E-Flex Cadillac Next?
GM has previously unveiled a concept car called the Cadillac Provoq. It was meant to demonstrate an E-Flex platform using a hydrogen fuel cell range extender in the form of a crossover.
As far as anyone at GM would say at the time of the unveiling, that vehicle was not production-intent.
From early on, considering the cost of lithium-ion batteries, there has been speculation that the Cadillac brand would be getting an E-Flex car. At first some thought the Volt would wind up a Caddy, but of course that has not turned out to be the case.
Automotive news is reporting something that they seem to know but aren’t willing to fully disclose.
An article was just published today about how GMs product line-up is changing for the smaller. They interviewed Bob Lutz who noted that Aveos may be getting larger and Cadillacs smaller. Lutz also noted that several vehicles could be built on the same Delta platform the Volt will, indicating a belief consumers are looking for small but well-appointed cars.
It was the last line in the article though that seems to catch our attention:
“There is talk that Cadillac will get the next vehicle to use the Volt technology. Stay tuned.”
I checked in with GM sources who would not confirm this possibility.
Source (Automotive News, subscription)
Popularity: 3%
Related posts:
- The E-Flex Cadillac Provoq and the GM Fifth Generation Fuel Cell
- GM Would Share Volt E-Flex Technology Among Brands
- Is GM planning an E-Flex Cadillac?
- GM to Unveil Cadillac Provoq Concept
- Cadillac Provoq Fuel Cell E-Flex Concept
(7 votes, average: 4.29 out of 5) 
Loading ...
August 25th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
First!!
August 25th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
I have mixed views about this post. If the idea is only to deflect criticism because of higher costs, I am not a fan. The idea that it’s okay to charge more for the tech because it’s badged as a Cadillac means that I’ll be looked for a full-blown EV from a Tesla, Fisker, or smaller shop that specializes in EVs.
However, the economy of scale and use of the delta platform across brands is supposed to lower costs, not give GM an excuse to inflate costs… What gives? Perhaps they are only targeting a different market which I would suppose make sense. However, they’ll sell far more vehicles at $30,000 than at $50,000, IMO…but that’s only my opinion.
August 25th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
I think this move makes sense. If you need to charge a premium for new technology, it’s the high end product that can usually tolerate the premium. Perhaps GM could get more margin out of the Cadillac to reduce the price on the Volt. Without more info all this is speculation.
I remember when I was growing up my Dad told me that GM released new technology on Cadillacs and Buicks, then moved it to Chevy and Pontiac after they hit full scale production. Maybe that should be the strategy with the E-Flex technology…
August 25th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
If the volt is priced like a caddy, and looks like a caddy then it would be better to be sold as a caddy.
August 25th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Ask how many Cadillac Escalade hybrids they’ve sold for about $80k and then I’ll think GM is talking sense. But then again, this would be the Volt for celebrities (with less range and more nose in the air) while leaving us with the Chevy (or Saturn) version. Other than that, I can’t justify it…yet…
August 25th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
#3 Bob C
if that were the strategy with E-Flex production then the average person would be waiting an additional 2 years for the Volt. Remember, the price point was a big deal to a lot of people on this blog. Making the Provoq first at a premium kinda defeats the main purpose of this site. It’s to bring this technology to the masses, not alienate them. Ask yourself this-how many people do you see driving Escalades compared to people driving Cobalts? Or Malibus? Or Corvettes, for that matter. It has been this price elitist mentality (especially with SUV’s) that has GM in the crap as it is. It’s about time they cater good technology to the guy or girl that doesn’t make $85k per year. The Provoq should come between 1-2 years after the Volt. Let the people who supported you throughout the concept prove that the platform is ready for portfolio expansion.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
This does make a great deal of sense. Take the volt tech, place it in a more ‘luxury’ style, and charge a premium over the basic model, then use the profits from that to offset the R&D cost and move to lower-cost across-the-line profitability much faster then if you relied on volume sales of unprofitable small cars. In a Cadillac body, you can get away with the extra costs quite well to drop the costs in your ‘basic’ Chevy line.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Great Marketing Idea- A plug in for the masses and also one for the classes!
August 25th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
If they are going to put the BEV series hybrid (aka Volt) platform into the Cadillac line they are going to have to figure out what to do with the battery pack when it comes to the back seat…. I don’t think folks are gong to buy a Caddy that only seats 4!
August 25th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
The article said: “indicating a belief consumers are looking for small but well-appointed cars.” This is absolutely true, I believe. That is part of the problem with GM’s small cars now. They are ok if you don’t expect or want much, but they don’t offer as much amenities as Honda or Toyota in their lower end cars. I think GM is on the right track here.
As far as the E-Flex Cadillac is concerned, most of us believed GM would do one right after the Volt, if I remember some of the comments posted in previous topics.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
#2 Dave B
“Perhaps they are only targeting a different market which I would suppose make sense. However, they’ll sell far more vehicles at $30,000 than at $50,000, IMO…but that’s only my opinion.”
Of course, Dave, GM is targeting a different market with the Cadillac. Those buyers want a Caddy version of the Volt, not the Volt. They are willing to pay for it, so why not let GM build some for that market. It will be a much smaller market than the Volt, but a good one for GM. The E-Flex is going to move into many of GM’s vehicle line-up. We may as well accept that fact. Hopefully that will not delay shipments of the Volt. If it does, then shame on GM.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
This would make a great addition to the hybrid ‘Yukonahoe’ and Escalade hybrid, lol. I would suspect the same amount of relative enthusiasm…after the celebrities get them and with several other EVs/E-Revs already on the market.
Underpowered, small, 4 seat Cadillac. Maybe they should bring back the Catera while they are at it (although it did have a ‘token’ fifth seat).
I know what GM is thinking, change the shell, maybe make a convertible, slap the Caddy symbol on it…ask 70K+, wait for the jackasses to show up.
By the time something like ‘this’ could get to market, it would be 2012ish. More than likely the market/economy is at it’s absolute bottom, unemployment, inflation/recession, housing, the trough of autosales, etc…maybe the top 1/2% could afford it, but would they even buy it?
In my opinion, bad, bad timing to even consider it.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
statik
you really think things are going to continue to go to hell in a hand-basket for the next 4 years? these things don’t usually take nearly that long to hit bottom.
anyways, i think there are alot of people with Cadillac CTS’s that would like a smaller luxury car that might even be convertible as you suggest, that gets good gas mileage.
if the volt really takes off, there will be charging stations are peoples jobs (especially for the vps) and then having the electric will mean free commuting in a caddy!! woo hoo. worth the extra money!
don’t underestimate peoples desire for a comfy car with good mileage.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
it’s only 22 days until the Volt unveiling. They can’t change it now. As far as a Cadallac version is conserned, bring it on! GM said that they were going to use the Volt technology in other vehicles and I say the more the merrier.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
#13 Right-Winger
“statik: you really think things are going to continue to go to hell in a hand-basket for the next 4 years? these things don’t usually take nearly that long to hit bottom.
anyways, i think there are alot of people with Cadillac CTS’s that would like a smaller luxury car that might even be convertible as you suggest, that gets good gas mileage”
—
I really do. (2012 is only like 3 years and a few months off).
We aren’t at a bottom right now, no one is saying we are. Most figure they credit markets have further to worsen, another 10-15% at least to be taken off the real estate market and inflation is just starting to take hold. (I feel thats a pretty optimisti, ‘half full’ scenario).
Funny thing about ‘the bottom’ is that you just don’t hit it and spring back up to the ‘good old days’. Best, best case is we ‘hit bottom’ around this time next year, then even off, and then start to pull ourselves up.
It probably will take 4-5 years after the bottom to just get back to where we where last year… and last year was one of the worst for the auto industry in several decades.
