Bob Lutz on Chevy Volt Battery Tests, Cold Starts, and Use of OnStar
Leftlanenews.com had the chance to interview Bob Lutz and included some Volt talk.
The GM vice-chairman confirmed that the prototype batteries have been tested both in extreme cold and extreme heat conditions, and aside from some solder failures on the prototypes he said that in terms of the lithium-ion chemistry, there has been an “eerie”, “almost scary absence of problems with the battery.”
He noted that one of the major challenges in the vehicle is to write computer code for the “zillions” of possible interactions between the driver, electric drive, battery, and regeneration and when the combustion engine should come on.
With respect to that, he describes an interesting scenario where its 40 below in North Dakota and the battery needs to be warmed in order to function properly. He notes this would be a big challenge for a pure EV, but in the Volt the car would start out with the combustion engine on and “run for a few minutes to warm up the battery so that the battery can take over.”
He also indicates that the OnStar navigation system will know how far the driver is from home and if the car happens to be at the customer depletion point, it could calculate and to provide just enough charge to get the driver home.
Finally Lutz also denied that there have been internal discussions about sharing E-Flex technology with Ford but states it his impression that “the whole worldwide industry is converging around this Volt concept as the intelligent way to go.”
Source (LeftLaneNews)
[NOTE: For those who may be interested I will be appearing on FOX Business News at 7:15-7:30 PM EST tonight 8/27 for a live interview]
Popularity: 3%
Related posts:
- How the Chevy Volt Operates Past the Customer Depletion Point
- Lutz: Production Volt Has a CD Between .27 and .28 and Battery Extreme Cold Performance is Good
- How Charging of the Battery Works in the Chevy Volt
- NEW FACT: Chevy Volt Generator Starts When Battery Power Hits 50%, Stops Again at 80%
- Will the Chevy Volt Have a “Limp Home” Mode?
(10 votes, average: 4.7 out of 5) 
Loading ...
August 27th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Interesting scenarios for use of the ICE. Glad to see they are thinking these through.
August 27th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
…the OnStar navigation system will know how far the driver is from home and if the car happens to be at the customer depletion point, it could calculate and to provide just enough charge to get the driver home.
That statement is a little confusing to me. Do you mean that the SOC will be allowed to go below the minimum charge if the car is less than a couple of miles from home?
August 27th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
I would like a manual override that would let me deplete a bit further (but not below a certain safe range for normal operation) fto zap that extra mile or two to a charging destination.
But that could also just be an aftermarket hack for those of us willing to play with our toys. I am certain that this car will be hacked even further than the Prius was. After all, where’s the fun if you can’t “customize”
August 27th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
See? All of the armchair engineers are worried that GM is not thinking this through. This is BIG! They will not fail……
GO GM - GO VOLT!
August 27th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
I don’t want Onstar involved.
August 27th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Keep the good info coming, Lyle. Thanks…
August 27th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Being from Winnipeg (nicknamed ‘Winterpeg’ for obvious reasons), I’m glad that GM is trying to figure out how to get around the problem of using the battery in extreme cold.
August 27th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Good stuff! Keep it comming, Lyle!
August 27th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Lyle,
Hit them hard with the web URL…you have nearly 40,000 people who have signed up on the unofficial Volt waiting list! It is an amazing number and I am sure that GM cannot believe their good fortune. I just hope that the management at GM have internalized this message and will continue to invest in cars like the Volt.
I don’t get cable so I will have to wait for the link online to see you.
Have fun with the interview, you’re an old pro now!
August 27th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
The news about the Chevy Volt just keeps getting better and better.
MDDave #2 I believe whats being said about On Star is that a program calculates the distance from home to the Volts current position and
August 27th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Congrats on the interview, glad to hear you’ll get the word out to an unfamilliar audience.
August 27th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
biodieseljeep, #3:
I don’t understand why you would want to do that. why risk damaging your battery or shortening its life just to save a few drops of gasoline to make it the last mile or two?
August 27th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
the more I hear the better it gets
August 27th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
>> All of the armchair engineers are worried that GM is not thinking this through.
No, it’s those pushing the absolute of NO GAS EVER.
That’s just plain not true. From time to time for everyone, a small amount will be consumed for the sake of engine upkeep. And now we know that for those in the north, they simply will not be able to avoid the engine running routinely.
The quantity of gas will be a drastic reduction compared to traditional vehicles. But it won’t be none.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
As long as the OnStar system is not required for the car to function, then they can go ahead and add extra features for those who want to pay a monthly fee for OnStar (like “get me home in pure EV mode if I am within range”). As long as the car still works if you don’t have OnStar.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
I don’t mind onstar but I’d like to program it.
I may want to go grandmothers home and plug it in. Onstar doesn’t know how Granny is.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Im pleased to hear the issue of the battery “tabs” has gone away.
A round of applause for the design staff….
…oh,…and Bob and Rick…..
August 27th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
#3 BiodieselJeep
I do not think that it would be safe to have a manual override as on many occasions throughout history, the greatest of machines have failed due to the fact that humans who felt they could calculate the trillions of cycles of information that a computer has to deal with better than the computer could…and they were wrong. Plus, GM has enough to deal with from the labor unions and the baggage that GM is stuck with. The last thing they need is a liability lawsuit because somebody ran the battery down, perhaps caused a short somehow and damaged the car and injured themselves. This is America, after all. Land of the free and home where you get sued often. They aren’t going to risk that…would you?
August 27th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
rankie Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
See? All of the armchair engineers are worried that GM is not thinking this through. This is BIG! They will not fail……
GO GM - GO VOLT!
———————————————
I know!
Listen to them roar!
Whining begins in 3,2,1……
I am glad Lyle finds Volt news daily.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
John1701a…
thank you for saying that…at least someone here gets it…
August 27th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
It sounds like the zero gas usage is not going to be a reality for most. Cold engine starts happen even in MD where I live. This will be fine. GM is designing the car and control systems to use the best parts of the car as needed and this will include the engine. Purists may be upset but this is good engineering. The engine is an integral part of the Volt system and should be run occassionally and maintained properly for best performance. If you want a pure electric, the Volt is probably not the best choice.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
terryk Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
I don’t want Onstar involved.
—————————————————–
Then build your own Volt.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
#3 biodieseiljeep
#15 Geoff Olynyk
I agree…a subscription service (OnStar) should not be a requirement for the Volt…even if it is free. Do not get me wrong…OnStar is a great service and can enhance the ownership experience for any of GM’s vehicles. Yet, some owners will not want it at all. As for myself, I probably would only subscribe if it was “free”.
In addition to OnStar, a button could be used to keep the SOC at a low or high level. Besides, an oil industry executive owner may never want to plug in their Volt.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
#5 Terryk
Im with you, No OnStar.
I agree with GM strategy to keep the battery at the CDP (Customer depletion point ????) so that you can charge the car from the wall once your home instead of with gasoline.
But if I have a car navigation system (In-car or portable hooked through USB or OPTIONALLY OnStar) the Volt would know how many miles are left on our trip. So if the ICE/Gen is running at optimal efficiency and generating 53 KW of electricity and the Volt is only using on average 40 KW, then it can continue to run at maximum efficiency until there is enough power in the battery to get me the rest of the way to my destination.
This should get the Volt the best efficiency and minimize the heat-cycles on the engine.
