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.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008 at 6:35 am and is filed under Engineering, Performance. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
-1
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:55 am)I agree with Mr. Farah. This is a minor inconvenience that most owners will never encounter.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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…
+1
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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/
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
+1
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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”
+1
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:58 am)Thanks Lyle, clear questions and clear answers.The Volt becomes more real day after day.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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).
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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…”
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:12 am)will it be awd I Want AWD !!!!!!!!!!!!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:15 am)Argh, where’d the edit function go?
Tag
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
-1
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
-1
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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!
+1
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.)
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:21 am)Why would even possibly think of taking a hill at >60mph?
Just wondering.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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)?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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…
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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…
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:42 am)Dave G
Has Atkinson Cycle been confirmed for the Volt, or is it just a persistent (though likely) assumption?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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…
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:16 am)I’ll still take one.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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 !
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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).
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:39 am)my god…getting everything we want is why we are in trouble…can’t we understand limitations.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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/
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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…
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
______________________________________________________
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (3:14 pm)#113 GM Volt Fan
Thanks for the links!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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)
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.”
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (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 likely the Camaro, IMHO.
We have heard a lot here about development costs. I wonder how far the development costs of all of the above would have gone toward developing the Volt? Meanwhile stupid Toyota develops the Prius, which any good GM product planner knew would never sell.
I’m glad I took your advice not to buy any stock.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (4:14 pm)I’ll start first:
I found an outdoor plug on the side of the building at work last week. I figure if i run an extension cord down the curb and park in the 1st spot on that side of the building, i’ll be able to plug in without causing a fire hazard. (extension cord laid across walkway)
I don’t think anyone will say anything, i’m good friends with the operations guy, and honestly what are we talking about .60 cents a day. Not to mention who is going to say anything to the guy whose trying to help the country get off foreign oil, improve our national security, and improve our childrens air quality. Right?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (4:15 pm)#113 GM Volt Fan – Powering a 4000 pound car uphill takes 4 times the power that it takes to move a 1000 pound car up the same hill. The LG Chem car is just a fiberglass shell.
#111 RB – Actually what you are calling a performance mode (misnomer) would extend battery life by decreasing the discharge rate to well above 1C, not shorten it. Whether your two charges a day will be a problem depends on the discharge rate, which in turn depends on what the drive is and how you drive. The charge rate is as important as the number of cycles.
#110 Dave G – “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.”
You run out of max power as soon as the gen-set kicks in.
#104 Dave G – ” 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.”
It doesn’t have to be a 6% grade. The gen-set can give you 50 kW. Going 80 mph is going to use 33-34 kW. That leaves 15 kW for a climb. Without the battery pack assist you’re looking at less than a 2.5% grade. A grade of that magnitude is not uncommon in many parts of the country.
#93 DG – not all passes are snowy. Grapevine north out of LA and the pass east out of San Diego are 5000 foot climbs — which means they’d exhaust the pack — and those passes are rarely inclement. Mostly warm and dry.
You can see this on this topo web site, which is pretty cool:
http://www.topocoding.com/
Sep 2nd, 2008 (4:30 pm)#127 JonP
“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.”
Wow. Again with the personal attacks. Calm down man. We are here to show our enthusiasm for the Volt, not to attack our comments. Maybe you should relax by driving up to Pike’s Peak and enjoying the view.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (4:34 pm)Aspherical #131.
Do what I do. Ignore anything he has to say. I was skipping over his comments until I saw you having an argument with him. A few days ago he went on an rampage and attack many people that have been here from the beginning. Just ignore him Aspherical. He sounds like a complete A$$.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (4:43 pm)JonP, please calm down. Most of the time you provide good discourse and interesting comments. Some days it just seems like you “get up on the wrong side of the bed.” I noticed that your first post today had an edge to it.
And for the rest of you out there, let’s all stop telling other posters to go away. The real trolls will get tired and disappear, and the rest will continue at their level of advocacy and interest. Thanks.
Post #127 is much calmer. Thanks.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (4:56 pm)Statik — Thanks for the update on the demise of the Saturn Sky. I just passed one for sale in the shopping mall I’m in. It is a beautiful sports car, and reasonably priced. I’m sorry to see it go.
More to the point, the parallels with the Volt are scary.
I’m trying to be optimistic and hope that GM is just focusing its limited financial resources on the most promising products.
On the topic of financial resoures, what’s the latest on GM’s financial picture?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (5:02 pm)#130 DonC says “Actually what you are calling a performance mode (misnomer)…”
It is performance when you go up fast (with battery charged) as compared to slow. The same extends to all loaded conditions.
