The Pike’s Peak Question: Chevy Volt and the Infinite Hill
A question that people like to ask about the Chevy Volt involves Pikes’ Peak. For those not familiar with it, Pike’s Peak is 14,115 feet high and has a 19 mile road going up to the summit.
I had the chance to asked Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah that very question and here’s how he describes the result:
What happens if your 40th EV mile occurs at the foot of Pike’s Peak and you want to continue on to the top. Is it a problem?
It’s a problem if you want to do it at 90 mph. But it’s not a problem to get you to the top. As you know, the faster you go, the more energy it takes and hence the more power you need.
Will there then be a governor that doesn’t let you go too fast in that situation?
No its not really a speed limit. Envision an infinite hill that goes up forever. Now I’m at the bottom of it in my Volt and I just hit my 40th mile and I start to go up this hill and I want to do it at 80 mph. That will take a certain amount of power and total energy.
As I start up that hill, I’ll be going at 80 mph, no problem. I will be drawing roughly 50 kw of electrical energy from the generator and I’ll be drawing the additional energy required out of the battery. Lets say its another 10 or 15 kw out of the battery.
At some point the battery will become depleted, completely. Or to within a reasonable margin of safety. Then the car wont be able to continue to go 80 mph. Its only going to be able to go as much as the roughly 50 kw generator will be able to take it.
How far will it have gotten up the hill at that point? It depends how steep the hill is. How often will this affect the typical customer? Answer, not very often.
There are a few situations in North America where I could conceivable think about this such as Eisenhower pass out in Colorado on the way to Vail and Aspen, that’s a long 6% or so grade. Will you be able to do that in the Volt at top speed for the whole thing? Probably not. Will you be able to do it at a speed that’s reasonable. Yes.
There are limitations to the E-REV concept, but the people who will experience a problem with this are far and few between.
Popularity: 2%
Related posts:
- How the Chevy Volt Operates Past the Customer Depletion Point
- My Chevy Volt Question to Bob Lutz
- Latest Chevy Volt Battery Pack and Generator Details and Clarifications
- Possible Future Chevy Volt Options - Version One Will Have 40 Miles EV Range
- VIDEO: GM’s CEO Arrives to Capitol Hill in Chevy Volt Prototype, Senate Hearings Underway
(8 votes, average: 4.88 out of 5) 
Loading ...
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:41 am
Mr Farah has a good design for the Volt. People who drive up mountains occasionally can do so. People who need to make this kind of drive every day may wish to choose a different kind of car.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:53 am
It’s bad for you to go up that high anyway. They’ve done tests on mountain climbers and find that their ventricles (spaces in the brain) are larger than normal due to massive die off of brain cells when they go up high. They call it climbers memory and it also affects the ability to speak.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:54 am
It would be nice if it could maintain 70 mph up hills while charge depleted.
Still it definitely won’t be as bad as our family’s former ‘77 Plymouth Fury with a 225 slant 6. That thing crawled up mountains.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:55 am
I agree with Mr. Farah. This is a minor inconvenience that most owners will never encounter.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:10 am
Here’s a situation for those of us who really want to advertise the benefits of an electric. There should be a manual mode as suggested by “nater” that would allow us to kick on the ICE/genset to bring the charge up on the battery in preparation for the hill climb. Oh, it would feel so good to go charging up a 6% grade maintaining the speed limit. People would wonder “what kind of car is that?”. It’s an advanced electric car obviously. “Everyone will want an electric, they just don’t realize it yet”
Here’s the thread that Nater started.
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1195&highlight=manual
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:13 am
That’s good to hear. I wasn’t planning on taking my Volt all the way to Vail or Aspen from Denver, but at least I know I can drive into the foothills of Denver and not stress out how I am going to get home. It now seems I would take my other gasoline car to go deeper into the mountains…
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:24 am
I had a 1979 Chevy Malibu with a V6 that would just crawl up some of the hills you would find on the Interstates in PA, MD and VA. If the Volt performs as badly as that Malibu did, it would definitely disappoint me.
I remember going skiing for a weekend with some friends (in the mid 1980s), and when that Malibu was loaded down with 5 passengers and all of their ski equipment and luggage, it couldn’t even manage 40 MPH up some of the hills in Western PA. Meanwhile, cars were passing me going 70 MPH. Even some large trucks were crusing past me.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:26 am
A little off topic but Ener 1 has forecast a 50% drop in the price of Lithium Batteries as production levels ramp up:
http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2056/80/
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:27 am
Good to know. I wonder how the Volt would perform going up Pike’s Peak with a full charge. I suspect it would be respectable.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:28 am
Good question . . . nice answer. But IMO, the VOLT is not being designed for this type of use. Yes, it is nice to know it will work, but technology like this is targeted at those of us making a daily commute - and there are not many commutes that take you up Pike’s Peak.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:44 am
Having been to Pikes Peak I don’t see it being a challenge to the volt because the speeds are so slow. Between the traffic, dirt road and lack of guard rails you never get fast enough to stress the engine.
Now going over a mountain rage is another story. Long distances at highway speeds with a 6% grade will probably be too much. But if stopping at a scenic rest stop is one of the sacrifices you have to make with a volt, so be it.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:46 am
LOL,
“There are limitations to the E-REV concept, but the people who will experience a problem with this are far and few between.”
In laymans terms: We don’t care how such a minute percentage of the population feels, were building this car for the world, not 1 guy!
Now if we could just get andrew to say something like:
Andrew: “if you want the concept volt, please put your name on this list”,
Me: for what:
Andrew: “these are going to be the last people in the world to get a Volt, if they can’t see the difference between a concept, and production model were not in a hurry to sign up nit-pickers”
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:53 am
Without a “mountain” mode switch, I’m still not convinced. 50 kw combined with the expected weight of the Volt means that it will be slower than that ‘77 Plymouth Fury, slower than that mid ’80s Malibu, and slower than most motorhomes and pickups pulling travel trailers. I wouldn’t dream of suggesting that the Volt should win the Pike’s Peak challenge, but I believe that engineer Farah is misleading our audience.
The Volt’s generator puts out about 50 kw, or about 67 horsepower. Putting 67 horsepower on any hill in a four door, four passenger Chevrolet is a much larger issue than most people think. A Honda Civic, which weighs less than the Volt, has 140 horsepower. A Toyota Corolla, which weighs less than the Volt, has 132 horsepower. A Chevrolet Cobalt, which weighs less than the Volt, has 148 horsepower. A Ford Focus, which weighs less than the Volt, has 132 horsepower.
So at about half the horsepower of similar sized, lighter weight cars, engineer Farah calls the Volt’s hill climbing ability “reasonable”. Yeah, I’m not buying it!
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:58 am
Thanks Lyle, clear questions and clear answers.The Volt becomes more real day after day.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:00 am
coming down the hill the battery will get recharged for free.. try that with a gas engine!
One advantage of the volt is that it essentially has a perfect transmission, with an infinite amount of gear ratios available.. so it may do better than that ‘79 malibu.
If mountain performance becomes an issue then they may have to stick a turbocharger on the generator… more expense..