I think a E-Rev Caddy will be priced alot more than the CTS…maybe more like the price of 2 of them.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
I kinda thought that the VOLT was going to be “well appointed”. If we have to “move up” to a Cadillac to get quality….. well, then GM has a problem. I’ll know better after driving a prototype for a few months.
I DO think that the economy should have turned around in the next half decade though. I guess I’m just an optimist (g).
Be well,
Tag
August 25th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Looks like half of the posters here on this topic “get it” and the other half don’t.
GM is NOT, I repeat NOT in the business of making cars just so YOU can get what YOU want. Believe it or not you would be doing the same things. Lets go through a senario where you are KING of GM.
Subject1: Dear King we don’t have enough batteries to supply enough vehicles if we sale a vehicle at 27K. The demand would be for 4 million vehicles annually. We only have battery capacity for another line making 300,000 vehicles. We can sale that many cadillacs with a profit margin 8 times large than we would make selling 300,000 chevy something or others.
So we can make $1500X300,000 off of a chevy brand are we can make $12,000X300,000 if we make a cadillac with these batteries. King what should we do.
Anyone that says chevy and not cadillac is either stupid or lying.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I agree Chevy is for the masses….but they do touch the 70K to 100K plus range with the exotic Vettes.
I am glad some of you on here are not in marketing.
Having this cutting edge technology in a Cadillac is a perfect move.
No one will be crying that it’s $45 or $50K
It will have Cadillac style and creature comforts to go with it.
And they will sell ALL they can make.
Let GM turn a profit people. Most of us here want GM to make it.
They deserve to with the new technology.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
I hope they do the Saturn Flextreme first. We really need something with more cargo space.
August 25th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Well, if tesla can hide a $30,000 plus battery system in their car,
I suppose GM can do the same in their Caddy, which could actually have a larger battery pack and perhap a 50 miles plus range.
A real Tesla buster (not that anyone is likely to ever see one of those cars on the road) would be a Corvette ala Fisker Karma style plug-in, with a “performance mode” with battery(larger output)/range extender generator(larger output) concurrently available for much stronger in-wheel PML FlightLink electric motors . Another good model in which to hide the extra battery expense. Personally , I’d like to see a Solstice/Sky positioned midway between Volt and E-Flex Vette.
August 25th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
#18 vincent
“I am glad some of you on here are not in marketing.
Having this cutting edge technology in a Cadillac is a perfect move.
No one will be crying that it’s $45 or $50K
It will have Cadillac style and creature comforts to go with it.
And they will sell ALL they can make.”
———-
Only problem is that 45K is probably the price of the Volt. So yes, if the ‘Cadillac E-Rev was 45K’ they could sell all they could make…but they would price it at least 20K higher than the Chev.
August 25th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
#21…
The point being…and keep in mind the price is NOT yet set on the Volt….
The Cadillac buyers will NOT be crying.
August 25th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Caddy, Saturn, and Chevy, it doesn’t matter to me. Just don’t take your eyes off of the prize!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the prize is: Finish up the Volt!!!!
August 25th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
I think it is a good Idea, plus they can use the same CUV body for a Saturn, Buick or Pontiac. As for the back seat, Chevy should really set up the volt for a car seat in the middle or a fold down car seat for a toddler, that would give more Flex to their E-Flex. This makes it way more suitable for small families. And in a CUV they could do 3 across the back seats even with a battey.
August 25th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
#21 Statik
I actually think the Volt will end up being priced in the high 30s, depending on incentives. Lutz would prefer to do a higher end Caddy. It’s more his style. But his express goal is to get more highly educated consumers living on the coasts to look at GM cars and the Volt does that far more directly. The Caddy will be next up, probably as Kent Beurchert in #20 suggested. The real peach would be a Corvette but there isn’t enough volume.
BTW I noticed in the WSJ that your friends at Mitsubishi are planning to build 4000 i-Mievs in 2010 but have not decided whether or how to sell any of these in NA. I fear this car is not happening anytime soon.
#17 omegamann66
Nice to see someone thinking about how price mediates supply and demand! Normally I’d say you are right, but Lutz has been clear that the mission of the Volt is to get people who at the moment won’t look at a GM car to do so. I don’t think it’s all about maximizing profits in the short term. If GM plays the Volt correctly it will change the game for their entire lineup. The Volt will go first.
August 25th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
I think the e-flex technology would be wasted in a Cadillac. No offense to anyone, but most Caddy drivers I see on the daily commute need to call AAA when they get a flat. Do you really think they will plug in a cord every night?
Moreover, these are the same people who need to drive a full size SUV to haul around their dry cleaning and commute to work in. Generally not the kind of person who wants to be hassled by a cord.
Putting flame retardant on now…
August 25th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
#25 DonC
“BTW I noticed in the WSJ that your friends at Mitsubishi are planning to build 4000 i-Mievs in 2010 but have not decided whether or how to sell any of these in NA. I fear this car is not happening anytime soon.”
————
Yeah, there is no real plans (has never been) for the i-Miev in NA on initial roll out, I would wager our first look would be late 2010 as a 2011 model. The whole EV thing is honestly frustrating as heck, further compounded by the fact I don’t live in California or New York, and I have never been on Celebrity Fit Club.
The fact that Mitsu is full tilt building factories for the Li-Ion packs now, and also funding a extensive expansion on plants in progress, but is still putting out conservative estimates is worrisome to not only them, but to the Volt and the sector in general.
I can’t even get a Zenn LSV car that is built about 20 miles from me…can you believe not legal in Ontario?
I’m really quite fearfull that reality for the ‘common man’ on EVs is along way away from the press releases. I’m feeling like 2013 is about the best I can reasonably hope for…from any automaker (that can also service my vehicle locally).
/sigh
August 25th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
I would heartily encourage GM to offer an E-REV version of the Cadillac Provoq!
As some here (including Lyle) will recall, I have strongly advocated that GM develop a version of the Provoq (WITHOUT the fuel cell) but using the Volt battery technology since early this year! Go for it, GM!!!
August 26th, 2008 at 12:24 am
#20 kent beuchert
The battery estimate for the Tesla is $20k, I have never heard a $30k+ estimate. Remember Tesla is using commodity cells which not only are cheaper but also have better energy density than the a123 cells GM plans to use.
“A real Tesla buster (not that anyone is likely to ever see one of those cars on the road) would be a Corvette ala Fisker Karma style plug-in”
More people have seen a Tesla on the road than all the Fisker Karmas and E-flex vehicles combined. The last time most people have seen a Fisker Karma or E-flex vehicle was at an autoshow; these cars aren’t coming out until 1-2 years in the future.
More on topic, I don’t think it’s that bad of an idea, GM needs the money, and given the amount of resources they spend on this platform it’s expected that they will use it in other cars and try to get some revenue back.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:24 am
An E-flex Provoq type vehicle is a great choice. When I saw that thing in New York, it clearly looked like a production intent vehicle. Bet it won’t be far behind.
And a note to all of you proposing an E-flex vette:
As a 25 yr vette owner, someone with lots of access to a large number of vette enthusiasts in clubs and such, an E-flex vette would land with a dull thud to this group. Maybe prospective vette owners would like it, but the “old guard” may rather see the vette retired in all her V8 glory and replaced with a new Fisker Karma type of electric sports car design.
Of course, that’s right after GM buys Fisker. The Karma is beautiful car.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:58 am
If GM is thinking of rebadging a Volt as a Cadillac, I have one word for you:
Cimarron.
If GM is thinking of offering a Cadillac SUV, CUV or something of that sort with Volt technology:
If you can do that, why can’t you have that technology in a Saturn Vue? I’d get one, 8am, day one that they’re available. I thought the tech wasn’t appropriate for something larger?