I’m in marketing mode in suggesting that nomenclature. I agree it is not entirely accurate, but I thought “performance mode” sounded better and was better than “mountain mode”. Having a well charged battery allows the full drive motor’s power to be engaged. That is, you can a performance benefit in many situations where no mountain is involved.
My main thought is that it is to the benefit of GM to allow the car to be all that it can be, and it will be an easy move to allow the ICE to recharge the battery to a higher level.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (5:29 pm)#128 noel park
“#82 Statik:….I’m glad I took your advice not to buy any stock.”
———-
I would never suggest anyone here buy OR short GM. I’ve said it before, but never invest in anything you have a emotional attachment to…good or bad. It just makes things too cloudy…and the market is tough enough to read without adding something else.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (5:38 pm)#130 DonC Says: “You run out of max power as soon as the gen-set kicks in.”
————————————————————————————-
I don’t think this is true.
Unless the battery is fully discharged, it is capable of supplying the full 120kW of power to the electric motor. The ICE gen-set kicks in when the battery is at 30% charge, which corresponds to 4.8 kWH. So there is plenty of buffer in the battery to supply max power when the gen-set kicks in. Since the ICE gen-set maintains the 30% charge level, you always have max power, except in extreme cases (e.g. 80 mph up a 6% grade for 24 miles straight).
Bottom line: Unless you are driving like a madman, you will always have max power.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (5:40 pm)Maybe they can use the GPS data for the route to top off the battery before a big hill?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (5:48 pm)#134 RB
Statik — Thanks for the update on the demise of the Saturn Sky. I just passed one for sale in the shopping mall I’m in. It is a beautiful sports car, and reasonably priced. I’m sorry to see it go.
More to the point, the parallels with the Volt are scary.
I’m trying to be optimistic and hope that GM is just focusing its limited financial resources on the most promising products.
On the topic of financial resoures, what’s the latest on GM’s financial picture?
———-
Your trying to get me into trouble aren’t you? Hehe. I won’t be tricked so easily!
Actually, there is very little out there right now. More than likely with the 100 year ‘shin-dig’ coming up everything is in lockdown.
As I mentioned before, we get the August auto sales tomorrow.
Originally, (and much like July), we were looking at probably a 25-30% drop off year over year. In July, we got the return of cash back and 0% financing which brought the numbers back decently, at what bottom line cost…yet to be determined.
August problems were going to be compounded by not only coming off the back off deep discounts and generally poor economic conditions, but the catastrophic (only word I can use that seems fitting) loss of leasing vehicles from GMAC…however, GM went to the well again and put ‘employee pricing’ ON TOP of the rebates and 0% offerings, so it will be interesting to see how it works out.
I would class anything around -15% as a ‘success’ mitigating the lease disaster, 20% is probably where it will come in…25% is nightmare time.
Regardless of how the numbers come in, two months of MASSIVE discounts=really bad financials at the end of the quarter.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:02 pm)Although it relates primarily to the previous topic on the “E-Flex Tacuma”, climbing Pike’s Peak also certainly involves performance, and I want to be sure Andrew Farah (who will hopefully read this thread) sees what I’ve just posted* in a blog to Jill Lajdziak, the Division General Manager of Saturn…..
“Thanks again for this opportunity to offer suggestions! I’m sure you’ll recall my 2-page ‘dissertation’ from earlier this year urging Saturn/GM to consider offering a version of the forthcoming Plug-in Vue with a significantly larger battery that would allow a large increase in its 10-mile EV-only range. By coincidence, I just today discovered a recent comment by Larry Nitz (GM’s Executive Director of Powertrain Engrng) that the Plug-in Vue’s electric range will be 20 miles, not 10! …..SUPERB!!! This a GIANT step in the right direction —now if an option for a 40-mile electric-only range could also be offered, that version of the Plug-in Vue would meet 78% of all owner’s daily driving needs without using any gasoline! (The comment from Larry Nitz is from a recent GM video at http://blog.gmnext.com/?p=246)
Also by coincidence today, I became aware of a GM news item saying the Kappa II platform (that Saturn’s beloved Sky roadster is built on) will be discontinued (this is at….. http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/gmi-exclusive-kappa-ii-platform-axed-r-d-68685/). My suggestion is that a replacement sport roadster be developed using the Plug-in Vue drive train (with a 40mile battery), the Vue’s 2-Mode hybrid system and the V6 from the Cadillac CTS. This car would be a “Tesla beater” at half Tesla’s price and could also be the next big step beyond Chevy’s Volt in terms of both styling & performance!”