Perhaps the buyer may have to sign a disclaimer about mountain performance before they buy the car. I dont think there are any cars sold in North America that just have a 50kw (67hp) engine and weigh 3500lbs.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:06 am
Hermant @ 13,
For comparision purposes, I just looked up the specs for the 1979 Malibu that I had and it came in at 94 HP (69.2 KW). Then consider that it was only capable of about 40 MPH up some of the hills on I-76/70 in PA when loaded with about 1,200 lbs of people and luggage. I know this comparison is more anecedotal than scientific, so make of it what you will… but it’s interesting nonetheless.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:07 am
>>Now going over a mountain rage is another story. Long distances at highway speeds with a 6% grade will probably be too much. But if stopping at a scenic rest stop is one of the sacrifices you have to make with a volt, so be it.>>>
What will you get by stopping?, you cant idle the volt and expect the battery to get recharged..Never mind, actually it will get recharged to 35% and then the engine stops… so at least you get back up to 35%, just guessing but that may take 30-60 minutes.
That mountain switch is beginning to sound better.. it forces the volt to keep the battery fully charged.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:09 am
Well, looks like we can order our bumper stickers…
This car climbed Pikes Peak
This car climbed Mt. Washington
This car climbed Mt. Everest
Go GM! Go Volt!
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:10 am
I guess that is one advantage to living in the Houston area. It is FLAT!!! No mountians or big hills around here to worry about!
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:17 am
Bear in mind that 67hp is with an electric motor (A/C drive) with all of the torque available all of the time. Teslas roadster motor has roughly 200 hp but can out perform cars with combustion motors with 500 hp. It is measured differently on internal combustion and electric motors.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:20 am
If you need to drive up Pike’s Peak or Eisenhower pass EVERY DAY, maybe you should get another type of car if you want to do it at 80 mph. People with regular small 4 cylinder engine cars will have the same problems. If you live 40+ miles away from the Aspen ski resort you work at, maybe you should get a big 8 cylinder car if you gotta make it to work at top speeds.
People in regular cars drive fairly slow up VERY steep grades anyway. The Volt would make it up the steep grades just fine at whatever speed you want if it’s running off the battery within the 40 mile range. It’ll run more like a Honda Fit if you start up the steep grade after you’ve gone over the 40 mile all electric range.
As battery technology gets better and GM refines the Volt E-REV technology, I’m sure they’ll come out with more and more powerful types of vehicles that are good for any type of hill climbing scenario. One thing that’s good about electric motors is that they have very good torque … as long as they have enough juice. If a revolutionary quick charging battery comes out with 400 miles of range, the truck drivers are going to love it. They like having that torque. So will the folks who pull boats and other stuff on trailers. More pulling power when you accelerate from a stoplight or whatever.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:21 am
This is the first generation EREV. Just because the gen-set is 50kw today doesn’t mean that the modular design doesn’t support more in the future. Just like vehicles have “standard” and “optional, larger engines”, I could see in the future the ability to get a larger gen-set. That’s the beauty of the EREV design - flexibility.
The ability to climb mountains doesn’t matter in the real world for a vast majority of people. Future design enhancements will certainly extend the capabilities.
Brian
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:30 am
Remember everybody, what goes up must come down, and charge the batteries!!! I’d like to see the ICE kick out more power to make the climb up the Eisenhower tunnel, but that will come in time.
I wonder what percentage the batteries would be recharced when coasting down a 6% grade from the tunnel back to Denver.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:30 am
Just ran some math for giggles.
If the battery is at 35% charge (customer depletion point), that means there are 5.6KwH of juice in it still. With the generator running @ 50Kw, if you need a draw of 80Kw total, that means 30Kw from the batteries. If 80Kw allows you to go 60mph up a hill, the battery will have enough reserve to provide just over 11 minutes (or 11 miles) at 30Kw.
A fully charged 16KwH battery would have 32 minutes of reserve (in the assumptions above, that means 32 miles) if drawn at 30Kw.
It seems to me that this will certainly cover well over 99% of the populations needs.
Does anyone have the knowledge to calculate how much power, in Kw, is needed to pull a Volt up a 6% grade? In other posts, we are provide the drag and weight, so I would think that it would be able to be calculated (by someone smarter than me though).
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:43 am
Hills have been an issue for a long time. Our family had to put the Model-T in reverse to get up steep hills. The gearing was “stronger” in reverse. Seriously!
Be well and
LET’S JUST GET THE VOLT’S WHEELS ON THE ROAD!
Tag
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:44 am
I drove a ‘78 Dodge Maxivan with a 360V8 up Pikes Peake back in the 80’s, and it barely made it. The problem had more to do with the ignition timing as the air became thinner. I had to take the engine cover off and adjust the timing while driving the van.
Anyway, as long as you’re faster than a tractor-trailer on the same grade, you should be safe. “What goes up…”
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:46 am
Remember your going to hit the bottom of the hill with 160 Hp and ALL THAT TORQUE. Then at some point when your battery goes from 30% to 20% or whatever the magic depletion GM figures is safe you will drop to 67 Hp. Also keep in mind what hill climbing does to traditional ICE transmissions. Volt won’t have that issue. As Mr. Farah states, he can’t answer the question specifically. It depends on how much weight is in the car, how fast you hit the hill and how steep it is. If they do the manual ICE On/Charging switch and let you juice up the batteries to 40 or 50% that may fix even the BIG hill climbs at a 70mph speed. Hell my V-6 F150 struggles up hills in the Smokey Mnts.
I have a feeling the VOLT will out climb comparable 50 to 100 MPG cars. Oh Wait, thats right……. are there any 50 to 100 MPG cars..???? So you want GM to build that car and be a “Hill Climber” for the Rockies…? In the first generation you have to make design choices. At least they have a 160 Hp motor to draw on.. They can tweak battery boast as time goes on…
GO VOLT
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:47 am
This does come into play here in Seattle.
Say I want to visit my Mother in law (ok stop laughing) who lives in then middle of the State of Washington. I travel 75 mile to the top of the pass across the Cascade mountains. Then I have another 2 hours of driving, It would be nice to be able to have the charge stay high enough to maintain speed until I cross the pass.
We also have kids @ Washington State University -5 hours away - and have the same issue.
Sounds like we will need a 2 mode/plug in Vue as well
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:52 am
Guys - What is this obsession with Pikes Peak? Really, get over it already! The car is what it is. It’s a commuter. Not a hill climber, it won’t compete in NHRA events; It won’t outperform Porches at Sebring and it won’t climb mount Everest in a single bound.
Geeeezzzzz…. But for those of you obsessed with hill climbing remember, it’s torque that is going to be your friend and electric motors have plenty.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:03 am
After this question and ensuing discussion … is anyone willing to bet that GM will be sure to get one of the test vehicles out to Pike’s Peak sometime within the next year?
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:06 am
Lyle - great site! You’re listening and asking them our questions, and they’re answering. How much better could it be? Thanks!
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:06 am
I’m glad GM is considering this scenario. I’d hate for the technology to get a bad reputation (like diesels) unnecessarily.
I still think a “mountain mode” would be a good idea. A manual switch which keeps all the battery in performance reserve. Simple and goes a long way to solving this problem.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:06 am
******************
My question is this:
Example, Coming down from a Pike’s Peak or Eisenhower Tunnel..
Would the regen braking be able to bring the pack back up to whatever level the captured energy would take it or would it only hold the battery at the minimum stat of charge like the ICE does?
I’d hope for max charge out of the braking system otherwise, it’s wasted E.
—-
Live long and burn electrons
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:07 am
After this question and ensuing discussion … is anyone willing to bet that GM will be sure to get one of the test vehicles out to Pike’s Peak sometime within the next year?
UNCONTESTED!
