvel of modern technology. Exotic materials, extremely light and thus fast, I would not leave it alone and I put my passion and individuality into it.
Now, wouldn’t that kind of system be much better for the world? Those who really care about driving and don’t mind putting a lot of their time and money into their passion will still have special areas to express themselves and their art.
Remember, driving a car is a recent thing. Go back a little over a hundred years ago (a blink of the eye in human history) and personal transportation was limited to a horse, walking, and other benign modes.
Yes people don’t want to change. The dictator never wants to give up his throne! However, in the face of the changing world, it’s extremely selfish to hoard the world’s resources just because we can. Because we were lucky enough to be born in this environment. There really is no other way to justify it. I think it might be time for all of us to grow up, get off of Mother Nature’s breast and learn to share our limited resources.
Of course this will not happen because we have not evolved that far yet. It will probably take a few resource wars to straighten everything out. I’ll be dead by then, thank God. Good luck to all you young readers!
August 17th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Who will be the default Voice of the Volt in-car Navigation System ? The current rage in nav systems is to download your favorite celebrity voice (for a small fee) for directions. I’m thinking maybe someone like James Earl Jones. Wadduthink. Of course, if they make it some irritating voice you are more likely to pay extra for a custom download of your own choo$ing. I can hear the GM marketing folks working overtime on this problem.
August 17th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Chevy Volt HHR sounds good to me. : ) E-Flex Cruze sounds good too. : )
August 17th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
#39 Grizzly
Yeah it is hard to believe. But I don’t think it was a typo. If you look at the side view drawing on the page you’ve linked to the car is really very much a teardrop, and teardrops are far and away the most aerodynamic shape you can have. Much better than the bubble plus Kammback on the Prius. Also if you look at the cars with lower Cd’s you’ll notice quite a few have the long hood and teardrop back. (And of course you have the bubbles like the Prius and the New Beetle).
The Tucker may have had a much higher CdA of course. I don’t have a feel for how big the frontal area is.
Wouldn’t it be a trip to have a Tucker replica body on an E-Flex drive train?
August 17th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
DonC #46
Yes it is basically a tear drop but even from the side, the windshield is too blunt, and the hood too horizontal to guide the air neatly over the top. From about where the driver would sit back it’s outstanding, but look at the bulldozer front and those sunken bays just inside the headlights, you”d think those would be an aerodynamic disaster.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
#43 Texas - “How about this… I own two bikes. One is for public transportation and one is for sport. The one for public transport is inexpensive, bland, safe, nobody would want to steal it, gets me from point A to point B and I’m very satisfied with it and wouldn’t really be too concerned if it was stolen or vandalized.”
How about this: I have my Venture Vehicle for doing short runs and my Cadillac with E-Flex for long trips? Same end result but two fun to drive alternatives.
I guess I am failing to see the connection between efficiency and design excellence (or lack thereof). A good design doesn’t cost any more than a bad one. You seem to be confusing gas consumption with the quality of the design. Who cares what someone drives so long as it doesn’t compromise national security, the environment, or the economy? Just stick a couple more solar panels on the roof.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
#42 Van
I have read that Toyota says the plug-in Lithium-based Prius will be ready by 2010, will greatly increase mileage and will be cheaper than Volt. Also, very importantly, numerous Toyota executives have stated publicly that it is very important to be “first” with plug-in. Without a doubt, there is a race to see who will be the first with mass-produced plug-in. I think they want to capture that consumer mindshare buzz from being the leader. If we are lucky maybe early 2010 instead of late 2010, knock on wood.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
#47 Grizzly
I personally don’t have any experience so I’m just relying on Wikipedia. It’s usually pretty accurate though since if you look at the discussions there are a lot of people who will quickly chime in if they think something is incorrect.
To me the Tucker shares a lot of design cues with the Porsche 977. But honestly, excepting the obvious cases, I find it hard to predict what designs will have low Cds so I am definitely not going to argue the point.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Who cares if the cars look the same. I want all the batteries to be the same, or at least interchangeable between vendors. Similar to AAA, AA, C, D sizes in portable devices. The consumer is going to get screwed in the long run by having all these different sizes and shapes of batteries that lock you in to a maker. The price they charge for their batteries may end up being the deciding factor in your next EV purchase and not the look of your next batt mobile.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
The new Volt design is astounding, especially considering they’re going mainstream at the pricing point advertised to date.
Chevy Volt: American-made, American FUELED for the American driver.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Thank God it is an election year. With both candidates promising either $5,000 tax credit (McCain) or $7,000 tax credit (Obama), perhaps GM will make a dime off the first year. They’re entitled to a profit for helping end the merciless addiction flowing from our child umbilical cord to Daddy Middle-East.