But Im sure GM will only allow this functionality to work with OnStar. Im sure they get a Kick-back from OnStar for every GM vehicle subscriber. Thats all I need is another leash on my wallet every month.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Wondering if they are programming the ability for the battery to be warmed up when it is plugged in for the night. Would hope that you could set a timer that when it is plugged in that it would warm up the battery and inside the car, so then you jump into the car and everything is ready to go and not use of gasoline. Lyle, please pass this on to GM and confirm if this is another option they are considering.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Jefro said…
“I may want to go grandmothers home and plug it in. Onstar doesn’t know how Granny is.”
Why wait for the Volt? When I go to my Granny’s, I just take her lawn mower gas cans and dump them in my car. Strangely, she doesn’t invite me over as much as she used … not sure why.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
#2, MDDave - that confused me, too, but for a different reason. The quote again is this:
If you have taken a circuitous route home and are running low on battery, the computer knows “wait a minute, the guy is only 10 miles from home, no point giving him a full charge. I’ll just run the piston engine enough to give him a ten-mile charge because he’s going want to plug in at home.
This seems to suggest that the engine runs to power the battery above the Customer Depletion Point. But Andrew Farah (in a post a few days ago) said that the engine would just keep the battery powered to that point, not charge above it. Lutz seems to say, we’ll run the engine for a bit, power the battery and then let it run itself down. Previously, we were told the engine will run only enough to provide power to the wheels. I imagine that what we were told previously is correct, and Lutz is just misspeaking.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
biodieseljeed said…
“But that could also just be an aftermarket hack for those of us willing to play with our toys. I am certain that this car will be hacked even further than the Prius was. After all, where’s the fun if you can’t “customize””
Sounds like fun, as long as you don’t mind when GM “customizes” your battery system guarantee.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
“…sharing E-Flex technology with Ford…”
Sounds good to me…GM and Ford could share the development costs. It also expands the use of E-Flex.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Mike said…
“Lutz seems to say, we’ll run the engine for a bit, power the battery and then let it run itself down. Previously, we were told the engine will run only enough to provide power to the wheels. I imagine that what we were told previously is correct, and Lutz is just misspeaking.”
Yeah I agree. His background is in marketing, not engineering.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
I don’t want Onstar involved either. Make that an option not manditory.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
#24 Sheltonjr:
GM owns OnStar.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Customer Depletion Point (CDP). ROTFLMAO.
“Customize”? I love it. I wish that you could see the number of jobs we get restoring Corvette electrical/electronic systems which have been “customized” of “hacked” by the owners
#18 Firefly & #28 PaulR:
Amen!
August 27th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Post says “… if the car happens to be at the customer depletion point, it could calculate and to provide just enough charge to get the driver home.”
It should say “…provide plenty of charge to get to the nearest motel.” After all, the text says plainly that it is the customer that is depleted, not the battery. (smlle) I can foresee reaching the check-signing stage of buying a volt, but if I reach the customer depletion point, I guess I’ll just have to go back home. (smile again)
What do we have to do to get rid of this terminology? Can we plead depletion? Really, it is confusing, and it makes us laugh at serious topics. “Vintage” was creatively used, if in a non-standard way. The invention of “customer depletion” is just terrible.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
This is a good thing with the ICE running and warming the battery up as I live in Central Alberta Canada (Sherwood Park) and it gets to be -20 C to -35 C in the winter..for a couple of weeks anyways… not like Winterpeg (grin)
The question I have is will I still get around 50 MPG taking into account the warm up time for the ICE as it will probably be running alot in the winters here…
Another computer variable to set up..
Go Volt Go..
I have deposit in hand for Mid 2011 (Hopefully a Volt will be available here by that time)
Ray
August 27th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
“Another neat feature we will have because the vehicle is OnStar-equipped, is it will have logic in its brain that knows how far away from home it is because it’s used to being charged at a certain place. If you have taken a circuitous route home and are running low on battery, the computer knows “wait a minute, the guy is only 10 miles from home, no point giving him a full charge. I’ll just run the piston engine enough to give him a ten-mile charge because he’s going want to plug in at home.”
The above is quite contrary to what Andrew Farah has said like
“ICE will never recharge the battery, it would just maintain the SOC and power the motor”
?????
August 27th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
From the article:
With respect to that, he describes an interesting scenario where its 40 below in North Dakota and the battery needs to be warmed in order to function properly. He notes this would be a big challenge for a pure EV, but in the Volt the car would start out with the combustion engine on and “run for a few minutes to warm up the battery so that the battery can take over.”
———
I live in Connecticut. We can have very very cold days in Winter.
Running the ICE a little to warm up the batteries sounds like a good idea to me. No issues here.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
From the article:
He also indicates that the OnStar navigation system will know how far the driver is from home and if the car happens to be at the customer depletion point, it could calculate and to provide just enough charge to get the driver home.
——————–
I would rather skip OnStar and use a little gasoline to get me home.
But I’m glad OnStar will be offered as an option (I’m assuming).
August 27th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
hehe this is all cracking me up a little.
The guys in the aftermarket division of my company (for those who remember my family owned a GM Upfitter doing conversion vans and after 200,000 vehicles we closed the doors last fall.) where we sell nav systems, bluetooth etc to aftermarket dealers avoid GM dealers like the plague. Why? People love Onstar. It does hands free cell phone, concierge service, hands free navigation, trip planning from the comfort of your home, and that is on top of the immense safety factor which is enormous if you are ever in an accident. the $8 a month is worth it for that alone, you pay a ton for insurance and that isn’t even something that could save your life.
Once people use Onstar they don’t every go away. In my personal experience if anyone has ever been involved in an accident and had Onstar they refuse to consider a vehicle without it.
Pan GM for a lot of things but owning OnStar and putting it in vehicles is definitely NOT one of them. It is a great service and if GM licensed it to other manufacturers I am sure it would suddenly become the greatest thing since sliced bread in Consumer Reports, the Media, and the general public.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
How about leaving the car sit for 4 hours out here in the Southern Nevada Desert (Pahrump) when it’s 114f outside?
(and hot enough to melt, yes MELT, my escort radar detector inside?)
No spontaneous combustion I hope.
If it survives this, then count me in.
(60 miles from nowhere and 6 feet from hell)
August 27th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
When you read this question, please remember that I am the dumbest one here.
I am missing something in the -40 F example.
If the battery is “frozen” and cannot propel the car, the ICE is going to turn on and do what? Warm up the battery, right? While it is doing that, is the car drivable? I’m thinking the answer is no. Here’s why. The ICE is not connected to the wheels, the motor is.
But I thought the ICE was not connected to the motor directly.
I thought, simplistically, the ICE is connected to the battery and the battery is connected to the motor and the motor is connected to the wheels.
My understanding is that batteries can not be warmed up too quickly. So does the ICE’s energy travel through the frozen batteries and end up at the electric motor?
Sorry. I’m confused. What part do I have wrong? Thanks.
August 27th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Hey everyone, I hate to point out some possible stupidity of this “engine warming the battery talk”, but here goes.
In very cold climates, people already have a plug on their car. It’s job is to keep the engine block warm so that you can start your car.
Now, I doubt there will be two plugs, so I’m assuming the same plug that recharges the battery will provide electricity to warm the engine block so that your engine is warm enough to warm up your battery. Now wouldn’t it be easier to have a battery pack warmer? I don’t know, maybe I’m the stupid one.
Edit: Rashid #41, an engineer said recently (Aug 25) that the electricity from the generator (connected to the ICE) can go directly to the motor, not necessarily through the battery.