Be well,
Tag
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:08 am
I agree with Tagament. Let’s just get the Volt’s wheels on the road. A very small fractional percentage may be affected by the slow speed up Pike’s Peak. But who in their right mind would drive up steep, winding roads at top speed anyway. Of course, we have very few steep hills and no mountains in Mississippi. I don’t think the Volt’s success is going to hinge on the ability to climb steep hills or mountains at top speed. As long as it can climb at reasonable speeds, it should suffice.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:12 am
will it be awd I Want AWD !!!!!!!!!!!!
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:14 am
DaveG @31 said:
“Lyle - great site! You’re listening and asking them our questions, and they’re answering. How much better could it be? Thanks!”
Well, the could be a Volt in my driveway… But short of that, this is still good (g).
Be well,
Tag
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:15 am
Argh, where’d the edit function go?
Tag
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:33 am
Awesome, Lyle!!! I asked this question a couple of days ago. For the record, I live in CO and will be happy to test drive one of the eraly Volts up Pike’s peak.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:42 am
I agree with the idea of the driver being able to choose “mountain mode”, though I would call it “performance mode”, in which the ICE would recharge the battery all the way back up to 80% (or whatever the maximum is), when the switch was set. [It could go back to "normal mode" automatically, when the car was restarted.]
The additional uphill performance would come at the price of shorter battery life, but, after all, the car does belong to the person who purchased it, not GM.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:43 am
I wouldn’t hold your breath for this manual mode switch being a factory installed device. If I was on this design I would be way too concerned about the average Joe/Jill who doesn’t know or want to know anything about the details misusing the switch and ending up dissatisfied with the MPG because they keep charging their battery with the ICE. However there are plenty of bright people who DO want to know the details and I’m guessing it won’t be too tough to develop a “switch” to fool the computer into charging the battery to a higher level when you want it to.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:44 am
For comparison purposes, the current Prius weighs 2932lbs and has a 57KW / 76hp gas engine.
On a hill, the mass of the vehicle (i.e., what you’re trying to lift) is hugely important. A heavier vehicle is at a disadvantage.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:45 am
How will a car like this DESCEND long hills? I drive an automatic, but on long downhills I just downshift it to save the brakes. This is crucial on a mountain to keep you from dangerously overheating your brakes. Is anything analogous to downshifting possible on the Volt? If it is a “one speed transmition”, does that mean the answer is NO? Alternately, does it behave more like a traditional electric vehicle (golf cart, bumper car, etc.) where taking your foot off the pedal disengages the motor, allowing the motor to slow itself down? It seems like this would be dangerous, since taking your foot off the gas on the highway would create an abrupt slow down. Can someone educate on how this works? Is there a true transmission that allows coasting, and if so, to what degree?
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:47 am
#11 5 watt Says: “… going over a mountain rage is another story. Long distances at highway speeds with a 6% grade will probably be too much. But if stopping at a scenic rest stop is one of the sacrifices you have to make with a volt, so be it.”
————————————————————————————-
First, just because you can’t drive 80 MPH doesn’t mean you have to stop. When the battery runs out, you’ll just have to slow down, perhaps to 60 MPH, which is about the speed everyone else will be driving anyway.
Second, realize that the 6% grade would have to be constant, with no level or downhill stretches where the battery can recharge. The only road I’ve ever driven that’s possible to speed 80 MPH up a constantly steep grade is going west up out of Death Valley (CA).
So let’s look at that. I’m going 80 MPH up a constant steep grade. How far can I go before I lose max power and have to slow down? Andrew Farah says in the article that going 80 MPH up a 6% grade will draw “10 or 15 kw out of the battery”. Let’s split that - make it 12 kW. The gas engine comes on at around 30% SOC, and the total capacity of the battery is around 16 kWH. So the amount of energy in the battery when the gas engine comes on is 4.8 kWH. At a drain rate of 12 kW, that would last .4 hours, or 24 minutes. At 80 MPH, that would be 32 miles.
So we are talking about a constant 6% uphill grade, with no level or downhill stretches, that lasts 32 miles. No such road exists.
So when Andrew Farah says “the people who will experience a problem with this are far and few between”, I think this is an understatement.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:49 am
If y ou go u p Pike’s Peak at 80 miles an hour, you will only go a few miles before you fly off of one of those switchbacks and come down - straight down! I just want to get my hands on one ASAP! ONLY 14 DAYS TO UNVEILING. GO GM! GO VOLT!
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:50 am
At least now we can finally stop arguing over Pike’s Peak (I’ve never even seen the thing) and start working out how the battery will handle those of us who drive down bumpy dirt roads frequently. Or how all that dirt will affect the underslung air intake. Or how that air intake handles puddle splashes. These kinds of things occur for far more people and make for trouble.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:55 am
#43 Jim in PA Says: “How will a car like this DESCEND long hills?”
————————————————————————————–
With regenerative braking. We covered this last year in the forums. The wost case scenario is that you live on the top of a mountain, and you start your long downhill decent fully charged. Note that the battery charger only charges the battery to 80%, so there is still 20% of the battery to absorb regenerative braking.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:01 am
A 4,000 lb. car, e.g., a Volt with two adults and luggage, travelling at 65 mph up a 6 % grade would require 45.7 kW of power at the wheels - 31.2 kW for climbing, 10 kW for aerodynamic drag and 4.5 kW for rolling resistance. With 10% electrical/mechanical losses, it would be a near miss for a 50 kW power plant..
However, at 55 mph, the number reduces from 45.7 kW to 36.2 kW of power at the wheels - 26.4 kW for climbing, 6 kW for aerodynamic drag and 3.8 kW for rolling resistance. Quite doable.
(Assumed drag coefficient of 0.28, cross-section area of 2.25 m2 and air density of 1.293 kg/m3 - sea level & 0°C.)
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:02 am
Here is my discussion on hill climbs in the Volt from March 23rd.
Note that we probably will see the ICE operate at several different engine speeds, and we now know the ICE will be a 1.4L normally aspirated engine.
But fully loaded (4 passengers and gear), the Volt will probably be able to maintain 50 to 60 mph in charge sustaining mode while climbing a 6% grade in the Rockies.
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=133
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:05 am
The interesting piece of information, and it’s new, is that you can continue to draw 10-15 kW of power from the pack below the state of discharge until the pack is “depleted”. Would be fun to know what that is.
#7 MDDave - You’re not looking at anything like 40 mph. We’ve run the numbers on this before. If you go up a 6% grade, which is the maximum allowed on an interstate, at 70 mph you’d need about 32 kW for the climb and 16 kW to overcome aero and rolling resistance drag for a 4000 pound car.
That’s about the 50 kW you have available from the gen-set. However with drive train losses you’d need say 5 kW more. If you have something left in the battery you’ll be fine. If you don’t then you’ll probably have to “turtle” down to 65 mph. I know the hills you’re referring to and they’re much shorter than what he’s talking about, and the battery will be able to regen on the way down.
Just keep your tires inflated. It makes a difference. Also note the traction motor is 120 kW so it will not limit the climb. It’s the limitation of the power sources that make a difference.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:11 am
Mountain mode, yeah sure! If you keep adding switches and modes to the Volt it will look like a porcupine. GM can’t possibly do some of the unrealistic things suggested on this site. Come on, people, get real.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:16 am
#48 NorthernPiker — didn’t see your post, you and DaveG more or less covered it. One point though is that as you climb the air becomes less dense which is good for aero drag but not very good for a normally aspirated engine. I don’t know how those factors balance out. Any ideas?