August 26th, 2008 at 1:08 am
When gasoline hits $8.00 per gallon in the U.S., these cars will be flying off the lot. GM is going in the right direction! Car loans might need to be extended to make up for the higher cost, but people will invest in vehicles that don’t require $200.00 fill-ups. Solar power and electric vehicles- just seems like such a natural fit. Go GM - I am on the Volt list.
August 26th, 2008 at 1:16 am
(not so) small but well-appointed cars. I don’t want a car I need a shoehorn to get into.
August 26th, 2008 at 1:36 am
#27 Statik
Mitsubishi says the planned roll out “worldwide” is 2000 cars in 2009, 4000 cars in 2010, and maybe 10,000 in 2011. Given their market share in NA is 1% my guess is we’re talking placements with electric utilities.
Yes the wait for the EVs is painful. Reminds me of Christmas but this comes at least once a year, not in three or four. I don’t blame you for wanting to get the cars on the road.
To tide me over I have an Aptera on order. If they actually start production I should get one fairly early since they want to release locally first and we’re local. It’s definitely a niche car — not a cold weather car and two + seats. But it is so aerodynamic that with a 10 kWh battery pack and a very small 30 kW motor it should bomb up the six degree slopes everyone here is fussing about at 85 mph. When a car gets this aerodynamic it definitely changes the game.
August 26th, 2008 at 1:48 am
#31 Lurtz
For a upscale Caddy I suspect they’ll need to scale up the the battery pack and gen-set. That will mean more dollars. On the positive side, a more expensive car gives them the latitude to do this and to make a better car. If they just slap a Caddy badge on a Chevy level product that will be a giant buzz kill.
The Voit needs to leapfrog the Prius. That’s the target. It doesn’t have to beat a Lexus or even a Camry or Accord. The Caddy product will have to do a lot better.
But the Volt is the big deal. In Lutz’s terms, it’s the right car at the right time for GM. An upscale Caddy or a Saturn CUV just wouldn’t be as good.
August 26th, 2008 at 2:26 am
My 2004 Cadillac XLR two seater features a door sill much lower than the seat. Very easy for me to get in and out of. What a shock when visiting Tesla Motors in Westwood a week ago. The Tesla seat is lower than the door sill. It’s difficult to get out of a Tesla. Range anxiety is a major issue when considering a Tesla, as cross country trips are out of the question.
Cadillac owners want comfort, luxury, performance and economy. As the auto industry is required to meet higher CAFE standards, GM will need more eFlex vehicles. I would LOVE for my XLR to drive 40 miles fuel free and have the ability to fuel it for a cross country drive. But I realize that most XLR owners want V8 speed more than the fuel savings.
I am on the VOLT wait list to replace an older 5 seat Eldorado. I have considered Prius (especially after renting them during vacations) but want a plug-in to slow the gas purchases to a trickle. If the VOLT preforms well, the Provoq should be very successful.
August 26th, 2008 at 5:20 am
Battery production will be the limiting factor for all of this. Award the contract fopr the Volt so I can get mine for sure.
Take Care,
TED
August 26th, 2008 at 5:28 am
Here’s a thought…Why not make EVERY car in GM’s line-up E-Flex?
August 26th, 2008 at 5:38 am
#38 Schmeltz.
Yup. I’ve been saying that all along. That includes SUVs, Trucks, Hummer, etc.
August 26th, 2008 at 5:39 am
GM seems to have been surprised, along with the rest of us, about how high the Volt’s price will need to be to make it a profitable car for GM. In hindsight it likely would have been better for GM to have introduced the Volt as a Buick or Cadillac, where a higher price would have seemed natural. Not having done that, GM has a dilemma.
So the natural remedy is to sell a modest number of Volts in CA at prices that are unrealistic for most Chevy owners, and then use the Volt as a niche car to draw people into dealerships (as with the Corvette). Then GM can restart the main Volt-type car as a Cadillac Provoq.
That way GM can declare success on all fronts, let the technology develop in higher priced models, and allow time for automation to bring battery prices come down.
Thereafter, as GM introduces future Chevy Volt models they can take advantage of anything that is advantageous, price wise, without having to have the Chevy car as their technology leader.
That is, I think the speculated GM move makes sense. The idea of the Volt as a car for the masses is a great dream but there has to be a plan to get there from here.
August 26th, 2008 at 5:52 am
Off topic. Anyone care to guess what the number 1 car is in America?
Yup, you guessed it.
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/593/hardest-to-get-cars/;_ylc=X3oDMTFhMD
August 26th, 2008 at 5:53 am
Go Volt!
August 26th, 2008 at 6:06 am
Nasaman @ 28, I agree entirely. If there’s going to be a Cadi, why not make it a Provoq, and why not make it electric. Why offer another sadan just like the volt?
August 26th, 2008 at 6:35 am
I agree with BobC, #3. You can get a higher premium with the Cadillac.
Also, the latest CUVs from GM (Acadia, Outlook, Enclave, and Traverse) are popular vehicles. How do you make a Cadillac version to replace the SRX? Will it be that much better than the Enclave?
Nasaman has indicated that the Provoq is based on the Saturn Vue’s platform. Therefore, this is now a new category for E-Flex, CUV versus a small sedan like the Volt. Also, the Provoq has 4WD capability.
These types of vehicles are very popular in the US, and Cadillac could both demand the higher price tag that is required for new technology, and also provide a significant differentiation between the Provoq and the current GM CUVs.
August 26th, 2008 at 6:37 am
#13 Right-Winger
“if the volt really takes off, there will be charging stations at peoples jobs (especially for the vps) …”
I’m not so sure about that. My employer is currently moving dirt in preperation of building a new parking garage. I wrote to the corporate Facilities folks to ask if they had any plans to include charging stations for plug-in’s and the response was “No. Energy costs more during the day, especially for large companies, and therefore it doesn’t make sense for the company to pay for charging employees vehicles.” Unfortunately, too many of the larger corporations still look at the short-term bottom line (need to get dividends to the investors) and paying for more energy will impact that.
August 26th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Stew said:
“I think the e-flex technology would be wasted in a Cadillac. No offense to anyone, but most Caddy drivers I see on the daily commute need to call AAA when they get a flat. Do you really think they will plug in a cord every night?”
Not to worry, Stew. They’ll have the coachman do it. (Sheesh)
Be well,
Tag
August 26th, 2008 at 6:51 am
I will second Nasaman. I would love to park a Provoq next to my Volt !
I would heartily encourage GM to offer an E-REV version of the Cadillac Provoq!
GM PLEASE develop a version of the Provoq (WITHOUT the fuel cell) but using the Volt battery technology! Go for it, GM!!!
I couldn’t imagine the tremendous sales once people realize the vehicles capabilities. Consider the past popularity of SUV’s and crossovers, now with great fuel economy!
August 26th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Where is my $80K E-Flex Escalade? I want it now!
August 26th, 2008 at 7:17 am
sigh… it is days like this that I realize I am poor white trash. People want to buy a Provoque AND a Volt? Hmmm… I think I’ll settle for putting my kids through college instead. Chevy Cruze, here I come. Still an exciting technology, though. I hope it takes off.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:22 am
Schmeltz says
Here’s a thought…Why not make EVERY car in GM’s line-up E-Flex?
I agree totally with this thinking. The sooner the better.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:24 am
There are plenty of that want or buy Cadillacs or similar luxury grade vehicles. Like it or not, this is where the technology fits best until the costs come down. The best and fastest way to develop the EREV is to get the on the road as quickly, with as much volume, and with as much profit (or smallest loss) as possible. The Volt has already announced for production and one the most challenging aspects of the development, if the most, is making it a Chevy. This puts tremendous downward pressure on cost. While I’m impressed GM set this as part of their coming out of the gate, I’ve always felt this has added tremendous unneeded risk to this first iteration of the EREV Eflex. Look at the specs for the nearest competitor edmunds.com/new/2008/lexus/rx400h/100913706/researchlanding.html which sells pretty well.