August 27th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
#41 Rashiid — Just guessing in response. The ICE certainly generates heat and has some sort of plumbing to go to the radiator, etc. Maybe some of that heating capacity can circulate through the battery system, until it is sufficiently warm.
August 27th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
#41 Rashiid Amul
Andrew Farah may have answered your question the other day. It would appear from his comments that there are parallel connections; 1) between the ICE and motor and 2) between the ICE and battery pack.
August 27th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
41 Rashiid Amul
The generator would be able to generate power to run the inverter section, which will drive the motors. The battery and generator are more like a parallel system, so you can run one w/o the other.
The battery will not actually be frozen but will be sluggish. You could run the car off the batteries, but your accel rate would SUCK!
———-
Other issue: OnStar. I prefer not to have to subscribe, and even if GM says it’s FREE, do really believe that? It would just be priced into the Volt, and add more to the cost of an already expensive transportation machine. Also, not a fan of getting to far in bed with any auto maker, and this smells of a long term relationship (Cut off your OnStar while GM sleeps…quietly open the door…run like heck!)
A GPS enabled car is all you really need for this function. Also, if you use the built in GPS to plan your trips the computer ALWAYS knows how far away you are from your destination, not just home base!
August 27th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Rashiid,
An interesting question, and if the battery is frozen, how did the ICE start? Another battery?
I suspect the software controls all the answers but I have seen references to the Volt being a parallel system and the energy from the ICE/generator combo could reach the motor…engineers willing…
August 27th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Bob Lutz noted that one of the major challenges in the vehicle is to write computer code for the “zillions” of possible interactions between the driver, electric drive, battery, and regeneration and when the combustion engine should come on.
_____
We’re hearing this ever more frequent, not only from GM but also Volvo and others. It would appear at this juncture that software is definitely on the critical path towards final production of the Volt.
August 27th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
42 VancouverJon
Excellent! I agree with your statement. I live up North, and it is cold. I have plugged my radiator heater in many times, so why not build the heater around the battery, that powers off your house 120V?
I wish I would of saw such a simple solution, and I would have claimed it and pushed Lyle to ask GM, then take all the praise and accolades for my great discovery…..ok, enough of that…back to work.
How about it Lyle, seems like a simple idea and makes a lot of sense. (I guess VancouverJon gets the credit….sigh
)
August 27th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
47 Estero
I totally agree, the software is going to be incredibly complex!
Some would say, “hey look at Windows or Unix or other OS choice, they are much more complex and run tons of applications”
But, like Lutz told Bill Gates about 10 years ago (funny how this all ties back together…) “crashing daily is not an option, when it comes to cars”. (this is not his exact quote, but along this line, google it if you have time on your hands, you’ll find it). If the software crashes on a computer, the compute might hang or BSOD, or other nasties, but if the auto software crashes, you might kill someone. This software has to be pristine, out of the box. None of that MS crap, like “We’ll release it now, and send out a service pack in 6 months”.
The Volt software will be the single biggest hurdle (IMO) left for the completion of the Volt.
August 27th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
oh! I now see why the unused 10% at the bottom it is for the extra 10 miles to get you home so you can get your cheap fix off the power grid
August 27th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
For all those opposed to OnStar you wouldn’t be if it you just use it once as I did.
I was in my GMC Envoy when out of the blue my brother complained of chest pains and how his arm was “tingling.” I could feel myself just starting to freak out and I began to wonder where the nearest hospital was. I had no clue. But my eye did wander to the red and white cross on the rear view mirror; the OnStar emergency button. I pressed it and immediately I was greeted by a voice asking what my emergency was. “I think my brother is having a heart attack!” I shouted. “Where’s the nearest hospital?” I asked. “Two miles. I can give you turn by turn direction to the hospital.” They did and my brother was in the emergency room in minutes. (He’s fine today!) And guess this: My free trial period had expired weeks ago! I did get a charge of $20 or $30 (I really don’t remember the amount) on my credit card. I’m a believer and a subscriber to OnStar.
SO. I don’t believe you HAVE to subscribe to OnStar for a vehicle to use the GPS that an OnStar vehicle is equipped with. GPS is just another tool for the vehicle designers to utilize in the Volt. I believe GM is the leader in “telematics,” the integration of electronics with automobiles. The Volt will simple put GM farther into the lead.
GO GM!
August 27th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
So, if GM decides to convert one of its Saturn cars to use the lithium ion batteries, do you think they would pick the Saturn Ion? So, we could have a Saturn Lithium Ion Ion?
I saw a Saturn Ion on my way to work, and it just struck me….I know it means nothing, but just had to get it off my chest…ok, done now.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
I like the idea of utilizing the OnStar…
I didn’t get OnStar on my 02 Buick..now I’m sorry I didn’t.
My wifes new Buick has OnStar and we have used it several times already… we use the Phone and the directions feature… It’s good that the engine and other critical parts of the car are monitored and we get updates on their condition and if they need repair.. we used to only get these updates when you went to the dealer and had a “daignostics” done.. with Onstar they monitor the engine while it is running which is a good thing.. especially with new technology like the VOLT. No mfr has the testing facilities like GM has at the Milford proving grounds which I’m sure will be seeing many VOLTs running around before it’s in our hands.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
People, do not fret about having to pay for ONSTAR to get the feature of the computer knowing how far it is from home. GPS is free and can do the same thing and GM can use for those who do not want ONSTAR.
Oh oh! I just notice 51 just said about the same thing.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
A winner fo GM. Good thoughts. Still would like a manual override for those times when I’m getting to work, not home. No point in charging the last mile to work either.
Take Care,
TED
August 27th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
When I was working at JPL (NASA), I was involved in a group that put together a spacecraft called Deep Space 1. This spacecraft had a piece of code called the Remote Agent. Its job was to analyze the spacecraft’s state, and come up with solutions to scenarios that might conceivably present themselves.
This would have been a nightmare to code in the usual way (if,else,end) but fortunately it was coded using a graphical state-machine environment called stateflow. The state chart was huge, but because of its graphical nature, it was easy to verify the functionality of the code. It was also easy to go through revisions - when a change was made, it automatically generated the new code necessary to run the spacecraft.
Anyway, the Remote Agent was a huge success, and seems to be applicable here. I’d be curious to know if GM is taking a similar route.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Clearly, Mr Lutz and his engineers have some technical issues to straighten out. I’ll wait until Bob and the guys REALLY figure out what the Volt is supposed to do, and finally get their stories straight. I’ve seen the “Volt” change so many times, I’ve almost forgot what the original concept looked like. I don’t really want to remember the concept, because of what GM has already done to it, and what they may do next. It’s just too painful - I still grieve for the beloved concept.
I’ll sit back and watch Bob and company do their best to make something like a Volt. I have a while to wait and watch. Will the Volt be the little brother of the original sexy “concept Volt” beast, or will it be just another boring GM car, aero-tuned to look like every other high MPG car ? (don’t answer - I will answer this myself in 2011 with a buy or don’t buy decision, as will everyone else).
BTW, Mine is the Volt with the custom chip which allows the ICE to fully recharge the battery, then shut down for 40 miles of peace and quiet.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
57 The Grump
“BTW, Mine is the Volt with the custom chip which allows the ICE to fully recharge the battery, then shut down for 40 miles of peace and quiet.”
——–
I think that expecting the ICE to recharge the battery would be a fruitless venture. The problem is not just that you need to run the ICE, but the charge rate of the battery. You would need to drive for quite a while (hours…) to get the batteries to recharge. This would be a very non-typical scenario, since few people drive more than a couple hours per trip (<5% easily).