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:21 am
#40 RB Says: “I agree with the idea of the driver being able to choose “mountain mode”, though I would call it “performance mode”, in which the ICE would recharge the battery all the way back up to 80%”
————————————————————————————–
Having the ICE fully recharge the battery would increase wear on the battery.
10 years of battery life corresponds to around 4000 charge/discharge cycles. GM has probably increased that for worst case scenarios, but there is a limit.
If you drive long trips and have the ICE significantly recharging the battery frequently, the battery will wear out much sooner. Also note that charging/discharging the battery decreases efficiency due to the electrical / chemical conversions.
That’s why the Volt controls the ICE output to match the average demands of the vehicle. This avoids any significant charging of the battery by the ICE.
Besides, as Andrew Farah implies in the article, there is no problem with the Volt getting you up the mountain at normal driving speeds. It’s only when you want to speed up long steep hills that you have a problem, and the only problem is that you’ll have to slow down to a normal speed eventually.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:21 am
Why would even possibly think of taking a hill at >60mph?
Just wondering.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:22 am
Of course the people who live in Woodland Park and Divide, CO who commute to Colorado Springs, CO daily WILL drive up and down Pikes Peak (north side the Peak) daily at speeds 40-65MPH (Ute Pass). The Springs are at 6000′ MSL and Woodland Park is at 8500′ MSL with Ute pass being 9100′ MSL. The pass is a 6% climb straight up and lasts about 18 miles from the Springs to Woodland Park. Screw the Peak, THIS is the reference for the Volt’s real-world commuter hill climbing ability.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:23 am
This seems like as good a place as any (recently) to address this difference between the battery’s native (absolute) capacity, and the capacity which will be enforced for the Volt by it’s automated charge-management system.
To prolong it’s life, we’ve been given figures close enough to 80% of absolute capacity for “Full” and 34% for “Empty” (’Customer depletion point’).
I agree with those who have said that “Customer Depletion Point” is a terrible term to use for this (and only addresses “Empty”). It sounds more like the point at which the customer cannot be talked up to a higher selling price!
Considering what the artificially-maintained range is for, why not call it the “Charge Safety Window.” This implies that there’s actually something “outside” the window, gives the customer an idea what’s really going on, and takes into account “Full” as well as “Empty.”
mmcc (#9):
“I wonder how the Volt would perform going up Pike’s Peak with a full charge. I suspect it would be respectable.”
It doubtless would be; but I doubt it would go a full 40 miles all-electric under that circumstance. I wonder if the programming would detect a continuous drain situation and start the ICE early (to hold more in reserve)?
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:26 am
#52
For sure the power loss of a normally aspirated 4-cylinder engine is significantly more than the gain from the loss of aero drag at altitudes above 10,000 feet. I feel my poor car struggling almost every weekend this summer going hiking/camping in the Rockies.
The only gain from the loss of aero drag is that more regenerative braking energy is available, but I don’t know if the gain is significant enough to even talk about…
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:40 am
#52 DonC Says: “One point though is that as you climb the air becomes less dense which is good for aero drag but not very good for a normally aspirated engine. I don’t know how those factors balance out. Any ideas?”
————————————————————————————-
It could be worse than normal since the Volt will be using an Atkinson cycle engine (not Otto cycle). The Atkinson cycle definitely changes the air intake and compression characteristics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle
The Prius uses an Atkinson cycle engine. Is there anyone here who knows a Prius owner that lives in high elevations?
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:41 am
#55 SD
Thanks for posting that. I was just reading through this thread and thinking, yeah, I live in Woodland Park and I work in Colorado Springs. And the comments in this thread are mostly saying that people like me don’t matter. I have a pretty low number on the Volt waiting list. Maybe I can sell it on eBay…
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:42 am
Dave G
Has Atkinson Cycle been confirmed for the Volt, or is it just a persistent (though likely) assumption?
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:46 am
#53 Dave G - “10 years of battery life corresponds to around 4000 charge/discharge cycles”
You need to halve that to account for the fact that only half the battery pack is being used — cutting down the cycles is why GM has reduced the EV range. Even 2000 is a bit high. (15,000/40 = 375). I’d think the worst case would be 1875. Of course you can always come up with a case where someone drives 80 mph for 30 miles to work, then recharges at work, and then drives home. Seven days a week, fifty-two weeks a year ….
#56 Jackson - “but I doubt it would go a full 40 miles all-electric”
You’d be using about 1.5 watt hours per foot of climb, so a thousand foot climb would wipe out about 20% of the pack.
#52 Aspherical #58 Dave G — thanks, that’s what I was thinking. Thanks Dave for making the point about the Atkinson engine. Hadn’t thought of that at all.
There would be some gain from aero drag because the car would need to push less air out of the way both going up and down. I guess less performance at higher altitudes is a trade-off for not having the turbo engine.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:48 am
Perhaps what we should be asking for, instead of a ‘mountain mode’ to build up charge in the battery, is a way to artificially narrow the “Charge Safety Window” to hold more in reserve.
The people who have special commuting challenges know who they are, and might press a button to make the ICE come on earlier; at an absolute capacity of 40 percent instead of the default 34 percent, say; just to meet a particular challenge.
It might not be a bad idea for anyone vacationing (on a long trip where recharge will be rare) to have an ability to hold on to more of the battery’s charge (to go farther if gas is in short supply, deal with an unexpected upgrade, etc).
To be clear: this wouldn’t “make” the ICE recharge the battery above “Empty,” it would raise the value of “Empty” so that more reserve battery power would be maintained.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:49 am
#55 SD Says: “Of course the people who live in Woodland Park and Divide, CO who commute to Colorado Springs, CO daily WILL drive up and down Pikes Peak (north side the Peak) daily at speeds 40-65MPH (Ute Pass). … The pass is a 6% climb straight up and lasts about 18 miles from the Springs to Woodland Park. Screw the Peak, THIS is the reference for the Volt’s real-world commuter hill climbing ability.”
————————————————————————————-
According to calculations of people here, and what Andrew Farah of GM implies in the article above, the Volt can go 65 MPH on a 6% climb all day (until you run out of gas). It’s only higher speeds like 80-90 MPH that start to cause potential problems.
And as I said before, the only road I know of that has a 6% uphill grade where you can go 80 MPH is going west out of Death Valley, CA.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 am
#62 Jackson Says: “To be clear: this wouldn’t “make” the ICE recharge the battery above “Empty,” it would raise the value of “Empty” so that more reserve battery power would be maintained.”
————————————————————————————-
This would work. In fact, they’ll probably do something like this to avoid the stale gas issue anyway.
But for mountain climbs, I think this is trying to solve a problem that doesn’t really exist. It appears that the Volt can go 65 MPH on a 6% climb all day (until you run out of gas). It’s only higher speeds like 80-90 MPH that start to cause potential problems. The only road I know of that has a 6% uphill grade where you can go 80 MPH is going west out of Death Valley, CA. All other roads with a 6% uphill grade are much too curvy to go 80 MPH.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:01 am
#62 Jackson
Being able to raise the “Customer Depletion Point” is a great idea. But would it be any better than simply being able to force the Volt into a gen-set mode regardless of the SOC? More elegant for sure, and if you were doing the same route consistently it would be fabulous, but for most circumstances I’d wonder if either would work as well.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:04 am
@hermant
You compare horsepowers of cars without taking into account of the much greater torque that electric motors have at similar horsepowers. It is very difficult to compare horsepower ratings between ICE and electric motors.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:05 am
#64 Dave G
“It appears that the Volt can go 65 MPH on a 6% climb all day (until you run out of gas).”