The Provoq is the right car at the right time can much more easily be the right price.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:27 am
#34 donc
“#27 Statik,To tide me over I have an Aptera on order. If they actually start production I should get one fairly early since they want to release locally first and we’re local.”
I hate you Californians, lol. I wish I could put my money down on a EV I would eventually get.
Although, the breathrough part of the EV in my mind is the four seater part…just for practicality. I already have a SMART TDI, (getting 69.4 real world MPGs since I bought it), for bombing around ’sans’ family, doing little errands or commuting.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:28 am
Oh, by the way, they should take the 160KW version of the EFLEX that will likelybe needed for the Provoq and Cadillac the concept Volt design too.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:30 am
12 Statik:
Why do you have to pan the “Yukahoe” and Escalade Hybrid?
The sales numbers are a joke but thats not because of the demand. If I remember correctly production numbers on these were LOW to begin with and they are selling them as they can.
Most of your SUV buyers and owners are so far under water right now on their current vehicle they can’t get out of them. So a huge portion of your market for these vehicles is stuck in a car for the next 2-3 years.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:41 am
Other odds and ends:
General Motors Corp (NYSE:GM - News; GM) has received interest from two separate investors from the Gulf Arab region to buy its Hummer brand, the company’s Middle East chief told Reuters on Tuesday.
http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/080826/hummer_sale_gulf.html
This seems more realistic of a buyer…from a place that is still essentially in the 90s, and has waaay too much cash to burn. A ideal choice. However, it goes to my theory of them stringing us along while they try to buy out dealers one by one.
I SERIOUSLY doubt a Arab investory wants to make/run/sell HUMMER in the United States through a fractured dealer network.
Can you imagine another wave of negative perspective on the HUMMER tot he average American? “I love those new HUMMERS, so monstorious, they own the road, low MPGS, $100 a fill, high price tag AND the best part…Middle Eastern owned!!! Sweetness! Can I buy two?”
I’m sure the problem with this sale is the State Franchise laws that are protecting the last 160 odd HUMMER dealers. Average buyout price of a dealer is around 3 million a pop…which means a 480 million dollar bill to sell to a investor like this.
Still, if GM could somehow do it and make even $1….it would be a good move.
August 26th, 2008 at 7:43 am
#26 Stew:
“Moreover, [Cadillac drivers] are the same people who need to drive a full size SUV to haul around their dry cleaning and commute to work in. Generally not the kind of person who wants to be hassled by a cord.”
Although I appreciate the knock on Cadillac drivers (I drive a Saturn), you can’t convince me that plugging a chord in is more of a hassle than filling up at the gas station. I’m sure Mrs. Cadillac will love being able to recharge her car as opposed to spilling gasoline on her white pants –which inevitably will need dry cleaning.
August 26th, 2008 at 8:03 am
#26 Stew
#45 Tagamet
#55 Mike
All of you need to put on flame retardant suits! Your comments about Cadillac drivers are uncalled for and show you to be what your comments suggest; crude with no class! I happen to drive a Cadillac and am no different than most others on this website, the present company excepted!
August 26th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Estero@56 said:
“All of you should put on your flame retardant suits! Your comments about Cadillac drivers are uncalled for and show you to be what you really are; crude with no class! I happen to drive a Cadillac and am no different than most others on this website, the present company excepted!”
You’re really funny for someone who is totally devoid of a sense of humor.
Tag
August 26th, 2008 at 8:14 am
#53 morgan
“12 Statik:
Why do you have to pan the “Yukahoe” and Escalade Hybrid?
The sales numbers are a joke but thats not because of the demand. If I remember correctly production numbers on these were LOW to begin with and they are selling them as they can”
————
It is the demand actually. Sure GM can only make so many, but they are no where near selling what they can make, so it doesn’t matter what capacity is. They have a large overstock inventory on them.
GM estimated sales of 12,000 units for 2008, they would be lucky to get to 4,000. All total hybrids brands combined for GM total 5,467 through July.
GM only sold 351 units of both the Tahoe and the Yukon combined in July. This is so bad that they are giving a rebate right off the top…this is unheard of for a hybrid. And thats before you even hit up ‘family pricing’…we are talking like a thousand bucks either.
Here is how the pricing structure on a Tahoe Hybrid works right now:
MSRP: $50,400
Family Price: -$4,719 ($45,681)
Rebate:$5,000
Cost: $40,681
Thats $9,719 off a hybrid! Which GM will also finance at a loss @2.9%…and they still don’t sell. I’m not really ‘panning’ the Yukonahoe, it’s a known disaster.
At $40K versus 50K, I would however expect a little ‘pop’ in the sales numbers for August. The amount of increase? Hard to say. (150 more?) Also hard to say what value are those numbers when you are just trying to get rid of them.
August 26th, 2008 at 8:16 am
#57 Tagamet
The thing is you don’t know anything at all about me except that I drive a cadillac.
August 26th, 2008 at 8:22 am
#58 Statik (me)
Another gah that changes the meaning of my post:
“And thats before you even hit up ‘family pricing’…we are talking like a thousand bucks either…”
should be
“And thats before you even hit up ‘family pricing’…we AREN’T talking like a thousand bucks either.”
/sigh
August 26th, 2008 at 8:47 am
#25 DonC #17 Omeggaman
Simply conjecture, but I wouldn’t give GM too much credence to a long-term GM vision right now. GM has to fight to get back into the black and Wagoner is under a lot of pressure to do that. GM has no loyalty to us. IF they can roll out a Volt for 40K and promise to get it down to 25K in 5 years (with gov’t subsidies of course), they can still get a marketing buzz about how green they are and take their profits. I’m not saying this is their strategy, but I wouldn’t put my faith in an idea that depends on a nearly bankrupt company doing something long-term at a short-term expense. I wouldn’t fault them for it, it’s jut the reality of their situation.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:12 am
If I had my choice of paying 35 for the volt, or 50 for a caddy with the same technology, I would buy the caddy hands down, but that just me.
I admit I am spoiled. I have never had anything but a luxury car or truck, and if I can get the same level of service that I am used to, with the same comfort that I am used to with the new technology, you bet I will pay for it!
And just so all that are complaining about the price know, there are a lot more people out there like me then you think.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:25 am
# 30. MetrologyFirst Says
I agree - keep the vette and camaro V-8’s and muscle cars lets use this E-flex system in other vehicles.
And why not larger cars or Vue/Provoq - not everyone commutes 40 miles. I commute less than 40 miles in a week, but I want a car that can take me places on the weekend. Vue/Provoq is large enough to do that and so should be the flexstream.
There are many people who would love to have a E-flex Caddillac you can buy a new CTS for $32,000 now under the GM employee pricing - why not pay $42,000 for a new CTS with e-flex
August 26th, 2008 at 9:29 am
#53, Morgan, The nearby Chevy dealership received three Tahoes several months ago. The remaining wo have been on the lot for well over a hundred days, each, waiting to sell. They’re currently in the second round of 10% rebates and also have 10% knocked off list. That’s before starting to wheel and deal.
They don’t sell. This product was a bad idea.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:34 am
#49
NZDavid Says:
Schmeltz says
Here’s a thought…Why not make EVERY car in GM’s line-up E-Flex?
I agree totally with this thinking. The sooner the better.
———————————————————————
While I agree that this sounds like a great idea, this will take a lot of time. The technology hasn’t even proven itself yet! Give the technology a chance in the market and see where GM goes from there.