I used to think that the ICE might as well be charging the battery when it was running, but after learning more about how the whole system works, I no longer think it is a viable method. Remember, you only get 40 miles per full charge, so if you cruising for that many hours, the 40 miles will be fairly insignificant anyway.
The Volt really is designed to meet the more common short commutes. If you plan on making a lot of long distance drives, the Volt would not be the best choice.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
#51 KentT
I hope it wasn’t your driving that set your bro’s heart off.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Don’t forget that Onstar is a two-way street. They CAN monitor your car.
“Sir, Onstar records show that, at the speeds your Volt has been driven, your driving habits exceed “severe service” as described in the Volt’s warranty. Exceeding “severe service” specifications is grounds for voiding your warranty. I’m sorry, but your Volt’s battery cannot be replaced under warranty. We do have a replacement battery for your Volt. The price is $16,000.00. With your $5.00 off service coupon, your price is $15,995.00 before sales tax.”
Do you really want GM looking over your shoulder every time you drive? Think about it.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
56 Noah Nehm
My guess is GM is using either Cobol or Fortran compilers
It would be interesting to know this. I know there are commercial graphical programming languages, that are used more often to develop test code, such at LabView. I have used some of the graphical languages, but I still find that it’s hard to beat a well written code in written in ANSI-C. (C++ is probably even better, but I struggle with OOP)
August 27th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
“OnStar navigation system will know how far the driver is from home ….” But what if I don’t want to go home. Will I have to anyway?
August 27th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Using the engine to heat up the battery is very stupid, IMO. It’s an incredible waste of gas and energy. If they are going to rely on the engine to heat up the battery, then they will probably rely on the engine to heat the passenger compartment.
It’s increasingly stupid if the car is plugged in in the morning, because there it has all the energy it needs to heat up whatever it needs to heat up electrically through the plug.
August 27th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
#VancouverJon
Yes that was a point I wanted to post. This was actually thought of for EVs; even the EV-1 originally had a similar system! The car’s cabin is warmed up/cooled down using electricity from the grid before leaving the house (you pre-program the time you want to leave, so it knows when to start warming up/cooling down the car). You can warm up the battery beforehand using the same principle. It is the same idea as an engine block heater for cold starts. There is no need to turn on the ICE unless you are at a location where you can’t plug in (in which case it is already unlikely you have a charged battery ready to use; most likely it is already in charge sustaining mode or with only a few miles of AER left).
August 27th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
I have had On-Star in my last 2 vehicles & would not be without it. It’s a great safety feature & the hands free dialing is a convenience.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
I’m in the “just say no to onstar” camp. I know folks who have it when it came with their new vehicles…. they haven’t subscribed once their free trial period (a year?) ended. I’m sure it works for some, but it’s a joke for the rest of us who have cell phones (in the rare case of an accident) and gps based navigation systems (either built in to the dash or portable). It’s much easier to follow the on screen and verbal instructions of a nav system than just verbal instructions from some human in India or China. I also don’t like the idea that they (onstar) can “listen in” on you if they really wanted to, and with domestic wire taps it wouldn’t surprise me.
I still hope the software will allow the SOC to go below 30% in the rare case when you run out of gas for the on board generator. I’ve run out of gas at least 3 times in my life, and have come close several times. “range anxiety” is nothing new to BEV’s. A series hybrid like the Volt is a good chance to reduce that anxiety by allowing the battery to be the backup to the ICE when in charge depletion mode.
And back to the nav system, an integrated in dash system is would be great to not only program in “home” where you can recharge, but any other “favorite” locations where you’ll likely be plugging in (work, girlfriend’s, etc). And I wouldn’t like the idea of GM/onstar having all my personal information like that.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
#58 JEC - Lemme guess - you’re the kind of person who likes to pop children’s balloons, just to hear them cry, right ? So I can’t have my dream without you poking a hole in it, is that right ?
Seriously, I know I’ll get exactly what Bob says I’ll get from the Volt - nothing more and nothing less. And maybe you’re right - the engine cycling on and off, over and over, for hours on end, would aggravate me constantly. I probably would be better off with a conventional car. I just hope the Volt changes again, this time for the better, and it becomes something I can live with. That’s why I stick around. The Volt isn’t set in stone yet.
I’ll probably buy a Honda Fit in the meantime - my Odyssey is getting old. They look nice, and 37 MPG isn’t hard to take, either. Oh yeah, the Fit is priced “comfortably below” $20,000. (quotes shamelessly aimed at the phrase Bob used for the concept Volt’s price). Sorry Bob, but I need a car now. A 2011 Volt ? Can’t wait that long.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Ok.
I think that we can agree that some people want OnStar and some do not.
So, GM, make this an option. Also provide use of other standard GPS functions (non-privacy features only).
Ok, now were all happy, right? (I am sure someone is not, but hopefully most are happy)
August 27th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
In regards to the people who say that is’s stupid to have the ICE run to heat the battery in cold temperatures…
Well, if the car isn’t plugged in (at an airport, for example), what choice do you have other than to run the engine? I assume that a cold battery that wouldn’t have the juice to propel the car at any decent speed could provide enough juice to at least start the ICE.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Terryk @ 5, I agree, NO On-star if it’s REQUIRED. I hate monthly fees for a service I’m forced to have. If GM wants to track info. fine, but all be darned if I’m going to pay for it willingly.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
JEC wrote “It would be interesting to know this. I know there are commercial graphical programming languages, that are used more often to develop test code, such at LabView. I have used some of the graphical languages, but I still find that it’s hard to beat a well written code in written in ANSI-C. (C++ is probably even better, but I struggle with OOP)”
With firmware my guess is they are using C and not C++. C++ is nice, written tons of code in it, but like you said it’s hard to be plain old C. It’s more compact, faster, and you have much more control. For those of us old enough to remember, the first C++ compiler didn’t generate assembler/machine code, it generated C code that was then compiled. Most anything you can do in C++ you can do in C, C++ just adds lots of syntactical sugar.
As for those graphical tools, that’s what they are, tools, not really a language (though I can see why folks call them that), and on it’s back end it’s generating code in C or some other real computer language.
In any case, back to GM, it sounds like they are writing robust code taking into account all boundary conditions. Hopefully their software engineers are all here in the USA, as even though I may be biased, I still think we have the best software engineers in the world.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
>> Well, if the car isn’t plugged in (at an airport, for example), what choice do you have other than to run the engine?
A glimmer of understanding. Phew! Unfortunately, the problem is far worse than most here care to acknowledge…
AT WORK FROM MID-DEC TO MID-FEB IN MINNESOTA it’s totally normal to see temperatures significantly below the Li-Ion cold tolerance. The car sits there for over 8 hours, on it’s own with no plug available.
This winter will be my 9th with a Prius observing that very scenario firsthand… many many many many times. The engine in Volt will have to run. Getting heat quickly is absolutely essential. It’s a real-world situation that simply cannot be avoided. Efficiency wil be sacrificed. Get use to it.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
John #22
You’re right. I will leave and not get a Volt….. or maybe not.
OnStar is not free. OnStar is more than $8/month. The cost of phone minutes is not competitive with mainstream cell phone carriers. If you want to share Verizon minutes you have to pay $15/month for OnStar and then $10 for the extra line from Verizon. I have no idea how the world survived before OnStar.
IF…..GM elects to use the OnStar tracking to assist the Volt it better be free.