US Air Force retired. Glad to see my entire career spent protecting the oil highways won’t be the legacy of the next generation of service.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
$49 Genie - “I have read that Toyota says the plug-in Lithium-based Prius will be ready by 2010, will greatly increase mileage and will be cheaper than Volt.”
First of all I think Toyota has said it will make a “fleet” of the plug-ins available to corporate and government purchasers. So I doubt we’d see anything on the consumer side until late 2011 at the earliest. Second is that at the end of the day the Prius is an ICE with an EV transmission (or assist) while the Volt is an EV with and ICE assist. Big difference on the technology side including the fact that, apropos to this thread, the Prius drive train is not really scaleable.
The price of the Li-ion Prius will be higher than the current version. How much higher we have no idea since Toyota hasn’t gotten that far yet. GM has completely changed the game.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
#32 DonC
And can an all electric Corvette 0 to 60 in 4 seconds be far behind?
Takes my breath away just thinking of it…
Oh, and speaking of CoD, the Corvette certainly doesn’t look like
a Prius now does it?
August 17th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
>> I have read that Toyota says the plug-in Lithium-based Prius will be ready by 2010, will greatly increase mileage and will be cheaper than Volt.
Final cost (including tax & fees) for the Prius itself and aftermarket augmentation is currently $34,000. From the factory, you can obviously drop the cost of the original battery-pack and the overhead (shipping & labor) from the aftermarket provider, which easily brings it down to $31,000.
It doesn’t seem realistic for Volt to be in the same category at a much higher price. How Volt will be marketed is a big question that has yet to be addressed… by GM or the enthusiasts.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
I am like so hot for a Volt right now. I am sensing a final episode of Spontaneous Combustion coming on strong. Somebody please call the Fire Department. This is a four alarm plea for relief. Come on guys break out your hoses.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
#54 DonC, #49 Genie
Toyota and GM’s public statements are statements for public consumption, including what they want their competitors to hear. Don’t take any of them at face value. It’s a good strategy to underpromise publicly so your competitors may have a false sense of security.
They both probably are assuming (or have inside info on) much broader and/or earlier dates by their competitor.
If I were Toyota, I’d see the Volt as a mortal threat and put all hands on having a plug-in Prius before GM. And were I GM, I’d worry that all Toyota would need to do to torpedo the Volt would be to have a few hundred plugin Priuses on the street first, and the public would feel that the Volt is just a cheap copycat of the ‘real thing’.
And very few people will value the Volt’s under-the-hood engineering as being worth $40k if the plug-in Prius is selling for $10-$15k less.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
>> Big difference on the technology side including the fact that, apropos to this thread, the Prius drive train is not really scaleable.
That could easily be considered greenwashing. I suggest you clarify that comment…
Highlander is a very large hybrid, dwarfing Volt in comparison.
August 17th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
#45, #46
Speaking of trips, how about a design that’s a cross between an HHR and a Tucker?
August 17th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Correction. I can guarantee u that is the flextreme under the right bottom blue sheet. But darn it, I want an e-flex Saab. Bad.
August 18th, 2008 at 12:56 am
#59 John1701a - “That could easily be considered greenwashing. I suggest you clarify that comment…”
If you understand the technologies it’s fairly straightforward. In a hybrid like a Prius or a HIghlander or a Tahoe there is a ton of interaction between the ICE and the battery assist (it’s why the assist is basically an electronic transmission). If you change any part of the system you have to redesign it at every point.
E-Flex requires very simple communications, making it fairly simple to upgrade one or more parts of the system. IOW making a Highlander from a Prius requires you to start from scratch whereas making a Cadillac with higher performance from a Volt requires, at most, a battery, ICE, controller, and motor upgrade. You might just be able to do it with a battery and software upgrade.
No comparison.
August 18th, 2008 at 1:00 am
Texas:
An interesting topic of conversation, and I suppose in Orwell’s Oceania it might be possible.
But when you have multi billion dollar for profit corporations competing for the same money form the purchasers, it is unlikely that they will all get together and decide to make identical cookie cutter cars. Why purchase a Chevy over a Ford at that point?
And your point about jet planes and buses misses one point. I don’t care what they look like, because I do not get to have a choice. If I had the chance to book my next airline flight on an F-16, instead of a 737, you can rest assured I would do so!!! But in reality, you book a flight to get you to your destination when your travel is required… This assumes, of course, that the flight is not cancelled, and that some rain storm in Houston, has not fouled up the flight departure and arrival times from Pittsburgh to Ft. Lauderdale, which is again somthing I have no control over!!!!
August 18th, 2008 at 1:59 am
I hope Bob Boniface gets on with a pickup design that can tow up to 4000 lbs soon. But I guess we’ll have to wait until batteries advance a little more.
August 18th, 2008 at 2:42 am
#48 DonC wrote:
“I guess I am failing to see the connection between efficiency and design excellence (or lack thereof). A good design doesn’t cost any more than a bad one. You seem to be confusing gas consumption with the quality of the design. Who cares what someone drives so long as it doesn’t compromise national security, the environment, or the economy? Just stick a couple more solar panels on the roof.”