Anyway, I doubt that GM will make ALL their vehicles with the VOLT (or E-Flex) technology. I’ll bet that right now the VOLT technology takes longer and is more expensive to manufacture than the already proven internal combustion engine technology. (That sounds weird talking about the ICE as a technology!)
GM does not need (or want) to be a specialist manufacturer. They will sell and make what the market can handle. And the market takes a while to change.
~Bob
August 26th, 2008 at 9:41 am
If GM comes out with the Provoq with an ICE, I would be more inclined to purchase it instead of a Volt. The main reason is my wife and I really need a family car (seating for 5) for the extended family and a crossover would suit us just fine.
The production Provoq, should it become reality, is likely to look a whole lot different than the concept car. When GM gets it into a wind tunnel, they are likely to realize those square corners will have to go, just like on the Volt.
The one feature that I would most like to see on the Provoq is wheel motors; 2-wheel drive is fine, 4 is better. It makes no difference to me if it is FWD or RWD.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:51 am
Make an e-flex platform with a larger battery that goes 80 miles AER and make it look like the CTS-V Coupe and I will do what I have to in order to buy one….or two!!!!! (one silver and one red)!
August 26th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Comment #7 is spot on. Comment #9 is bovines excrement.
Who would want a Caddy with 4 seats ? The same idiots who pay Caddy prices for a BMW Three series. And even more so the clowns who do so for a BMW One series… Plenty of those people …
You can recover costs on the Caddy and price the Chevy Volt lower. Makes sense.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:56 am
#3 Bob C said:
“I remember when I was growing up my Dad told me that GM released new technology on Cadillacs and Buicks, then moved it to Chevy and Pontiac after they hit full scale production…”
_____
The Volt is being produced as part of the Chevy line. We’ve heard speculation regarding E-Flex models for Cadillac and Saturn. But, there has been absolutely no word about Pontiac & Buick. What gives?
August 26th, 2008 at 10:14 am
oops.
August 26th, 2008 at 10:16 am
#9 Jeff M said:
“If they are going to put the BEV series hybrid (aka Volt) platform into the Cadillac line they are going to have to figure out what to do with the battery pack when it comes to the back seat…. I don’t think folks are gong to buy a Caddy that only seats 4!”
_____
I agree !
Who knows, perhaps a new technology will come along that will allow the battery pack to be reconfigured and/or reduced in size.
The technologies that immediately come to mind are EEStor’s ultracapacitor (ESU) and nanowire technology. And, there are others.
Hydrogen technology is so far down the road it is hardly worth consideration. But, there might be a bright scientist out there somewhere that can solve the hydrogen extraction, storage, transportation and other issues. Let’s hope so!
August 26th, 2008 at 10:17 am
I thought the original GM’s idea is to sell the Volt at $30k or less, it is a Malibu level and as a Chevy.
Car is a transportation instrument for me, not to show my status as Lutz said in the interview. I want a Volt is to pay $0.02/mile rather than $0.2/mile now, while helping to keep $700B/yr in the US and Green.
The last time I own a GM is a 1976 Buick Regal. I gave it away after 40k miles because I can’t handle the problems any more. There is no reason for me to buy another GM other than a $30k Volt.
Should I dump my GM shares? I brought them because I think $30k Volt will turn them around. @$40k or as a Caddy wouldn’t do it. I hope Wagoner would stick to his original gun.
August 26th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Hmmm … I wonder if they’d use a 100 mile AER battery? I bet if they put E-flex into a Cadillac it would have very few compromises. All the bells and whistles. It would be a glimpse of the latest technologies that might trickle down to the masses in 5+ years.
I think GM ought to build it. It’s another E-flex car for the Hollywood people to drive around and mention in their interviews, etc. It might end up being an $60,000+ car though. I’ve been waiting for years for the Detroit 3 to come up with a premium sports sedan that wins in those JD Power and Consumer Reports ratings every year like Lexus and BMW have.
I bet GM could build a super quiet, super smooth E-Flex Caddy. The people that buy Caddys for those features would love it. Add in a built in Apple iPhone 3G type system with a quality 5.1 stereo system (with Sirius satellite), and all the usual Cadillac plushness and you’re all set.
I think they ought to do a whole new exterior design for it. The design should be on par with the latest and greatest Lexuses, Benzes, and Bimmers. I like the Cadillac CTS. It’s a really nice car, no doubt. It’s a unique design and all that, but I prefer the rounded front end and headlights like on Lexus GS 450. That’s the car I’d like to see Cadillac beat in every way. In looks, reliability, initial quality … all that JD Power type stuff. I think the designers and engineers at Cadillac can do it. They’ve had success with the CTS. Now they can build on that and do even better in the future. I’d like to see E-flex Cadillacs become THE “gotta have” cars if you get successful in your career … the car you see the NFL, NBA and other pro sports players driving around.
August 26th, 2008 at 10:38 am
#31 Lurtz:
Rats, you beat me to it. How about the original Seville, a rebadged Nova? Nothing new under the sun.
As to the actual thread, I’m not going to buy a Cadillac, so I don’t care.
August 26th, 2008 at 10:45 am
The SUV: a vehicle nobody wants.
The Fuel Cell: a power source no one can afford.
I think a luxury fuel cell SUV is a great idea.
August 26th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Paul @ 72:
If you are making judgements on GM quality in 2008 based on your last 1976 Regal purchase, (new or used),
I don’t know what to say.
August 26th, 2008 at 10:49 am
______________________________________________________
VOLTIZE the entire Cadillac portfolio!
Start with the SRX Crossover and the SLR Roadster. It would be a MEGA success for GM.
______________________________________________________
August 26th, 2008 at 10:49 am
I don’t want a Cadillac, I want a Chevy (or a pontiac). I don’t mind paying a premium for the car and technology, but I don’t want the burden of higher insurance rates for owning a luxury vehicle. The Chevy volt needs to offset it’s higher price with tax breaks and cheaper insurance over the life of the vehicle.
I am in it for a cheaper/cleaner mode of transportation, not for a namebrand.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Estero @ 66:
I don’t know, the Provoq looks to be a pretty sleek design. I would be suprised if the shaped needed to be refined too much more. Maybe smooth it out a little, but not take away the character. It is a crossover design, and if you look at the others being offered right now, the Provoq is as sleek as any other.
To a lot of others out there:
There is a big market for luxury vehicles, whether you or I are in it or not isn’t the issue. GM will be selling into this market, and considering the CAFE standards on the horizon, the more they can improve the mileage of these larger, luxury vehicles, the more impact it will have on the CAFE bottom line. Look around at what is on the road once in a while. A LOT of pricey vehicles.
The E-flex Provoq would serve a good market, just like the hybrid Escalade. Yeah they may cost a lot and some may snicker at the irony, but if you need or want a real big SUV, getting 20mpg around town, (the same or better than most Camry’s BTW), is an amazing feat for something that size.
It is nice to know that GM is committed to improving the mpg performance across the whole spectrum of cars and trucks.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:14 am
#3 Bob C
In reading the thread, I’m not sure how I skipped your point Bob. Right on. This is the same strategy the electronics business uses. Early adopters pay for the R&D. If you want rapid advancements in technology, the money has to come from somewhere. The technology will still roll down-hill, it just might take an extra year or two. Using that as a business model, I’d expect 40K Volts for several years and then the price would fall once early adopters have their cars and competitors enter the market.
Will see what really happens. These are exciting times to live.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Makes perfect sense. New technology costs are typically at their highest early on, so why not start selling it at the highest price levels from the start?
Additionally, it could be a boost for Cadillac’s image which has fallen off the top tier of luxury brands (BMW, M-B, Lexus) to a level somewhere below. In the image-conscious luxury class, being green is more and more becoming an important perceived value, and high perceived value greatly helps the product image.