Personally I don’t want the Volt to depend on any external signals to operate efficiently including OnStar (and I am not implying the car would stop if it lost OnStar signal, ok?) OnStar as a product is horrible and over-priced. Once my free subscription ran out I never renewed and never looked back.
But I still want a Volt!
August 27th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
And further more!!!!!!! 8^)
Considering GM had 3 software engineers alone working for several years on the spark retard code for the ICEs I would imagine they have the right talent and the right number of engineers working on the code for the Volt. That is the least of my worries.
I’m more worried about the OnStar to power trunk release interface.
August 27th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
OnStar is a great tracking and vehicle assist device. It should be mandatory with ALL new GM products. It has saved countless lives already and I am sure it will get many many Volt owners out of a jam. EVs of the future will be very complex and the average owner will not have time or willingness to read their shop manual. Best let the experts in the sky fully monitor your vehicle as well as your driving patterns. OnStar is an extremely smart system and is being enhanced for Volt monitoring which is a very good thing. As for price, if you can afford the Volt you most assuredly can afford OnStar-Volt Edition. It will more than pay for itself after it saves you (the average american) from whatever mess they find themselves in, trust me.
August 27th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
#61 JEC
#71 Jeff M
I hope they stay away from C++ at all costs. I think standard C is the greatest “systems” programming language of all time and is very suitable for embedded stuff like Volt propulsion work. But C++ is one of the WORST languages ever. It was an extremely poor attempt to create an “application language” from a purely systems language. It failed miserably, hence the popularity of Java and C-sharp owe much of their success to the failure of C++ as an application language. Basically Java is everything C++ should have been years earlier. And C# is just a total and complete ripoff of Java. Although Java could be used (as shown by the Mars robots) I would think C would have better real-time performance.
August 27th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
67 The Grump
I find my self laughing, but not sure why…Your alias sure seems fitting.
I honestly appreciate your sentiments, but not quite to the extreme. I am just guessing at best, at what GM will do, just like the rest of us.
I cannot help picture you in front of your computer typing that stuff with a big grin on your face.
take care, and I look forward to your next post.
August 27th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
74 terryk
“Considering GM had 3 software engineers alone working for several years on the spark retard code for the ICEs”
——
Not sure this brings a lot of confidence in GM’s software talent. 3 engineers to develop the code for spark retard? Are you serious? Maybe I just took the bait?
August 27th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Just don’t let anyone that uses Microsoft technologies get near Volt code engineering. I heard that every single Xbox gaming console will eventually have to be replaced because of “overheating” that was completely overlooked by MS Engineers. LOL.
Anyone who has faith in MS products needs some serious couseling, they are good at one thing and one thing only: Marketing.
August 27th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
What I hated about C++ was having to manage memory allocation and dealing with garbage collectors. Ugh! C is a beautiful language and I miss my time coding with it. Nothing beats top down programming. You can envision the entire structure unlike OOP where there’s so much that can be hidden from a programmer.
Now, what were we talking about again? Oh, yes… Go Volt!
August 27th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
JEC 74,
It’s a good thing. I have been involved with GM program code for years (calibration editors) and it’s clear the amount of effort GM puts into their vehicle control software. The spark retard code is a small but important chunk of code and they spent tons of time to get it right. I used it as an example of something people think is easy when in fact it extremely important. GM’s silky smooth idle? You have no idea what that takes with in the code.
Anyone that has looked at the GM code from various cars can see they don’t mess around. They develop a solid module and then share it with other applications. They have the experience and talent to get the Volt software right.
No doubt there will be some updates once they get better real-world data but I will bet it will be quite functional and as seamless as it can be. GM software engineers of today stand on tall shoulders and they just do it better and better. I believe they will do a fantastic job.
August 27th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
OnStar should be included in the price of the Volt. It is a vital part of the Volt’s situational awareness. This feature cannot be compromised. If GM is to properly improve the nextgen Volts they will need to collect as much information as possible from current Volt owners. OnStar is ideal platform to retrieve massive abmount of information from each Volt on the road. I would estimate about 1 terabyte per minute, so I hope their storage facilities are up to snuff. NASA already collects far more than this amount fairly easily so GM should have no technical challenge in collecting data. Since this is proprietary surveillance the Volt owner have no business interfering with GM’s monitoring efforts. All Volt owner habits should be collected and stored in a fully encrypted vault from prying eyes, however, GM should be allowed to carefully analyze Volt owners behavior and use it to market other products accordingly as they see fit since this is done to help the customer in their daily routines only.
August 27th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Don’t forget that Onstar is a two-way street. They CAN monitor your car.
“Sir, Onstar records show that, at the speeds your Volt has been driven, your driving habits exceed “severe service” as described in the Volt’s warranty. Exceeding “severe service” specifications is grounds for voiding your warranty. I’m sorry, but your Volt’s battery cannot be replaced under warranty. We do have a replacement battery for your Volt. The price is $16,000.00. With your $5.00 off service coupon, your price is $15,995.00 before sales tax.”
Do you really want GM looking over your shoulder every time you drive? Think about it.
———————————————————-
This type of monitoring is already used by rental car companies to fine you for exceeding speed limits and driving out of state when you didn’t pay for out of state privileges.
August 27th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Just a bit more about stateflow: while the state machine was graphical, it automatically generated code in C. Imagine a state diagram with 4 states: stopped, creeping, slow, and fast. The state machine would have a graphical representation of the states, and how they would transition from one to another. The automatically generated code in C would, typically, have place holders for what the car would do in each of the states, which you’d have to fill in with the code that is designed to do whatever that state demands. This allows you to decouple the details of how to handle each state (more lower level code) with the higher level stuff.
Anyway, it worked fantastically in Deep Space 1.
BTW, there’s more stuff at the mathworks: the state diagrams I was talking about are depicted in figure 8 in this link. That gives a state diagram for an automatic transmission. The other stuff is related to a graphical dynamic modeling method called Simulink. (It’s similar to Labview) That’s more for the design phase rather than the coding phase.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Anyone see Lyle on Fox Business channel tonight? He was, as always, great and three of the four commentators were very positive in their remarks (the fourth wants to stick with “gas” - and he looked like he had a lot of it already).
I hope the vid makes it to youtube.
Be well,
Tag
August 27th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
That is priceless… for all the “GM’s really thinking this through” comments, SteveF’s idea of warming up the battery with electricity while plugged in (post #25) is spot on and shows up the “brilliant” minds at GM.
It was Lutz’s own scenario and he picked the wrong solution. Does he really have no clue? Or did he say it to help justify the range extender? That’s pretty much the Volt in a nutshell.
If they had just asked anyone who lives in a cold climate they would know about block heaters. I hate to give too much away to GM, but they should look into heating the interior with electricity as well. We call it a car warmer.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Looks like GM still has a ways to go on the Volt. I think the software will be their largest hurdle because all the hardware seems to be parts that already exist and are used in other products. If it is written in a 3GL such as C it will most likely be millions of lines of code, not trivial by any means. Also the failure rate of software today is at an all-time high, mainly because of the new methodologies being used and the dearth of talented program managers. Code monkeys are easy to find and cheap (see India, China, Brazil…) but a good project manager is rare these days. The newer “agile” programming methods used today have a 60 percent failure rate. Even the inventors of methods like Scrum, XP, etc. acknowledge these horrendous failure rates. GM would be wise to stick to the traditional and proven “waterfall” lifecycle method of development.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Because of the complexity of programming for endless scenarios I don’t think the so-called code base will be fully ready or tested by launch date. Therefore, GM better have a way to rapidly update the code in the Volt so that any unforeseen glitches can be rectified in a prompt manner. Failure to heed this advice would be at GM’s peril. Any yes, I am sure my I.Q. is higher than yours.