*Posted on 9/2/08 on a blog to Saturn’s GM at http://www.imsaturn.com
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:02 pm)#139 Statik — Thanks. I’ll be watching tomorrow.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:03 pm)131 Aspherical and 132 Amul – I cannot believe all the people near the Appalachian Mountains (encompassing areas in the states of Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, and North Carolina, as well as sometimes extending as far south as northern Georgia and western South Carolina, as far north as Pennsylvania, and as far west as southern Ohio) are just not significant to JonP, and he would want them to buy another type or car. And that’s only the east coast !
You know I want to use the ICE to fully charge the Volt’s battery. I’ve been told that I should go away and buy another type of car, just like you Aspherical. DON’T YOU BELIEVE IT ! Just because certain posters have been here longer, that doesn’t make them High Lord of all postings, it just means they get too self-important now and then. It’s hard, waiting for a car that’s two years away. People get irate, they get upset, and they lash out at anything they perceive as holding up the Volt’s production. “if you don’t live on flat land, get another type of car” – we know statements like this are nonsense, and you should take these statements as pure frustration. We want to make the Volt the best car it can be, to appeal to the most people it can – even if they live in Wyoming. (oh, the horror, LOL).
GM monitors these posts, and the Volt isn’t set in stone quite yet. Mountain performance is a very valid question, much more so than my issue. I personally destroyed a 84 Lincoln Town Car’s transmission in the mountains of West Virginia. Mountain’s are tough on any car. We’re concerned, and GM is listening to these concerns.
—————————————————————————–
BTW, exactly HOW FAST, Mr Farah, would the Volt climb a 6 percent grade with a totally exhausted battery, hmmmmm ? Not “acceptably”, not “adequately”, EXACTLY how fast in miles per hour, Mr Farah? Can the electric motor handle that much constant demand without burning out, Mr Farah ? Lyle, don’t let Mr Farah give us more “kinda, sorta” answers. If he doesn’t know, he should simply say so.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:13 pm)#142 The Grump —- Wants people in Wyoming to buy a Volt.
Grump! Wyoming? Now you have really gone too far.
(Actually a beautiful state, of course.)
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:48 pm)Well I do not like other people in control of my life. I would like a switch that I could set so if I was just running around town for the day the car would charge in the normal mode. On the other hand if I am going to be on the road for a few days I would like the battery to charge to the “full” level. I would then have the reserve when I needed it. JMHO
Take Care
Arch
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:49 pm)#142 The Grump Says: “You know I want to use the ICE to fully charge the Volt’s battery.”
————————————————————————————–
I still have no idea why anyone would want to do that. It wears out the battery and decreases the miles per gallon. Unless you drive a constant 80 mph up steep long hills (extremely dangerous), you’ll always have max power available. Where’s the benefit?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (6:52 pm)#144 Arch Says: “On the other hand if I am going to be on the road for a few days I would like the battery to charge to the “full” level. I would then have the reserve when I needed it.”
————————————————————————————-
30% SOC is 4.8 kWH. That’s a huge reserve. Unless you drive a constant 80 mph up steep long hills (extremely dangerous), you’ll always have max power available.
I think people on this thread are perceiving a problem where there is none.
Andrew Farah ends the interview by saying: “There are limitations to the E-REV concept, but the people who will experience a problem with this are far and few between.”
Interpretation: Unless you drive like a madman, you won’t have any problems.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:13 pm)146 Dave
I like to go camping and fishing. I have paid for a big battery. I would love to have a small AC unit in my tent. I would also like to have a nice big light for night fishing. I have paid for all of this but I can not use it because GM thinks I do not need that. It just seems a little silly.
Let me decide how I want to use the car. I would hate to pay for all of this and then find I can only use one third of it. I will bet somebody will hack the system so I can do this. What about if there is a BIG storm headed my way and I want to power my house for the night? Are you going to tell me I can not use what I have paid for in that way?
Take Care
Arch
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:15 pm)Suppose the ICE charged the battery to full. Now suppose that you regularly go on a 60 mile trip. You plug in your Volt, drive for 40 miles and then the ICE powers the motor and charges the battery. When you get home you are at full charge. There is no point in plugging in. The next day you do it again. drive 40, drive/charge 20. After awhile you have driven hundreds of miles without ever plugging your car in and thus have powered your car entirely on gas.
The idea behind having the ICE only maintain the charge at 35% is so that you can maximize the benefit of plugging in your car. When you get home after any trip of 40 miles or more, the car will need a full charge.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:17 pm)Jackson Says: “Has Atkinson Cycle been confirmed for the Volt, or is it just a persistent (though likely) assumption?”
————————————————————————————-
Well, GM has stated the 1.4L engine will deliver around 70 horsepower. An Otto engine would be way more than that, so it can’t be Otto. Also, it can’t be a Miller cycle since there’s no turbo. So process of elimination says its Atkinson.