Of course the risk is that if unforeseen bugs show up soon after product introduction it could be a killer,
August 26th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Do you think GM did an analysis of where to best place the battery pack in the Volt? Do you think they just went with the design for the EV-1 (the T-shape) because it was already done. No real difference in shape or placement of the Volt’s battery pack over the EV-1’s battery pack, except in size and weight. Was this the best shape and placement for the battery pack? Are the other manufacturers wrong? Is there a right place? Certainly there is a wrong place to put the battery pack.
Did GM just accept the fact that with this battery pack design they would only be able to build four passenger cars? I don’t know. It would be interesting to know the why and wherefores of their decision.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:31 am
_____________________________________________________
Here is a video interview where Bob Lutz gives a hint that the Cadillac portfolio line will be the next line (after Chevy) to get Votlized (e-flex).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1N2Ir64yNs
______________________________________________________
August 26th, 2008 at 11:35 am
#82 N Riley
Interesting question. I don’t think they did a lot of analysis because they knew they had a winner. The T design placed under the body is a complete winner both from a battery pack and a performance standpoint. The T shape gives more area for the mass, reducing the heat issues. Placing it low in the center of the car keeps the center of gravity low and reduces the handling issues.
Why mess with a winner and do something dumb like putting the battery in the trunk?
August 26th, 2008 at 11:42 am
For all of you calling for all GM products to be e-flex, how do you think this is possible in anything less than a 30 year time period? This is a radical new technology, you don’t just take an existing model and slap some batteries and an electric motor in it. Even if it was that simple, where do you get the batteries? Toyota’s Prius production is limited by the number of batteries they can get and that is on battery’s that have been in production for 10 years.
And the call to make trucks, SUV’s and Hummer’s e-flex? I don’t see that happening for a while. What’s the point? A large surcharge for the batteries on the purchase price for a vehicle that will still need a V8 for towing and hauling and will get marginally better gas mileage? You’re not going to make a truck that can tow 10,000 lbs with a 1.4L engine getting 50 mpg.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:42 am
#72 Paul “The last time I own a GM is a 1976 Buick Regal. I gave it away after 40k miles because I can’t handle the problems any more. There is no reason for me to buy another GM other than a $30k Volt. ”
Are you kidding me? That was 32 years ago, let it go man. Funny think is another 32 years prior to that the Japanese were trying to kill my grandfather, yet which one of us holds the grudge?
August 26th, 2008 at 11:45 am
#82 N Riley
Didn’t really make clear that having the weight centered between the back and front wheels avoids issues introduced by having too much weight over either set of the wheels.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Jack @ 85 states, “For all of you calling for all GM products to be e-flex, how do you think this is possible in anything less than a 30 year time period? This is a radical new technology, you don’t just take an existing model and slap some batteries and an electric motor in it….”
Sure it is…no plug, no sale. I’d encourage everyone here to refuse to buy another new vehicle unless it is powered by electricity, regardless if it’s a GM product, or otherwise. And Jack, are you telling me the Manhattan Project or Moon Shot took 30 years? I’ll bet Nasaman has something to say about that. This is capitalism and the Darwin was right…survival of the fittest. IMO, electric is the future.
August 26th, 2008 at 11:58 am
#82 N Riley
The engineering work done previously was probably still good engineering. Picking up where they left off wouldn’t be laziness but prudence. To add to #84’s reasons, the T-Shape seems to impinge the least on passenger volume. Consumers are more accustomed to not having access under the rear seat and down the centerline. A concept that sounds better (for minimizing impact on volume) is conformal batteries placed under panels, but that has plenty of other problems like cost, repairability, susceptibility to damage, etc.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
MetrologyFirst #76
It is GM’s attitude towards consumer problem. In 70’s, GM has 50% of the US market share (I had a Cutless before Regal, with similar experience and I have a friend with a Pontiaic then had to cut the quarter panel to get the beer can out.). Now, they know you want a Volt, so they increase the price from $30k to $40k. Now again, it will be a Caddy with gold door handle. What they did not know is that to save GM is to sell millions of Volt quickly. More Volts on the road, the gas will be cheaper and GM will sell more of the high profit margin trucks too.
No doubt GM’s quality is better than before. GM’s 2.4 litter engine on Malibu has a similar HP as Camry and Accord, while Ford’s Fusion is a bit less. I am not an engineer, but engine performance tells me a lot about the Technology and Engineering. Higher GM quality don’t mean I have to, or I want a GM. But I will try a $30k Volt, or two.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
RonR64 #86
Once bitten, twice shy.
I never had a car with more problems that my 1986 Pontiac Sunbird.
I never bought another American car again.
But the Volt will be my first.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
They should get something on the road as see if it works out before comming up with all this crap! Talk is cheap!
This volt idea is looking to be more and more of a scheme to get investers.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Maybe the Caddy could offer a convertible, with a 24 KWH battery, a 160 KW drive motor and a 12 cu ft trunk. Nah
August 26th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Some random new Volt information:
“General Motors won three Flint tax breaks worth tens of millions of dollars Monday, likely cementing construction of a new plant here to build a gas engine for the battery-powered Chevy Volt.”‘
http://www.mlive.com/flintjournal/index.ssf/2008/08/flint_oks_tax_breaks_to_lure_g.html
Flint City Council unanimously approved the tax breaks at its meeting Monday:
• 50 percent of the real property taxes. Schneider said the company would save $6 million, but the plant would also generate $6 million in new property tax revenue. The plant would build the engine for the Volt and for the Cruze and other small cars.
• 100 percent abatement of personal property taxes, which are taxes on equipment through 2033. Schneider said those taxes are “clearly substantial” and would be a lot more than the $6 million in savings from real property taxes. But he said he did not have an estimate yet on how much GM would save.
• The city agreed to designate the site as a brownfield redevelopment site, which makes the plant eligible for state tax breaks. Schneider said the company still needs to seek approval from Michigan for those tax incentives.
Construction of the Flint plant is expected to begin in 2008 and be completed by 2010, according to a presentation by GM officials. The Volt — often touted by GM as part of the solution to the world’s dependence on oil — is expected to be sold to the public in 2010.
“It puts Flint on the ground floor of the new technology for the most gas-efficient, energy-efficient cars,” said George Schneider, regional tax manager for General Motors. “If the technology takes off, the most logical place to expand the operations is here.”
Schneider said the tax breaks are crucial for GM to invest here to the tune of $359 million to build the new 530,000-square-foot plant, which would preserve 300 local jobs and be located on Van Slyke Road adjacent to Flint Engine South and Flint Truck Assembly.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
#56 Estero
All of you need to put on flame retardant suits! Your comments about Cadillac drivers are uncalled for and show you to be what your comments suggest; crude with no class! I happen to drive a Cadillac and am no different than most others on this website, the present company excepted!
—————
Estero, Estero, Estero (shaking my head back and forth, tapping my foot). I drive over 500 miles a week. Let me tell you my observations of Cadillac drivers. They are either hogging the road, cutting people off, or driving carefully and patiently in the right lane.
Now let me tell you about the Aveo drivers I have observed. They are either hogging the road, cutting people off, or driving carefully and patiently in the right lane.
Bottom line, there are good drivers, and bad drivers in every vehicle, and Caddy drivers aren’t any different than the rest. We are all the same. I’m with you on this one, but I do think they were just doing some good-natured teasing. Have a good day, my friend.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Bob-
“… an it takes the market a while to change.”
I think the market is changing faster than GM can change right now.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Marketing-wise, consider two scenarios, around the year 2015:
Chevy salesman: “This baby has the same technology as a Cadillac.”
Cadillac salesman: “This baby has the same technology as a Chevy.”
It makes sense to introduce the cool stuff at the top of the range first.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
#94 Statik
Tens of millions of dollars is a lot of tax breaks to save 300 local jobs. Those jobs must be high-paying.