Sen J. Biden
Future VP of the Americas
August 27th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
#49 JEC Says: “The Volt software will be the single biggest hurdle (IMO) left for the completion of the Volt.”
————————————————————————————–
I agree. The press is always talking about possible battery issues, and GM has talked a lot about this also, but it’s fairly typical that the thing you worry about most turns out to be fairly easy, and the stuff you take for granted turns out to be hard.
One note: I would call the Volt code “Firmware” and not “Software”. Keep in mind that most of these automobile chips cost less than $1 and implement the whole processor system. The O.S. (if there is one) will be thin and light. So this is embedded code that doesn’t have many of the issues that PC software has.
The code space sill be minimized for cost, but the algorithms will be very intense, especially for the induction motor. Modeling the induced currents in the windings of the rotor in all the different real-life scenarios is hard enough, but then implementing that in a small embedded processor and testing it to death until it’s perfect - this will take time. And then you have to integrate this with all of the other embedded control code subsystems. It will all take time.
Fortunately, a lot of the firmware can be perfected and tested in parallel with the ramping up the Volt production line. Once you know the hardware all works, you can start building it while you perfect the firmware.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
76. Ruby on Rails,
I would not be surprised to hear that CLR came about because of Java, but to say C# and Java are successful in large part due to the failure of C++ is a strange interpretation of what MS is doing with .NET as well as the supposed success of Java.
Give me C++ over C ANY DAY.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
BTW, where is the exhaust pipe exiting on the Volt ?
I don’t remember seeing a tailpipe at the rear. Also, it may take more than a few minutes to thaw out that battery. In really cold weather my GM cannot even thaw out the ice on my windshield completely. I usually just leave home with a small hole cleared out on the glass in front and back, manually cleared with some high tech elbow grease (the kind you can’t buy at the auto store).
August 27th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
#86 GXT,
Yes, when you are plugged in, you can use grid power to warm the batteries and interior.
But when you are not plugged in, you will need to do what Lutz says, which is use the ICE to warm the battery for 2-3 miles.
Note that all this assumes it is ridiculously cold outside.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
87. Bury Obama,
“Talented” PMs are as easy(hard) to find as talented programmers.
The failure rate of software these days is in large part due to increased complexity and PM’s believing things like “Code monkeys are easy to find and cheap (see India, China, Brazil…) but a good project manager is rare these days.”
As for the failure rate of projects, well that is also because of the PMs.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
#90 GXT:
“…supposed success of Java.”
Are you kidding or just not very bright. Java is without a doubt the most successful programming language of all time. Almost 7 million developers can back up that claim to fame. There is a reason why Java is NOT a fully object-oriented language. Within 3 years of Java’s birth in 1995 more than half (the smarter half) of all C++ programmers switched to Java and never looked back. Java’s use has been increasing ever since. C++ is garbagey. I have used both for many years, although I like Java it is not always the best solution. But I have found that there is ALWAYS a better solution than C++.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Bradley Pitt (#75) wrote “EVs of the future will be very complex and the average owner will not have time or willingness to read their shop manual”
I think you are confused… while getting some details of the Volt’s software may make it sound complex… (battery) EV’s are a lot LESS complex than any internal combustion engine vehicle being built today. An EV has anywhere from 70-90% less moving parts, and it’s a moving part where most problems happen (wear and tear). Two moving parts in a BEV drive train I can think of… the pot connected to the gas peddle, and the electric motor. And electric motors are extremely reliable proven technology (they’ve been around longer than the ICE).
The Volt, being a series hybrid, is a bit more complex as it still has an ICE… as well as new software to handle it in combination with the other power sources, so it may be on par in complexity with current ICE vehicles… however in theory the ICE in the Volt will not even be running for lots of folks, and only be running a small percentage of the time for everyone else during regular usage. So it should operate as a BEV most of the time, and hence have close to the same reliability as pure BEV’s.
As for shop manuals… I couldn’t even buy one for my Volvo when I bought it like I did when I had bought my Nissan 12 years before. Car makers like Volvo want to charge for online subscription access now to the info, or force you to go to the dealerships. Can only do so much with the new cars these days, they are so complex compared to what they used to be. And even generic OBD2 readers aren’t able to read all the codes, have to hook up the proprietary reader to have it divulge other codes.
And you can keep your Onstar… I don’t know where you get your data, but the only person I’ve seen it helping in an accident is in GM’s own commercial with an actor… and that guy could have simply used his cell phone. What does GM/onstar do if the accident took out the battery and disabled the onstar, or the driver is actually unconscious or dead? Also not very good advertising for the safety of GM vehicles. Also curious how often you are driving down deserted roads and no houses around and you drive yourself off the road? Most accidents I see tons of folks stop and help, call 911, etc.
If you are going to mandate onstar, you might as well mandate that the nav system knowing where you are and the speed limit, to limit your speed by computer control to no higher than the speed limit…. that will save lots of lives too. Can anyone say big brother? 1984?
August 28th, 2008 at 12:03 am
#95 Jeff M
Actually, some of the new cars GM is selling Europe can “read” the speed limit signs for you. I would imagine that if the car knows what the sign says then they simply de-throttle the vehicle for your own safety.
And this could be done without OnStar.
You should not be afraid of GM “adjusting” your bad driving habits. They are doing so for your own good. You may have been drinking (possibly when you writed your blog entry) and OnStar will save you from your evil self. Your thanks are implied, I will pass it on to my OnStar coworkers.
And YES, OnStar does monitor this blog. Have a nice day and thank you for using OnStar.
August 28th, 2008 at 12:16 am
java’s popularity is due in big part to it’s ability to compile once, run anywhere, thanks to the jvm and bytecode.
sadly the OSF never got the NDF (neutral distribution format) promise/project off the ground, which would have also provided that compile once, install/run anywhere capability.
java still has problems with performance, due to it’s interpreted nature, garbage collection, etc. An app written in java doing something real usually runs orders of magnitude slower than the same app coded in C or C++. There’s also a reason why web service providers charge more for hosting JSP than even perl, PHP or python.
Don’t get me wrong, java is “fun” and I’ve done a fair share of work with it, but each language has it’s uses and it’s place, and it’s own set of trade off’s.
By the way, to the person who said C++ was OOP and java is not as much… java actually is much more OOP paradigm than C++ is… it’s java that forces even a hello world program to have a class. And there is nothing wrong with OOP either, depending on what you are doing and where you are using it.
August 28th, 2008 at 12:26 am
I would like to see all infants be in-car-monitored by OnStar. This would protect them from stupid parents who leave them locked inside overheated cars with closed windows and wonder why junior has a severe case of fried brains. These same parents have also been known to do this with their beloved pets as well. Mindless parents in the twenty first century, we are surrounded by them.
August 28th, 2008 at 12:56 am
#97 Jeff M
Actually, the latest java hotspot just-in-time (jit) compilers used in Java version 6.1 have been shown to be faster than many C compilers. Java has been getting faster with every new release from what I have seen.
I think interpreted languages have been getting a bad rap for years. For example the JavaScript engine in FireFox 3 is the already fastest browser on the planet. But apparently Firefox 3.1 will increase JavaScript performance more than 40 TIMES !!