That would be great news if this is indeed the case. The only people that would be upset with this news are the people who plan to race a Subaru Impreza WRX STI up the mountains around those other cars who only going 45mph…
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:06 am
#64 Dave G
I think it would be pretty cool. Do you need it? No. But at some point we get into the distinction that Lutz makes between “needs” and “desires.”
Say you want to do a trip — with a long flat and then a steep climb at the end — at 80 mph the entire way. Jackson’s suggested mode would work. The standard mode wouldn’t. Both modes would satisfy your needs. Only one would satisfy your desires.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:08 am
This discussion is important to me as Eisenhower tunnel is between me and Summit County where the ski areas are. Since I am in Fort Collins (60 miles north of Denver), I will be on “empty” when I hit Morrison where the grade starts.
I do not care about going up the pass at 80, but I do not want to go up at 30-40 either. I have done that in a very underpowered VW Rabbit diesel in the 80s that would only crack 40 if you really built up some momentum on the very few downhills on that trip.
Of course, I would be more than happy to test this out for Chevy with an early Volt.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:14 am
#67 Aspherical
I doubt the Volt can go up a 6% grade at 65 mph on the gen-set alone. It’s on the edge to begin with and then we have the problem of the engine performance. Depending on what was in the car it might work but it’s not a slam dunk. Even 60 mph might be iffy. To stay on the safe side I’d say 55 mph.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:15 am
#40 RB
Agreed. Performance mode sounds way better. I doubt GM will allow the ICE to recharge to 80% though. Battery cycles would spike and GM still has to warranty it. I’d suggest that “Performance Mode” should consist of running the ICE for all movement, and only the battery when the ICE can’t keep up. Hard accelerations, hills, pulling a small trailer, etc.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:16 am
I’ll still take one.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:17 am
This is a non-issue for me. If and when I have to go over a mountain pass, if I am stuck in the slow lane with the trucks, I will just live with it. The benefits the other 99.9% of the time will far outweigh that inconvenience.
#42 dagwood55:
Thanks. After following this blog for a year, I was just about convinced that the laws of physics had been repealed.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 am
#40 RB - Actually, someone like me is the reason Bob would never authorize a “mountain mode” switch in the Volt. I would knowingly, willingly, happily, joyfully, and with great satisfaction, use the mountain mode switch all the time. It would give me 40 quiet, electric-powered miles over and over again on long times. Plus, it would REALLY tick-off Dave G, who disapproves of the whole idea, and gets upset at me when I bring it up. (Is the Volt’s 300 pound battery really that puny and pathetic?) Don’t forget - the batteries will become cheaper to replace in the future.
Go “Mountain Mode” Volt, go !
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
While the people who demand that the Volt be able to maintain over 70mph on a climb up Pike’s Peak are in the right I think they are missing the bigger picture. Currently today, right now there are vehicles driving on the road that can’t maintain >70mph up Pike’s Peak. Why are we allowing this! I say we demand legislation that gets all these dangerous road hazards sent to the scrap yard. Forget the CARB legislation, let’s mandate that any car built for the US must be able to climb Pike’s Peak at a minimum 70mph. Personally to be on the safe side I’d also want the ability to tow an 8000 lb trailer up Pike’s Peak at 70mph.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:39 am
This thread is about what happens when you start to climb this hill with the battery already at the customer depletion point or even a little past that such that the battery is not able to supplement the generator….
What I’d be curious is if the Volt started the climb with a fully charged (to it’s standard usable capacity) how many BEV only miles would you get at that grade before it’s reached the deletion point and the generator kicks on? It’s obviously not going to be 40 miles, and probably not anywhere close…..
…. however it should be pointed out that that’s still providing exactly the same amount of displacement of gasoline even if you only get 10 miles up the hill as a traditional ICE I believe would get the same decrease in miles per gallon.
And this is definitely a situation where a series hybrid like the Volt is better than a pure BEV… if you regularly drive up mountains (or any long stretch of steep include roads where you never get any regen braking to recoup some of that energy).
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:39 am
my god…getting everything we want is why we are in trouble…can’t we understand limitations.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:55 am
#5 LyleL
Thanks for the link to Nater’s comments. Very interesting!
But…instead of having GM write and test more code, I would prefer a switch to favor engine mode or battery mode. That would solve the problem where your commute is 40 to 44 miles and It’s not worth starting the engine, warming up the catalytic converter, etc.
Scratch that …
I’m back to Tagamet’s comments… “LET’S JUST GET THE VOLT’S WHEELS ON THE ROAD!”
and start this baby rolling in 2 years and 2 months!
As some have implied, no one car is designed for everyone. That’s why one guy buys a Honda Fit and someone else buys a Chevy Malibu. And they’re both happy.
Now if we could just get rid of, (I can’t repeat the whole thing) “Cu…. depletion point”. It sounds like something you’d find in a Life insurance policy regarding when you’re, well, depleted.
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:58 am
When the Volt was first introduced, my first comment was about performance up an incline.
Range is not important, because the ICE can do 70 all day long while keeping the battery topped off. The question is, how long will this car keep up with traffic where real power is needed? Will it run with other cars to the top of Donner Summit, or to the top of the Grapevine grade on I-5? Or will it run out of battery and arrive later, in the truck lane?
If you want to get from Southern California to Northern California, chances are you will drive I-5 over the grapevine. If you want to go skiing, you climb the Sierras. It’s not a minor issue. So it may very well be that people need to understand that this is intended to be a commuter car and has limitations in other uses.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Thanks for all the kind comments, but there’s one other thing about “my mode” that I should make clear: raising the value of “Empty” effectively reduces AER. Nothing comes from nothing.
If you’re out for a couple of weeks seeing the USA in your Chevrolet and won’t be able to recharge ’til you get home, AER is meaningless; but having reserve power is a plus. This is what would keep most people (except perhaps “The Grump”
) from leaving the mode engaged all the time.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Who even goes 80 MPH up a 6% grade? The speed limit is probably 55. There are probably curves in the road that deter someone from actually going 80. This problem seems to me like only a “on paper” problem, and anyone driving the Volt like a regular human won’t encounter a problem.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Unrelated in alot of ways, but GM has scrapped the Kappa II platform. (Kappa I is what the Pontiac Solsitice and Saturn SKy is built on).
GM loses about $10,000 everytime they sell one, and they were considered “image cars” for their respective brands, so the line was a ‘once and done’
They limited production to about 40K of these a year and they retail at around $25-$30K, while the cost is around $35-$40K.
Speaking observationally…and I’m not saying this is the case. But the path of the Solstice/Sky sounds very familar to the path of the Volt. Volt is a image car, with limited production.
The Solstice/Sky represents Lutz’s first baby, the first car fully developed under his watch at GM.
If you read the old Sky/Solstice news when it first came out, Lutz was also quoted as saying that alot of tricky things limited initial capacities (hydra forming, direct laboUr, etc) and that down the road alot of capacity would be added easily once it was straightened out…which sounds kinda familiar.