August 26th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
I think that making a Cadillac with E-Flex is a great idea. GM might be able to make some profit on them. GM has claimed all along the this is just the beginning of a new line of vehicles using this drive train. If they are planning a whole line of cars then it strikes me as even more unlikely that the Volt is a sham or some PR stunt as some people claim.
The way some of you talk you’d think that there was only one person at GM working on the Volt. Just because they have people working on expanding the number of E-Flex offerings doesn’t mean that they are taking anyone off of the Volt or losing focus.
I’ve also noticed that some people seem to think that just because we are discussing something on this forum that also means that that is what GM is focusing on. I’ve often noticed that someone on this forum will suggest a feature or guess how the drive train is going to work and within five posts or so another person will point to this discussion as another example of how GM is losing focus or they are dumbing down the design or sacrificing performance because of the mindless bean counters. All because of something that another poster wrote.
August 26th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
#88 Dave B
“Sure it is…no plug, no sale. I’d encourage everyone here to refuse to buy another new vehicle unless it is powered by electricity”
That’s a simple answer, it’s too bad it doesn’t work that way. My company needs pick-ups and we replace about 200 per year. So your suggestion is we don’t buy any new pickups until we get electric ones. I don’t see anyone coming out with an electric full sized pickup. The equipment and tools we carry won’t fit into a Volt, so we just drive our current fleet until they die and shut the doors of our company? Or do you think if we tell GM that we are canceling next years order of 200 pickups they will rush out and deliver electric pickups in 2 years?
And for the 30 year timeline? GM has over 50 models of cars for sale in the States, yes some of them are the same vehicle under different brands (GMC/Chevy) so let’s say 20 unique models. How many do you realistically think they can convert to e-flex each year?
August 26th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
#96 Len Says:
“Bob-
“… and it takes the market a while to change.”
I think the market is changing faster than GM can change right now.”
————————————————————————————-
Whether or not this is the case has no bearing on the point in post #65.
The point is that the technology has to be proven (both economically and mechanically/electrically) before GM will risk drastic changes in their entire line-up… and that takes time.
August 26th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Some of the problem with GM’s current “hybrid” line up is that they are only carried at dealers who agree to carry them. Not all dealers want to carry the hybrid because of the training cost involved for what they see as low sales volume. This should change as GM brings more two-mode hybrids on the market and dealer training (sales and service) catch up. But there is really a disconnect at this time between GM’s sales advertising and what is really available at your local dealer. Some of that is GM’s fault and some of is the dealer’s fault. Some dealers will have to be dragged into the present day market climate by force.
August 26th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
______________________________________________________
Jack #85 says: “For all of you calling for all GM products to be e-flex, how do you think this is possible in anything less than a 30 year time period?”
—–
It is very difficult for a large established organization, such as GM, to quickly and materially change the direction of its established organizational momentum. The difficulty is primarily due to the usually impossible task of changing the corporate culture in a large organization. All the other adaptive changes such as relevant design, engineering, logistics, marketing, etc…, are attainable resource commodities that will conform and propagate to scale if the organizational culture allows those resources to be acquired and applied accordingly.
My strong belief is that GM has managed to transcend the odds and is indeed well along the process of significantly changing its corporate culture throughout the entire GM organization. If this proves to be true, I predict the entire GM portfolio line will adapt to the e-flex architecture inside of 10 years. Alternatively, GM will go down in history as the automaker that had a couple of maverick guys in leadership positions that sparked the e-flex trend for general consumer cars but were not able to change the GM corporate culture in time to themselves take advantage of the innovation.
Evolution: Adapt or die.
____________________________________________________
August 26th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
I’ve been a big advocate of using eflex in Caddys, but it has to be done with the target market in mind.
I had sifted through the vehicles in the $40- >$70k ranges in the thread about the Escalade hybrid a while back.
If you took the \Volt’s drivetrain directly to this price range, it would be out horsepowered by everything in it’s class at least 2:1 but more like 3:1 or more. The cars in these price ranges ALL get pretty poor mileage (< 20) (over $50k, anyway) except the Excalade hybrid and the Lexus sport hybrid which costs about $100k. And sales of that are really poor. On the surface, you’d think nobody wants a luxury car that gets good mileage.
But that is the opposite of what Eberhard noticed (that he saw Porsches and Priuses in the same driveways) and the founding philosophy of Tesla.
My conclusion is this is a fickle group. If you’re going to try to inject an e-flex vehicle into this area, it had better be done very carefully.
Personally, if I were GM king, I wouldn’t try it without doubling the horsepower with a second motor on the rear wheels. That would really make customers take notice of the vehicle. Otherwise, I’m pretty sure the existing drivetrain is way too underpowered for this segment.
August 26th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Paul @90:
Millions of Volts on the road would save GM. It would save anybody. But where do you expect to get the millions of batteries?
Like it or not, there is a small and finite number of batteries available for E-flex cars in the next few years. I do not think they should all go into Volts. I have always thought GM should be spending more time developing several new E-flex models as options for the buyers rather than trying to perfect the airflow around the first one.
The best way for GM to take “charge” of the RE-EV market: have car options for people when other manufacturers have none at all. The Provoq, the Volt, a Flextreme equivalent, maybe a very small E-flex car. Get the choices out there ASAP; have them all available almost at once. To me this is the best way to get traction in a market that is limited due to battery supply. Show us that they have a solution for every niche and that we have the choice. Present E-flex as the obvious future for electric cars.
Those who offer the first blueprint at the beginning of an effort, usually can dictate the direction the effort will take. The Volt is not a blueprint, it is an example, and a really good one. But a set of E-flex options, all available at once, is a blueprint that consumers and competitors alike can not ignore and would demonstrate E-flex as a functional solution.
My guess is GM IS doing this right now. I just think that the Volt rollout should be accompanied with several other E-flex offerings at once. Present the E-flex chassis as a 2008 version of the Autonomy skateboard.
August 26th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Cadillac is prsently announcing a new 2010 CTS Sports Wagon that looks extremely like the Provoq but with an ICE engine. See it at:
http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/experience/news_cts_sportswagon_announcement.jsp?from=news
August 26th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
#104 DaveP
it’s not the same consumers. The Prius consumers are tech savvy, educated, have a lot of money, live on the coasts, and want to show how tech savvy and green they are. The Escalade group have money and want to show it. From personal experience I can tell you that the Prius is capturing market share from the likes of Mercedes, Lexus, and Jaguar, not Cadillac or Buick or Lincoln.
Listen to Lutz. He understands what he’s doing. He really does.
It’s just changing status symbols. A hundred years ago when food was an issue it was a status symbol to be fat. Today anyone can be fat so it’s a status symbol to show you can afford to spend time at the gym and be thin. The Escalade is a “see how much money I have car”; the Volt and the Prius are “see how tech savvy I am” cars. Different people have different status symbols.
August 26th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Off topic(?):
“Integrating Solar Energy Systems into the Electrical Grid, DOE to Invest:
“…The applicant teams will also develop products that facilitate interaction between solar energy systems and plug in hybrid vehicles, to provide a secure back-up power sources during outages.”
http://www.technologynewsdaily.com/node/10191
…off topic, except that maybe Caddy buyers would have more cash to throw at a PV system.
August 26th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
MetrologyFirst #105
As usually, batteries are from battery factory. If GM can build 9 million of cars, sure they can build millions of batteries. 2010 is still 2 years away.
I do agree with you that GM should build different plug-in models for different brands and styles, Chevy, Caddy or otherwise. The idea is to flood the market.
August 26th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
#109 Paul
“As usually, batteries are from battery factory. If GM can build 9 million of cars, sure they can build millions of batteries. 2010 is still 2 years away. ”
It’s not that simple. GM didn’t go from builting 0 cars to 9 million in two years…and this is a commodity, which has limited infrastructure.