I’m also failing to see a connection between design excellence and efficiency. The Hummer may be a beautiful design but is it an efficient way to get a person from point A to point B in terms of used resources (assuming we are not trying to get from war zone A to war zone B)? All I’m saying is that currently our personal cars are more personal than transportation. Can you argue with that?
It doesn’t mean we can’t do better but what is the motivation to do so? It’s passion baby. The Geo Metro is just not cool, man. The Prius is just too geeky. Oh, but that Hummer… Now that will make me look tough!
The great thing that has happened lately is the price of gas went so high. It scared the cool right out of people! All of a sudden you were not so cool in that Hummer. People actually laughed, cried, screamed, and pitied those Hummer pilots when they saw them.
If you took the passion out of the equation just imagine how efficient (in terms of resources) personal transportation could get. I’m guessing many more times as efficient.
In the future when we humans have a handle on our resources and can be responsible tenants of the planet we can go crazy. However, right now it’s kind of like stealing money out of your mother’s purse to buy that pair of cool jeans.
August 18th, 2008 at 3:36 am
#61 Jim I wrote:
“And your point about jet planes and buses misses one point. I don’t care what they look like, because I do not get to have a choice. If I had the chance to book my next airline flight on an F-16, instead of a 737, you can rest assured I would do so!!!”
I think your statement shows that I got the point perfectly. If you had the means you would feel no guilt of consequence in jumping in that F-16 for your flight to NY (probably the equivalent of a poor Indian wanting to use a Hummer).
August 18th, 2008 at 5:57 am
Lyle’s post was about GM’s plans for multiple lines of cars. So should that be cause for optimism or pessimism?
Optimistically, it seems to show they think the ideas have possibilities. That’s great.
Pessimistically, GM tends to turn everything into a muddle of blandness, trying to be minimally adequate across multiple models.
I hope that GM will pay attention to the Volt long enough that a really fine car is what is introduced. GM can’t afford to take its collective eyes off the ball at this particular moment or GM will never have another turn at bat.
August 18th, 2008 at 7:02 am
#30 Marcus R. (WL# 5275) Says: “They gotta be going for a truck next. The need for trucks hasn’t gone away, just the affordability of powering the vehicle has…”
————————————————————————————–
There are some people that really need a truck, and I don’t fault them, but I don’t think they are a majority. How many Hummers are actually being used off-road? How many pick-ups have dirty beds? The vast majority of truck and SUV drivers today are motivated by fashion and status.
I remember a time not too long ago when most women wouldn’t be caught dead driving anything that resembled a truck. Now they are all lining up for Hummers, Navigators, and Yukons. This is fashion - pure and simple. And like all fashion, it will change when something new comes along.
August 18th, 2008 at 8:15 am
>> If you understand the technologies it’s fairly straightforward.
That unusual definition of “scalable” isn’t correct either. Prius has already been upgraded in two different ways… simply by swapping in a more powerful engine and a higher capacity battery.
Stop fighting the FULL hybrids. It doesn’t make sense. They are helping with the same effort: replacement of traditional vehicles.
August 18th, 2008 at 8:35 am
Bob Boniface made a point the other day to mention the “vertical fin” on the production Volt and the effect it has on aerodynamics.
Many aircraft employ vertical fins called “winglets” because of their ability to smooth the flow of air as it leaves the wings, reduce wing tip vorticies and reduce drag.
I don’t know if the vertical fin on the Volt will have the same effect as winglets have on aircraft or not. But, if it does then designers could potentially employ different size vertical fins with different angles to keep the aerodynamics clean and still have different looks.
Perhaps nasaman or someone else would have more knowledge of this than I and might care to comment.
August 18th, 2008 at 8:44 am
#35 beware asian drivers
There is an expression I learned living in Toronto..because there are a lot of asians living there and most drive like maniacs..ots DWO (like DUI) it stands for Driving While Oriental.
(no offence intended)
August 18th, 2008 at 11:41 am
#30 Marcus R:
Yeah, come on truck! I don’t see why the Volt driveline wouldn’t support something the size of the S-10. Even a Colorado, worst come to worst. I have made a lot of remarks about trucks and SUVs as fashion statements, but there is a large core market of people who actually need them, and small businesses (mine for instance) are smarting from the run up in gas prices.
#44 Volt Voice:
Bob Lutz.
#70 Estero:
Yeah, just take a look at a modern F1 car. Winglets, “barge boards”, and other trick little aero gizmos galore. The teams all have, or at least have access to, the latest and the greatest “rolling-road” wind tunnels, and use them pretty near 24/7, trying to find the slightest “unfair advantage”. There must be something to it! Of course, they are all too willing to trade drag for downforce, so maybe that’s an issue, but still….