Again, I’m not saying this is the case with the Volt, I’m just drawing parallels to Lutz’s “first baby” at GM.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/gmi-exclusive-kappa-ii-platform-axed-r-d-68685/
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Statik,
Perhaps he’s sacrificing the Kappa since he’s forced to lose money on the Volt. Unlike the Sky/Solstice, the Volt has enormous potential for the whole GM line, at least one (probably two) other Volt follow-on types are in the works.
Also, the Volt and it’s stablemates are being built on a “world platform,” using a “world engine;” so I don’t know that one can really compare the two efforts in that light.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:29 pm
#51 N Riley
I’ve liked a “performance mode” for some time now. It’s simple and solves several problems including long hills, aggressive drivers, small trailers, car-top carriers, etc. I don’t think it’s superfluous. Its a real world solution to real world problems. To reiterate, when in performance mode, the entire battery is treated as reserve, the ICE runs all the time. Performance mode should be off by default, and turned on each time the car is started, like the O/D OFF for transmissions. ECON Mode should be standard. Honestly, I’ll be suprised if this function isn’t on the Volt. I think it makes complete sense.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:40 pm
>> I’ve liked a “performance mode” for some time now.
Why are you pushing the term “performance” as an aspect of power, especially since the need ceiling was exceeded years ago?
Some consider it totally realistic for high-performance to be a reference to EFFICIENCY.
As for allowing greater power, if that requires increase use of the engine, the green creditials for Volt will be compromised. I suggest you study the EPA emission ratings for more info, since trade-offs are often required.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm
#75 Jack Says
“While the people who demand that the Volt be able to maintain over 70mph on a climb up Pike’s Peak are in the right I think they are missing the bigger picture. Currently today, right now there are vehicles driving on the road that can’t maintain >70mph up Pike’s Peak. Why are we allowing this! I say we demand legislation that gets all these dangerous road hazards sent to the scrap yard. Forget the CARB legislation, let’s mandate that any car built for the US must be able to climb Pike’s Peak at a minimum 70mph. Personally to be on the safe side I’d also want the ability to tow an 8000 lb trailer up Pike’s Peak at 70mph.”
LOL I’m glad i’m not the only one that thinks this conversation is pointless. I keep reading just to find out whose the biggest baby.
How about this:
Dear GM there is a lake inbetween me and my job, it would help alot if i could drive right over it and save myself 3 minutes of time. Could you squeeze that into the Volt & keep it under 30 or GM will fail and no one will buy the Volt, and the concept was so much better, and it should of been out yesterday.
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:58 pm
#85 john1701a
I don’t think “performance mode” is a big deal. The Volt is not a performance car, so people who buy it are not going to be primarily motivated by performance. Additionally I’d assume the battery pack will deliver more power than the gen-set + battery pack (the car has a 120 kW traction motor for a reason). Yes you will use less energy climbing at 55 mph than at 75 mph but you’ll always use less energy going at a slower speed. The issue is whether you can “save” a bit of the battery pack for a steep climb in order not to turtle.
The energy difference won’t be that great, and the scenarios we’re dealing with are unlikely to occur in the real world with any regularity. It’s the notion of the thing which is appealing.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Example, Coming down from a Pike’s Peak or Eisenhower Tunnel..
Would the regen braking be able to bring the pack back up to whatever level the captured energy would take it or would it only hold the battery at the minimum stat of charge like the ICE does?
If I understand correctly, the only way this would help you is if you have another steep hill to climb before you get home. If you are driving home on the level, arriving at home with a full charge only saves you a buck’s worth of electricity.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:15 pm
#84 Cautious Fan - “It’s simple and solves several problems including long hills, aggressive drivers, small trailers, car-top carriers, etc”
I don’t think you’re talking a about performance mode and I don’t understand the “aggressive driver” reference. The Volt has a 120 kW traction motor. The battery pack should be able to deliver that much power. Using the gen-set + battery pack gives 65 kW of power. IOW the battery pack before it gets to the customer depletion point IS performance mode.
Maybe it would be called “boost mode” or something, because what you’re talking about is the battery pack giving a very modest boost over a long period of time. Nothing performance about it, so “performance mode” seems a misnomer.
This mode would BTW be gentler on the battery pack and therefore should extend its life. On the other hand you’re running the ICE all the time. Absent unusual circumstances it doesn’t seem all that useful.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:15 pm
They should put the Volt power system in the Sky/Solstice. I like it’s looks better than the Corvette.
They could use it for all wheel drive development. Soon we will be seeing electric cars competing and winning against ICE cars.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
E-flex solstice would be pretty cool.
And they could actually charge $40k for it and sell it.
Maybe they should rethink scrapping it for now…
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:30 pm
“Would the regen braking be able to bring the pack back up to whatever level the captured energy would take it or would it only hold the battery at the minimum stat of charge like the ICE does?”
Interesting question. From the information we have, the gen-set should charge the battery to slightly above the Customer Depletion Point and then turn off. I’d assume that regen would still charge the battery after this point, presumably because the recharge will not be so great as to endanger the battery life.
The extreme case would be a six percent slope which, at 80 mph, you’d have to get rid of 5500 watts, presumably through braking. In half an hour that would be 2.7 kWh. Even assuming losses of 20% that would be 25% of the pack. So the question is a good one.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:32 pm
What the hell is wrong with you people why would you want to drive 70 MPH uphill on a mountain that most likely has wet or snowy conditions? With an electric vehicle that runs on gas with no gas station or plug in for miles? Its just common sense people. And if your still stupid enough to do it pack some extra gas in your trunk and stop nit picking for every small reason. GM just get the car done please and ignore these fools.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:35 pm
I drove up Pikes Peak about a year ago and I maybe averaged 15 - 20 miles an hour. I was driving our van and prefered not to fly off edge of dirt roads. But If the Volt could maintain 30 miles an hour that would be more than enough for the Pikes Peak ascent in my mind. I would be interested what how much a depleted batery could be recharged on the way down. The descent is a serious test of any cars brakes. (someone at a checkpoint does a temp check on your car’s breaks at some point)
I think a more relavent test would be to find the longest steepest interstate road (where the speedlimit is 55mph or greater) and find out if a volt with a depleted battery could maintain highway speeds for that road with 4 adults in the vehicle.
I could live with it not being able to do 70-80 in this case but I wouldn’t want to have to worry about being a roadhazard ie: not being able to maintain say 5mph under the speed limit.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:46 pm
I’m glad they are being honest. It would be far worse if they claimed the volt could do something that it couldn’t do as a production vehicle. In my opinion, this actually give more credence to their claims of what the volt can do. If only politicians would be this honest. Good work GM.
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
#86 JonP
I strongly disagree this conversation is pointless. For those who live in cities near mountainous regions, we need to know if the Volt is a second car or can be a primary car. If the Volt performs just as well as current gasoline cars up the mountains, GM will have more potential buyers which in effect will make the Volt cheaper. Otherwise, GM is limiting the Volt to flat states that are at sea level and the Volt will be more of a “niche” car for those with $40k to $50 to burn.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:05 pm
It used to be that gasoline powered cars had difficulty going up a long hill at high speed. It wasn’t the end of the world. As the horsepower wars ensued, pretty well all cars now can do it with little difficulty.
We are now back to sqare one. The first generation of electric cars may have some difficulty with long hills at high speeds, but as the battery capacity wars begin in a few more years, that problem will be “solved”.