August 26th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
One thing you will not see quickly is any Cadillac enhancement which would require substantial re-engineering of the Volt system. The initial Volt (and any cross-division stable-mates) will have to share the basic battery/motor/genset technology. Otherwise, what is the advantage of using a Caddy to defray development costs? Where is the cost-cutting benefit of economies of scale?
Hopefully, beefier EFLEX will become available once initial R&D gets some payback (and economies of scale have a chance to lower overall battery costs). I don’t look for that happening any time soon.
That’s not to say that other new technology (more carbon-fiber and aluminum in the body) couldn’t be added to a Cadillac to lower the weight and increase range (not too likely, IMHO).
I agree with the principle of using Caddy to help pay for EFLEX development, if it doesn’t turn out to be an effective kiss-off to those of us waiting for something affordable (even fewer Volt numbers than the small amount already announced, at the expense of building more Cadillacs).
August 26th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Sounds like a lot of talk and no action. GM-Make the car and we’ll buy it, I am excited about a GM car for the first time since my 1970 Pontiac Catalina. It got 12 miles to the gallon. I traded it for a 1973 Honda Civic which got 30 miles to the gallon. GM you are only 30 years behind the times. I see you advertising so many cars that get 30 miles to the gallon. The new number is 50 MPG plus. e-Flex is your only way out of this mess. With e-flex every GM car could get 50 MPG. You have the technology, now gets off your rear and produce.
Take Care,
TED
August 26th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
GM has to start moving the E-Flex to other vehicles sometime. The Caddy Provoq will probably debut around 2012. This is a good time frame and may see some in 2011. The sooner GM gets a profitable car into the hands of owners, the better off the Volt will be. I don’t believe GM has or will lose focus on the Volt. Too much is already riding on it for them to drop the ball.
August 26th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
>> It makes sense to introduce the cool stuff at the top of the range first.
Prius had luxury features way back in 2003, years before they were introduced to Lexus.
There’s no reason for hybrid transportation to follow old-school practices from the 20th.
August 26th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“Prius had luxury features way back in 2003, ”
I drove one the other day. I sure didn’t see any luxury features!!!
Stupid dash isn’t what I’d call a luxury.
As for Caddy, sure, don’t care who foots the bill for technology. This won’t happen from the race track, darn sure won’t happen for the econo-box sales.
Caddy has always led production of technology that later found it’s way back to other segments.
At some point we may have to consider a fuel cell based range extender. I do like quiet.
August 26th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
>> I drove one the other day. I sure didn’t see any luxury features!!!
The best special-effects are the ones that are not readily apparent.
All the following were available with Prius in 2003, a very long time ago when in comes to technology:
MULTI-DISPLAY touch-sensitive screen with voice-recognition
DIGITAL REFLECTIVE speedometer
BLUETOOTH phone interface
SE/SS (smart-key) wireless fob
HID headlights
And then a few years later, the SELF-PARK feature was added to Prius before it was made available from Lexus.
August 26th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
>> Stupid dash isn’t what I’d call a luxury.
Feeling & Hearing little is most definitely a feature of luxury vehicles.
SMOOTH & SILENT driving at speeds up to 42 MPH has been available since 1997.
August 26th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
#91 Rashiid #112 Ted
You guys represent the target market exactly. Not previously interested in GM products, now you probably know a bunch about the entire product line. The Lutz magic.
So get the wheels on the road so we can buy one!
August 26th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
For anyone interested in a dissertation I prepared earlier this year relating to the subject of this thread (an E-Flex version of the Caddy Provoq), that I hand carried to Bob Lutz (as well as sent to many others in GM senior management), I’m again offering to email anyone a copy (2 pgs).
Just send a blank email with the subject “Provoq” to…..
nasaman@earthlink.net
No obligation, of course!
…..but I promise you’ll find it interesting if not exciting, as well as very pertinent to this topic)
August 26th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
#120 Nasaman
I did get your email about the Provoq when you first offered it to us. Let me tell everyone here, it is well worth the time to get that information from Nasaman. He has done a fantastic job with the presentation. Do it. You won’t regret it.
August 26th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
I have a question about assembly of the ICE.
From Statik’s earlier post:
“General Motors won three Flint tax breaks worth tens of millions of dollars Monday, likely cementing construction of a new plant here to build a gas engine for the battery-powered Chevy Volt.”‘
I thought the 1.4L was an existing motor, and that was why GM chose it versus re-design of a smaller 1.0L ICE?
Does not GM already have a plant that can build this ICE? Maybe they need higher volume? Just seems a little strange, since we know the volume of the Volt will be limited for several years out, but I guess this plant would kick in production in a couple years.
Anyone know where the current 1.0L engine production plant is located today, and what type of production quantity they run?
August 26th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
#95 Statik said “Construction of the Flint plant is expected to begin in 2008 and be completed by 2010, ”
The plant is not yet fully approved. The chances that this plant will open in time to make engines for the Volt in 2010 are zero.
By the way, whatever happened to the battery contract?
August 26th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
#122 JEC regarding the 1.4L engine
Earlier comments said that the 1.4L engine was European, and said that there was an existing factory there. Presumably GM might import some for a while.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
124 RB
Ok, I thought that their was a good reason why they would build another plant to build the same engine.
Thanks!
August 27th, 2008 at 6:05 am
If the buyer can afford a +$50,000 automobile … they don’t have to be concerned about the cost of fuel.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:25 am
#123 RB
“#95 Statik said “Construction of the Flint plant is expected to begin in 2008 and be completed by 2010, ”
The plant is not yet fully approved. The chances that this plant will open in time to make engines for the Volt in 2010 are zero.
By the way, whatever happened to the battery contract?”
————-
Just to clarify, hehe. I strictly cut and paste from that article, kind of sounds like I was doing commentary on it…but everything was taken from the article…I was just passing along some info.
There is this quote in the article, would make me believe it is for Volt support/expansion,– “If the technology takes off, the most logical place to expand the operations is here.”–George Schneider, regional tax manager for General Motors
Who knows about the battery contract, eh?
August 27th, 2008 at 8:07 am
#120 nasaman
Thank you very much fo rthe article! An interesting read that I’m going to share with a buddy of mine who’s also been following the Volt (albeit with less rigure than I) and with my father who hasn’t been.
I believe both will find it just as interesting a read as I did.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:28 am
“If the buyer can afford a +$50,000 automobile … they don’t have to be concerned about the cost of fuel.”
… not unless “Greener than Thou” becomes the new “Keeping up with the Joneses.”
Or, should I say, the new cliche.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
GM — Throw the doors open! Give us e-flex Caddies, GMC’s, Saturns, Opals, Chevy’s, Holdens, Pontiacs, what ever you’ve got.
Give us expensive e-flex luxury SUV’s, cheap e-flex 4-door sedans, e-flex 2-door convertibles, e-flex work vans. Give us e-flex from the top of your product line straight down to the bottom. Because there are people out there who have bought vehicles from every one of your products lines that want e-flex for various reasons.
Bring them ALL on, just as fast as you can get each one to market.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
There is a rapidly growing market for fuel efficient luxury cars, as Toyota already realized. The customers in this market aren’t as worried about the fuel costs, they are worried about balance of trade and petrodollars going to hostile nations, they are worried about the economic problems caused by high oil prices, and they love the “green cachet”. Of course, they don’t object to saving money, either!
An E-Flex Caddy is a wise move, it should get far better fuel economy and sell far better than the Escalade.
August 28th, 2008 at 9:09 am
Rockyroad Says:
If the buyer can afford a +$50,000 automobile … they don’t have to be concerned about the cost of fuel.
*********************