#71 Mitch:
No kidding, LOL. Toronto has nothing on L.A. in that department, I promise you!
August 18th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
For a while all econo-cars will start looking the same to the wind. In Nascar they all have similar body aerodynamics design per the rules. However the stickers make them look like there real car counter part. While the lights won’t just be stickers you still designing options to work with.
August 18th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
A neat looking car for the E-Flex power train would be a convertible Volt. Man, I would buy one of those on day one. GM plans to bring out a Camaro as a convertible, so why not the Volt as a convertible?
August 18th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Hopefully they will be working on things like a 2 seater version. A hatchback model, a 2 door model, a smaller version (someone coined the phrase “milliVolt” in the fourm).
August 18th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Must be dusty there.
They have to keep the cars covered.
August 18th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
#72 Noel - “I don’t see why the Volt driveline wouldn’t support something the size of the S-10″
A 53 kW engine can’t tow up long freeway grades.
August 18th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
#77 doggydogworld:
Neither can our S-10! It has the old 2.2L 4 banger with the 5 speed. Try to even move a trailer away from a stop and it’s bye-bye clutch. It’s a great little parts runner and commuter though. 25 mpg combined every tank. At 25K miles a year, almost all within 40 miles, and the ability to charge at work, E-flex would save us some serious bucks.
That’s all I’m talking about. Towing trailers is another whole story.
Even a small van would work. I saw a Mazda 5 this morning. Something like that, or maye even a little smaller would be perfect. At risk of offending anyone, the HHR just doesn’t do it for me. If I wanted a 1950 Suburban, I’d buy one.
August 18th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Texas - “In the future when we humans have a handle on our resources and can be responsible tenants of the planet we can go crazy. However, right now it’s kind of like stealing money out of your mother’s purse to buy that pair of cool jeans.”
I disagree - it is more like stealing money out of your child’s piggybank. We will be long dead by the time the responsible tenants are a majority.
I will have an electric car. It remains to be seen if it will be a Volt. It will most likely be something a bit more affordable with a higher AER, and maybe no ICE.
August 18th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Well, I think we have our answer as to why there has been such a disappointingly low number of Volts projected for the first few years of production. There will be a huge number of eFlex vehicles coming out, but only a few will be Volts. GM has this issue spot on. Look at all of us arguing over what type of erev each of us really wants. GM plans to make as many of us as happy as possible as early as possible (well, maybe not counting that negotiation phase about the price). Me, I like the idea of something like an eHHR. What about an eHHR pickup? Yeah, you lose a little range, but you can toss junk in the bed of a pickup that doesn’t fit inside a vehicle or that stinks and belongs in a flower bed or that is heading to the county dump.
All of these body styles have a point and a purpose and that is what a full line car company knows well. No sleep Bob, 200 million erevs in 20 years. Lets see the General do it.
August 18th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
#76 jefro —- Yes, it must be dusty.
August 18th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
What vertical fin on the Volt? Either way, winglets on airplanes are on the ends of the wings because that’s where the tip vortices are. This produces a significant amount of drag. I can’t imagine where the Volt’s shape would produce a similar phenomenon. Also, the speeds involved are much different. Who knows though…I’m just an engineering student, not an engineer.
In my opinion, sterilizing the automobile in the name of efficiency would produce a huge backlash against the green movement. Anyways, I don’t think low drag necessarily has to come at the expense of style. Certainly a shift in public perception about what looks good in a car might help streamline the greening of the automobile, but if you force too much on people they’ll get upset.
I think as automakers fight to reconcile greenness with consumer taste, this problem will solve itself. GM is already working on it with the Volt, making it as efficient as possible while keeping it a visually appealing car. I may be the only one who thinks the production model looks better (so far) than the concept.
August 18th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
#83 Jake — Yes, I think you are the only one.
August 18th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
#65 Texas & #79 Len:
Actually, I think that you are both right.
#83 RB:
Actually, I have seen several comments here just today saying the same thing as #82 Jake about the looks of the production model vs. the concept. Count me in as agreeing with him as well. I don’t care what it looks like as long as it has the best possible AER and fuel mileage.
August 18th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
#84 noel
Yes as you said there have been a number of comments from writers who prefer the production Volt’s appearance. That may be the majority view.
As a person on the other side, in #83 I was just responding in a light-hearted way (with a smiley face) to agree with Jake’s own comment. But he’s not alone in his preference for the production version.
August 19th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
I haven’t read all the comments, but–
Has anyone got facts and figures of using about half carbon fiber frames for cars, in the same way as the new Boing planes are being built, for reduction of weight? Too expensive? Maybe, but lighter, stronger, easy to shape, etc. Then the battery weight will become less of a problem.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
I would bet that those two are the 2012 Pontiac and Saturn versions of the Volt…
Mike