I put the word “solved” in quotes because it’s the horsepower wars that sort of got us to where we are now–wasting gas for bragging rights–leading to higher world demand and higher fuel prices.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:07 pm
#84 Cautious Fan
I don’t disagree with your “performance mode”. I could see the use of one mode like that. It is just that there seems to be so many modes and/or switches being suggested that it would prove a burden to build and program all of them. Maybe you performance mode could satisfy some or all of the other’s needs. I want GM to keep it as simple as possible while doing it correctly the first time. That in itself is going to quite a challenge for GM.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:10 pm
_____________________________________________________
The VOLT just made the FOXNEWS homepage!
http://www.foxnews.com
News Story Link:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,414942,00.html
______________________________________________________
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:16 pm
“Customer Depletion Point” refers to the fact that this is the “point” where the “customer” can no longer “deplete” the battery.
In reality there is probably 5-15% (or more) residual in the battery pack for cases such as Pikes Peak. IMO there’s probably a 20% cut-of at both top and BOTTOM. The ‘Customer Depletion Point’ just prevents the customer from using it (in case the customer really needs it!)
~Bob2Chiv
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I don’t think the 67 horsepower generator-only power up hills is going to be a problem. My stock 88 mustang has (or had) 88 horsepower when it was brand new, that was 20 years ago. I’m sure it has much less now, and I climb hills fine. The volt will be much more aerodynamic as well.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
#99 CDAVIS
Article says:
“The Volt is a major gamble for General Motors, which aims to be the first automaker to market a plug-in hybrid, and the first to offer a hybrid vehicle that is propelled solely on electrically generated power. Featuring an electric-only range of 40 miles, a small gasoline engine is on board only to charge the batteries on longer trips, but cannot move the car on its own like the engines in traditional hybrid vehicles.”
——————————————————————–
Seems that fox has their facts wrong they say: “[Gasoline engine]…cannot move the car on its own like the engines in traditional hybrid vehicles.”
Just to dispel any fears on this site, that’s not true. The ICE can move the car on it’s own, but it doesn’t do it directly.
~Bob2Chiv
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:32 pm
From what I understand about the production Volt, GM is building it with improvements in mind. Problem is everyone wants a different improvement. In an effort to satisfy everyone’s desires, GM is allowing you to rub the exhaust pipe for a total of three times. Each time you will be granted one wish for a total of three wishes. One wish that is not allowed is to be granted more than 3 wishes. Sorry, but they had to place some kind of limit on that or you would be in an endless cycle of wishing for two things and then on the last wish wishing for another three wishes.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:33 pm
#68 DonC Says: “Say you want to do a trip — with a long flat and then a steep climb at the end — at 80 mph the entire way. Jackson’s suggested mode would work. The standard mode wouldn’t. Both modes would satisfy your needs. Only one would satisfy your desires.”
————————————————————————————–
I have no desire to kill myself. The vast majority of roads with constant 6% grades are curvy. You can’t drive a constant 80 mph and stay on the road.
As I said before, there is only 1 road that I know of where you can drive a constant 80 mph up a 6% grade, and that is going west out of Death Valley, CA.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
#104 Dave G says:
“I have no desire to kill myself. The vast majority of roads with constant 6% grades are curvy. You can’t drive a constant 80 mph and stay on the road.
As I said before, there is only 1 road that I know of where you can drive a constant 80 mph up a 6% grade, and that is going west out of Death Valley, CA.”
——————————————————————-
Amen to that! Not that I drive up mountains a lot (Ohio resident) but if I did, I’d be more than content to poke up that windy, curvy, wet and muddy/sloshy slope at 65 max… which happens to probably be the speed limit anyway. I’d probably go up it at less than that.
!
I almost forgot: Go VOLT!
~Bob2Chiv
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I’ll be sure to let you know what happens when I get mine ! Home to the base of Pikes Peak is just about 40 miles.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Addendum to pmy post #103
Don’t expect a Genie to appear when you rub the exhaust pipe. With union wage scales what they are now for the Genie Union, GM could not afford all of the genies they would have to contract for. So, all you will get is a computerized voice greeting you and telling you to make a wish or to say your wishes have all been used. Damn union. Here I was hoping for a Barbara Eden genie. Now that would be worth the $45,000 price tag.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Wow, given the posts over the past two days, the group is really sticking to the topic well! It won’t be TOOOO long until we “crack” 2 years.
Be well,
THM (Tag)
Let’s just get the Volt’s wheels on the road!
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
The 1.2L ICE is capable of 80 HP (59 kW) @ 5600 rpm, so as a first approximation, is a pretty good match to the 50 kW generator. The generator could in theory be upgraded to 59 kW to better match the selected ICE for a little more oomph at the wheels when the battery is depleted, for such a scenario as an extended grade, but I suspect the generator supplier and model has already been sourced for the Volt.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:45 pm
#96 Aspherical Says: “For those who live in cities near mountainous regions, we need to know if the Volt is a second car or can be a primary car.”
————————————————————————————–
The only issue raised with the Volt is racing up steep hills at 80 mph. If you drive the speed limit or even a little more, you’ll never run out of max power.
So the Volt will be fine in the mountains at reasonable speeds. In fact, it will probably accelerate better up hills than a regular car with similar horsepower.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
#84 cautious fan says “I’ve liked a “performance mode” for some time now. It’s simple and solves several problems including long hills, aggressive drivers, small trailers, car-top carriers, etc. I don’t think it’s superfluous. Its a real world solution to real world problems. To reiterate, when in performance mode, the entire battery is treated as reserve, the ICE runs all the time. Performance mode should be off by default, and turned on each time the car is started, like the O/D OFF for transmissions. ECON Mode should be standard. Honestly, I’ll be suprised if this function isn’t on the Volt. I think it makes complete sense.”
I agree with your points. The main objections, which are good ones, are not that performance mode is difficult or that it would not benefit performance for people traveling over mountains. Rather, the objections have to do with the warranty, and the fact that the battery can be recharged only so many times throughout its guaranteed lifetime. To address these objections, maybe it would be better to limit the warranty, rather than limit the car.
That is, a traditional warranty has been “3 years or 36,000 miles.” Maybe the battery warranty should be “10 years or 36,000 full charges”, where the latter is tracked by the car, just as the mileage is tracked by the car.
Such a limit will allow the warranty to more evenly apply to everyone, not just people using “performance mode.” For example, I think a larger group may be people (like me) who can recharge at work as well as at home, and discharge most of the AER on each trip, thereby taking advantage of 2 charge cycles per day. The total number of charge cycles likely will be easy to tabulate, as the car has to test the limits in the course of normal operation, so it should be a straightforward item in the hardware and software with no new complicaitons.
Such a limited warranty then will also allow people who wish to do so to get the full performance from their Volt that it is capable of providing. The choice can be with the owner. It is a choice I would like to have.
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
#110 Dave G says:
“So the Volt will be fine in the mountains at reasonable speeds. In fact, it will probably accelerate better up hills than a regular car with similar horsepower”
—————————————————————–
This is because of the increased torque provided by electric motors!
Go VOLT!
(okay, okay; I’ll shut it for now unless someone responds to my posts… I guess I got overexcited!)
~Bob2Chiv
September 2nd, 2008 at 2:56 pm
I’m sure the lithium ion battery companies have been rigorously testing their products for climbing hills for a year or two at least. I bet GM is pretty confident about how the Volt will perform on steep mountains. I’m sure the Volt will get the job done. Maybe not as well as a 350 horsepower Lexus or Corvette, but it’ll probably do fine. They’ll tweak it until it does at least as well on mountains as your average 4 cylinder regular car.