Just about any interpreted language can run as fast as compiled ones these days by incorporating modern jit compile methods.
As for Java being OOP, the main reason that Java uses primitives (instead of objects) is for speed.
As for Java use on web sites, I think sites such as eBay (handling largest number of transactions per second on the web) have shown that Enterprise Java based web sites can scale very well and make a good web platform. PHP, Python, Perl and even ASP all have serious scalability and security issues compared to Java.
The only real negative about Java is that it is overly complex (they are addressing this issue in future releases). But it is a proven industrial grade platform.
August 28th, 2008 at 4:02 am
The ’software’ component to these systems includes the vehicle analysis, modeling, alg. design, and V&V. The kinds of problems that are being discussed is essentially a massive use-case analysis to make sure that they have covered the most critical issues and because they have to consider a bunch of vehicle states (above cdp/ below cdp, remaining fuel, distance from destination / charging location, etc.)
Once the analysis is done, GM will probably use tools from Mathworks to graphically encode the algorithm (e.g. statemate) and autogenerate c code (e.g. Matlab Real-Time Workshop), and this c code is called from hand-generated, object-oriented c++ driver code, running in a real-time OS such as VxWorks. Take a look at the following, which gives you an idea of the basic technology stack:
http://techjobs.co.in/vb2/showthread.php?t=29521
Note that this is an older job advertisement for a position in India, presumably for their more traditional cars. However, it would be really unnecessarily risky for GM to change their whole approach to software development for the first rev. of the Volt.
A more recent job description for a position in Milford also emphasizes skills in developing assembly (for debugging presumably)…
August 28th, 2008 at 4:20 am
Thanks Lyle, for this relay of interesting info and congratulations for being invited on Fox news.
Living in Europe, the problem of On-Star is not pertinent, … for now.
August 28th, 2008 at 5:18 am
Lyle,
I would like to see the interview on fox. Any chance for a link?
Take Care,
TED
GM I would like to know the roll out for Florida so I may make early arrangements to get one of the first Volts in Florida. 239 410-8826 24/7
August 28th, 2008 at 5:42 am
I was just thinking one of the ways GM could subsidize a lot of Volt would be to auction say first 100 Volts with cars showing this is your Volt No 1.
I am sure they would be able to raise a few million.
Just a passing thought.
August 28th, 2008 at 5:55 am
RB #43
Estero #44
JEC #45
Bruce g #46
Thanks for the answers. It seems to me we may need to either sit idling for a while or drive very slowly until the batteries are ready to produce.
August 28th, 2008 at 6:03 am
Re: “I’ll just run the piston engine enough to give him a ten-mile charge because he’s going want to plug in at home.” —Lutz, source article
————————————————————————————–
Two comments:
1) It’s simply terminology that’s bothering some people here. If the Volt’s drive train engineers were asked what Bob Lutz means they’d say something like, “I’ll just run the piston engine (& generator) enough to propel the car for the last 10 miles so the battery stays at its min SOC, because he’s going want to plug in at home.”
2) The OnStar GPS receiver is ALWAYS powered ON, whether an owner subscribes or not, so the car’s distance from the owner’s home is always available to the Volt’s control processors to allow a decision such as that in (1) to be made on board the car, with NO signals transmitted to or received from “OnStar Central” — i.e., it’ll be FREE!*
*BTW, I wonder how many new car buyers are aware that a much more “invasive” device than OnStar is hidden in virtually all new cars? This device constantly records the car’s speed, acceleration, steering, braking, etc —it’s a crash data recorder (that’s ALWAYS powered ON and that CANNOT be disabled) that allows all vehicle motion prior to any accident to be accurately reconstructed afterward.
August 28th, 2008 at 6:17 am
I have had Onstar since there was Onstar and have found it to be very unreliable. I have been given wrong directions many, many times… which caused me to drive loops and repeat roads only to be placed where I didn’t want to be. Onstar is unreliable and should NOT be tied to the Volt system. I’m reading here that Chevy believes the Volt’s buyer will be so stupid or incapable of realizing they have enough battery to get home…?? All I want to know is how far I have left on a charge, not how far it is home. I may not want to get home. I would like to see a way to disable Onstar’s response in the matter. I feel the primary focus should be on getting the Volt in the sales room.
August 28th, 2008 at 6:21 am
#104 Rashiid Amul
If I understand things correctly (and perhaps someone out there will correct the record if I state it incorrect), but “sitting idle or driving slowly until the batteries are ready to produce” should not be necessary.
With parallel connections the ICE/generator would provide sufficiently power to operate the Volt at highway speeds and warm up the battery at the same time. One the battery is ready, the ICE will turn off.
August 28th, 2008 at 6:44 am
#106, #107………
—————————————————————–
Dennis M, et al: Over its 13 year history, OnStar has been significantly improved, debugged and enhanced. I have three other vehicles with GPS Nav systems and the 2008 OnStar is easier to use, more accurate & more relaible than any of the other three!
Estero: You’re exactly right that “…..the ICE/generator provides sufficiently power to operate the Volt at highway speeds and warm up the battery at the same time. One the battery is ready, the ICE will turn off.”
August 28th, 2008 at 6:53 am
Swap “OnStar navigation system” for “manual flip switch” and I’ll be super happy.
[1] I don’t want OnStar so don’t force it on me.
[2] Make OnStar an option with “EV mode near home” mode as a selling point
[3] Provide a manual push button “I’m within X miles of my intended destination and that destination has an electric hookup for me so it’s ok to dip below the ICE kickon threshold because I’m going to plug you in”
August 28th, 2008 at 6:58 am
# 87 Bury Obama
>> I think the software will be their largest hurdle … Also the failure rate of software today is at an all-time high, mainly because of the new methodologies being used and the dearth of talented program managers. Code monkeys are easy to find and cheap (see India, China, Brazil…) but a good project manager is rare these days. The newer “agile” programming methods used today have a 60 percent failure rate. Even the inventors of methods like Scrum, XP, etc. acknowledge these horrendous failure rates. GM would be wise to stick to the traditional and proven “waterfall” lifecycle method of development.
You’re kidding me right? First off the 10% increase in software project success rates between 1995 and 2005 that was identified by Standish in 2005 was attributed by Standish to the shift away from waterfall to RAD (becoming Agile) development practices. While I agree the shift to “code monkeys” is foolish, the software industry in the west has acknowleged for years that the “savings” achielved by moving the actual coding to India/China are illusory, being offset by the time and energy used by western development teams to review and repair the egregious code errors created by the relatively inexperienced Asian developers.
I am a software project manager and I’ve always maintained that application quality is directly affected by code quality, and that good code is created by good developers. As obvious as this may seem, it appears to be beyond most corporate senior staff… it’s the people who are not familiar with software development who low-ball the difficulty in developing software and it’s always been that way. When one of the first computers (I belive it was the Eniac) was being developed, one of the scientists was heard to say “The software is the easy part, as soon as that’s done we’ll be able to focus on the hardware”. That was like 70 years ago and the hardware has always been the easy part. It’s the software that’s a bitch.
August 28th, 2008 at 7:14 am
Here’s a good idea for the cold weather scenario. Since you are plugging in the Volt anyay to charge the battery, that one plug should also power an optional engine block heater. That way the engine starts well and warms up quickly, which in turn warms the battery quickly. Or, if the Volt is equipped with a battery temperature sensor (which is likely), then just have a direct battery heater powered by your plug. This would obviously be thermostatically controlled, and would not operate above, say, 25F. Plug-in engine block heaters are fairly common in some of the colder Plains states. In the winter you drive by folks’ garages and see their cars plugged in.
Unlike most of my comments, I think THIS ONE is something that GM should seriously consider as an option for cold weather climates. Obviously its implementation can wait, since CA and FL will be the first Volt states.
August 28th, 2008 at 7:19 am
I don’t know if Mr. Lutz was reading my post, but thanks for listening to the ideas expressed by myself and others. I don’t know if it is that we are just second guessing, but again thanks for listening!
August 28th, 2008 at 7:26 am
#87 Bury Obama
#88 Joe “Low IQ” Biden
Let’s keep the political stuff off this website if we can. It is guaranteed to only lower the level of discourse. You’re obviously just having fun, but you never know when some bozo will come along and take it up a notch.
By the way, how did all of you people get inside my computer?
Sincerely,
Sen. John Sidney McCain
August 28th, 2008 at 7:32 am
#60 I. P. Phreely — That would be a pretty good plan for GM to totally destroy OnStar and the Volt. Can you imagine the backlash that would come if they started denying warranty claims for anyone who ever drives aggressively or speeds (as in, all of us, at one time or another)?
#83 Stew — And those are the rental companies I will never rent from, unless I have no choice. Vote with your dollars, send a message that invasions of privacy will not be tolerated.
August 28th, 2008 at 7:38 am
“The Volt really is designed to meet the more common short commutes. If you plan on making a lot of long distance drives, the Volt would not be the best choice.”
*********************************************************
If the Volt can do 50 MPG after the first 40 miles, that is nothing to scoff at. I like the idea of having a commuting car with no worry of being stranded in the middle of traffic. If you don’t think that is a great accomplishment, then don’t buy it.
August 28th, 2008 at 7:49 am
Look again at the sentence in the post “He noted that one of the major challenges in the vehicle is to write computer code for the “zillions” of possible interactions between the driver, electric drive, battery, and regeneration and when the combustion engine should come on.”
Maybe this sentence is only marketing talk, intended to show customers how much work GM is doing, and intended to scare away possible competitors.
On the other hand, if software development has come to encompass “zillions” of situations, maybe the designers need to go back and simplify the goals of Volt gen1. All that really has to happen is for the ICE to come on when the battery’s state of charge falls too low, and for the ICE to go off when that is no longer the case, with some dead zone in between to prevent overly fast on-off cycling. That is all that is essential.
Yes, there may be zillions of other things that would be nice to have. In Volt gen1, though, what we want is a car that does the fundamental tasks reliably and well, not a computer system that is overly ambitious and thus only sort of works, only some of the time. The kind of mission creep implied by “zillions” is how one gradually sinks from good to bad. I’m going to be optimistic and say all these zillions are just marketing talk, and the real Volt gen1 is well defined and sticks with essential tasks. If the main challenge of Volt gen 1 is a huge software system, the goals for the software have become too complex. That is, KISS.
August 28th, 2008 at 7:50 am
Just yet another reminder to those who don’t yet know. The volt ice will NOT RECHARGE THE BATTERY COMPLETELY. It is designed only to keep the battery from DIPPING BELOW THE 20-30% CHARGE STATE. Also, I would much rather use 1/5 of a gallon of gas (50mpg with only 10 miles from home) then risk damaging the $10,000+ battery.
Maybe we can get the volt specs page updated with this information?
Another question about the ICE: Will it have to turn on the warm up the catalytic converter for emissions issues? Or will the ICE truly stay off (short of being needed to warm up the batteries) until it is needed to MAINTAIN the battery?
August 28th, 2008 at 7:55 am
Lyle, Can you ask GM about the details of warming up the battery? Namely, if electricity is available, can we just program in a time to have the battery start warming up? I think iCE makes sense when electricity isn’t available, but when it is, it would seem that using it would reduce fuel consumption that much more.
August 28th, 2008 at 7:57 am
#39 Morgan
GM did offer the other NA automakers to get in on ONSTAR, they declined, and now they are rushing to catch up (sync from ford), yet they are inferior.
#86 GXT..and if you are in a parking garage in winter? or airport car park? your block heater wont do too much.
I think that the Volt will monitor battery temp, if plugged in, the ICE will not be required as charging GENERATES heat, and it will intelligently use the electrical supply IF connected..to heat the battery pack. If it does not detect a power supply, and the temperature is x°F, then the firmware will know it NEEDS to run the ICE. this is not a real hard thing to do..
#88 Joe..(good luck in Nov BTW lol) upload will be done via ONSTAR..even if you do not subscribe it is there (for the paranoid people..yes it is, its there…always just beyond your knowledge..it is also watching you…listening..subliminally feeding you government mind bending messages !! be afraid, be VERY afraid…) (and no sex inthe back seat of a volt ok?)
Big brother? get real…the gubermint does not need ONSTAR to do that…just because YOU cannot access credit card activity, tap any phone from anywhere in the world, and have spy network satellites track people you are interested..read your computer screens through brick walls (yes they can)..doesn’t mean they can’t if they want…believe me..you leave an electronic trail in SOOO many ways its STUPID…ONSTAR is NOT big brother….
August 28th, 2008 at 8:07 am
TOYOTA will have plug in car by 2009!!!
In his annual outlining of the company’s business plan, Watanabe tried to sound an upbeat note by promising green vehicles. He said Toyota will speed up the delivery of a plug-in hybrid — which can be plugged into regular household electrical sockets — initially promised for sometime in 2010, to the end of 2009.
August 28th, 2008 at 8:10 am
For me it is bad news from Luts since I am used to the cold climate. I understood so, that automatic climate control or preheating will be not installed. In that case I will be forced to turn on electric heater when driving and dramaticly reducing range. At the same time frozen windows and cold seats. Will it be possible to preheat car at certain time in the morning when the cable is still puged and teperature is well below zero? Do I will have possibility to programm preheating and precooling time? For me this is very crucial point.
August 28th, 2008 at 8:12 am
>> Will it have to turn on the warm up the catalytic converter for emissions issues?
Does GM want Volt to truly be clean? A cold emission system isn’t green.
Warming the BATTERY, the CABIN, and the CAT are all big efficiency challenges.
August 28th, 2008 at 8:23 am
In case anybody wants to see Dr. Dennis’ interview on Fox Business channel here’s the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6yW4-feUnA
August 28th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Wow! What a bunch of paranoid software programming burnouts! What a wealth of completely worthless software programming opinions! What an awesome chance for those who were suspected of being clueless wheenies to finally remove all doubt!
What does much of the above whining have to do with using the ICE to warm up an unplugged Volt? Nothing! What does much of the above personal opinion have to do with the Volt’s use of OnStar? Nothing! C versus C++ versus C# versus Java? Interpretors versus JIT versus compilers versus virtual machines? Are you serious? Come on girls, time to get back to work…
August 28th, 2008 at 8:40 am
As someone who has never owned a GM product and thus never had any experiences with Onstar…
I DO NOT find it surprising that some people really hate Onstar and some people love it…. are there any people out that that really could care either way and just want a car that uses electric motors and less gas?
What I dont understand… besides the arguments over what type of programming code is the ‘best one’….is that IF GM has it worked out that Onstar becomes a required peice of equipment… which we do not yet know for sure… in order to have the Volt function in its most efficient manner… then so be it, dont buy it if its that much of a deal for you (better chances I’ll get one earlier)! For all those worried about ‘big brother watching’ I&#