Check out this LG Chem electric car climbing Pike’s Peak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgJdey87R2s&feature=related
LG Chem might be the main supplier of batteries for the Volt. They haven’t announced it yet. It could be A123 Systems. GM will probably put a lot of soundproofing on the Volt and it will be MUCH quieter. You might barely hear the electric motor running. No siren blaring either like on this LG Chem car. I guess they were concerned about some hiker not hearing it or something.
http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/pikes_peak_ER3.html
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
“Featuring an electric-only range of 40 miles, a small gasoline engine is on board only to charge the batteries on longer trips, but cannot move the car on its own like the engines in traditional hybrid vehicles.”
Remember that a news report isn’t an engineering document. The point that is trying to be made here is that there is no mechanical linkage from the motor to wheels like there is in a hybrid. That the ICE tries to maintain the current charge level ( ~35%) rather than charging up the battery to full, allows for different interpretation on whether it is powering the wheels on continuously recharging the battery at the same rate as the drain.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:14 pm
#113 GM Volt Fan
Thanks for the links!
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
I like this question. The Volt would have some problems making it to the top, but so would your typical ICE. A lot of vehicles boil over on high mountains with steep inclines. One of the worst roads I’ve been on is highway 14A just east of Cody, Wyoming (Big Horn Mountain Range). If a Volt can make it up those 20 miles it can go anywhere.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
As long as the Volt can go up Eisenhower pass when at the depletion point at a reasonable speed (near the 65MPH speed limit), this is great!
What is essential is to avoid bogging down to well under the speed limit (like 40 or so). This is frustrating for the bogged down driver, upsetting to the other traffic struggling to get around the underpowered car and bad for marketing when people see a car with the big VOLT name written on the back slogging up the hills.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
#93 DG
What the hell is wrong with you people why would you want to drive 70 MPH uphill on a mountain that most likely has wet or snowy conditions?
———
You should have just stopped there….hilarity! And quite possible the most amusing one line retort as of yet here on the site…or maybe it’s just me.
+1
Side Note: US auto sales for August are released tomorrow at 1600 GMT (1200 EDT)
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
#96 Aspherical Says:
“I strongly disagree this conversation is pointless. For those who live in cities near mountainous regions, we need to know if the Volt is a second car or can be a primary car. If the Volt performs just as well as current gasoline cars up the mountains, GM will have more potential buyers which in effect will make the Volt cheaper. Otherwise, GM is limiting the Volt to flat states that are at sea level and the Volt will be more of a “niche” car for those with $40k to $50 to burn.”
————————————————————–
Are you being serious when you say that? Dude there has been 113 post so far either worrying about a hill climb, that at most represent maybe 1% of all of the driving done in the volt ever. Maybe you drive pike’s peak every day, but the other 99.9% of us don’t.
The other half of the 113 post all pretty much say the same thing: “are you serious who cares if you can only do 55mph, just build the Volt”.
I have been a memeber of this site for 2 years and was at Volt Nation in, NY. I have actually met Launaker, Lutz, Farah, and the other big wigs that were there.
I have to say the amount of time between little bits of info has really worn on this site, not much to talk about, so were making up worst case scenarios and disecting how the car will perform.
I’d rather we spend a whole day posting our individual days itineraries and details about how were going to try and use the least gas possible. Or maybe all the different places we have found to plug our cars in at.
Do me a favor though don’t act like the Volts performance on pike’s peak will actually affect sales buy any amount signifigant enough to even show on GM’s radar.
I’ll let Farah tell you himself:
“There are limitations to the E-REV concept, but the people who will experience a problem with this are far and few between.”
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I agree with others. It would be nice to allow knowledgeable drivers to flick the “keep the genset running so I have maximum battery possible” switch. Either that, or GM needs to open their drivetrain algorithm source so people can make their own hacks for this vehicle.
I would really like to see a hackable Volt. It would open the Volts consumer base to a whole new subculture of automotive modder geeks that the automotive world has not seen since the Carputer.
I have never driven up a Pikes Peak hill, but I do want more control over my car in certain circumstances.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
You have to admit one thing that will be really cool about hill climbing in a Volt is the car should be just as quiet as regular driving and NO Downshifting. That noice you hear in a traditional car the momment you can tell your transmission is about to kick down a gear while RPMs rev up will be a thing of the past. The ICE may throttle up to it’s max level, but I bet GM will keep it pretty quiet at that RPM.
It will be an odd feeling on moderate hill climbs to push the pedel and power up without hearing your engine load change. If your on the interstate in rolling hills I’m guessing your battery will fluctate from 30% to 25%, but the car will just Hum along… Hills won’t matter.
Go Volt
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:39 pm
#119 JonP
You would care about this issue if at least went into the foothills at least once a week. I’m not talking about driving to Pikes Pike. I am not buying this car if Mopeds can pass me on a 6% climb, so, yes, it will affect sales in mountainous states if the Volt cannot perform as well as gasoline cars. I don’t care who you know or what they have to say about my daily itinerary. Don’t comment on this post if you are going to be so negative and belligerent.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Hey, everybody. Why so tense? Maybe try decaffeinated coffee (It’s a long way to the showroom; who among us will have any sanity left by then, if we don’t calm down?)
I know!
We can talk about …
HYDROGEN!!!
… just kidding.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
You buy a Volt. You’re gonna get what you get. All is pretty much set in stone at this point. I just hope I can buy a BEV version at some point. Two Volt, one E-REV the other BEV for those times when 100 miles would do me which is most of the time.
Take Care,
TED
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
JonP #119
If we could get a little more substance from GM to chew over the conversation would be more to your liking. But until then relax and go with the flo. In their own good time GM will anoint us the specs for the Volt. In the meantime keep your chin up.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:07 pm
#123 Jackson, #124 Ted in Fort Myers, #125 Ed:
Right.
It doesn’t look like there are going to be enough Volts to supply all of the potential buyers for the first several years anyway. So before we can realistically expect to get our hands on one they will become a pretty well known quantitiy - tested to death by the car magazines, CR, and all of the news outlets following the soap opera. If there are any deal breaker flaws in the product, I’m confident, or maybe even disappointed, that we will have plenty of time to make the right decision.
Having said that, I offerd a long time ago to put down a deposit, as have many others here. A lot of people here are willing to take a big risk to help GM to survive, and to help to push the technology of energy independence. Gome on GM, come up with a program for us.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:07 pm
#122 Aspherical
“Don’t comment on this post if you are going to be so negative and belligerent”
I’m the one being negative, is that right? Your upset because just like every other car in the world the Volt’s performance will be degraded in your “extreme driving” conditions. Maybe the Volt isn’t for you…..
Beligerent, do you even know what that means, is it even possible to be beligerent via a message board? Am i belligerent simply because i find your concerns to be miniscule in the big picture of the Volt.
My point is this, if your going to make statements about GM’s ability to successfully sell the Volt, based on it’s ability to handle severe grades keep them personal.
Like:
I’ll have to wait and test drive the Volt because unlike the majority of other drivers, my daily drives include severe driving conditions. Just like on every other car i’ve ever owned i have to prioritze it’s ability to handle steep grades. I really like the volt , and hope it can handle the grade, if not i may not be able to buy one as my primary vehicle.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:14 pm
#82 Statik:
Well not to restate the obvious, but a cautionary tale if ever I saw one. To the SSR, the GTO, and the Hummer we can now add the Sky/Solstice. What’s next? Very