The Prius definitely uses Atkinson. That’s how they get 48 MPG out of a 1.5L engine.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:24 pm)I notice Fox News is claiming a scoop about the Chevy Volt photos that we saw a few days back, heh heh
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:28 pm)#145 Dave G – #142 The Grump Says: “You know I want to use the ICE to fully charge the Volt’s battery.”
————————————————————————————–
I still have no idea why anyone would want to do that. It wears out the battery and decreases the miles per gallon. Unless you drive a constant 80 mph up steep long hills (extremely dangerous), you’ll always have max power available. Where’s the benefit?
——————————————————————–
The benefit ? Try getting permission to run an extension cord from your third floor room in the Marriot, down the stairwell, through the lobby, out the door, across the parking lot, just to recharge your Volt ! Two guesses what the manager’s answer would be.
People don’t always go home. A power outlet is not always available. It would be nice to have the option to recharge the Volt on the road using the ICE. You wouldn’t use the option. I might use it now and again. But it’s always nice to have an option. It’s called freedom. If you still don’t understand, I can’t explain it any better. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:33 pm)I wouldn’t look forward to having any “modes”. The control logic for this thing is going to be very complex. I would expect the parameters that exist to control the Motor, the ICE, the battery charge and discharge, and the regenerative braking, could number in the hundreds. Do you really want to be able to change the scaling function of the second derivative for the right front wheel while breaking down hill?
I’ve done some simple control programming and even the simplest systems have many constants. For example, the standard PID control loop to have a motor accelerate from one speed to another has a proportional component, and integral component and a derivative component. Each of these components has a scaling constant and these constants have to be different for different performance characteristics. PID controllers are considered the most simple control algorithms. The really good algorithms are much more complex.
Let me give you a hypothetical example. Remember, I have no idea if the Volt actually behaves this way. But it is not inconceivable that it does. You could have completely different control code for braking downhill while turning right than you do for braking downhill while turning left. That’s because we drive on the right in the US and the arcs for right turns are tighter than for left turns.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:35 pm)maharguitar #148
I don’t believe the volt charges the way you think it does or have I missed something along the way ? It’s my understanding that the ICE driven generator provides enough current to operate the vehicle with a 30% battery charge, but not enough to restore the battery to 80% which would take hours of driving anyhow. The only way to charge the battery to 80% is to plug it in. Am I right or wrong ?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:37 pm)JonP
I want to know how my Volt will perform when I go to the Sierras. A lot of Californians visit the Sierras. People also visit the Rockies, Poconos, Appalachians, etc. The mountains are a favorite destination for many, many people. Auto companies consider mountain driving when designing a car. Please don’t think the world revolves around you.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:39 pm)#147 Arch Says: “I like to go camping and fishing… I would love to have a small AC unit in my tent. I would also like to have a nice big light for night fishing.”
————————————————————————————-
Yes, I would also like to use the Volt for generating 110v AC power for remote locations or home backup.
But note that the charge port for the Volt works in only one direction, from the grid to the Volt’s battery, so that won’t work. Also keep in mind that the Volt’s battery is 300-400 volts DC. There are no inverters available for this. Besides, at 300-400 volts DC, the battery power would not be accessible for safety reasons.
So GM would have to build a special inverter into the car to provide 110v power .
I’ve asked GM previously to provide 110v AC convenience outlets for the Volt, at least as an option. 15 amps would do the trick. When the battery drops below 30% SOC, the gas engine would turn on provide power to the 110v outlets. In other words, the Volt would make the perfect gas generator!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:48 pm)#151 The Grump
If you buy the Volt, you can replace the control software with anything you want but don’t expect to have a warranty.
Suppose, and I think that this is quite likely, that the driving characteristics such as speed and acceleration are the same when in all electric mode and ICE mode. Except for the sound of the ICE running, you can’t tell the difference. Why would you care if the ICE charged the battery to full or not? After the first 40 miles all of the energy for moving the car is coming from the gasoline. If the ICE charges the battery to full while driving than shut off for 40 miles than repeats the cycle, you consume the same amount of gas over the whole trip except that you would be much more likely to have a full charge when you finally got to a plug.
The amount of gas you need to drive and charge to full is going to be much more than what you need to just maintain the current charge level. I suspect that you won’t get all of that back during your next 40 mile all electric cycle.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:48 pm)#130 DonC says “The charge rate is as important as the number of cycles.”
I didn’t know that. Thank you.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:49 pm)Someone has probably done a similar analysis by now but I started earlier in the day and figured it was worth posting.
Forget about Pikes Peak. Anybody that has actually driven up Pikes peak know that you can’t go fast enough for average energy draw to be an issue. Eisenhower pass is at 11,158 ft and is about 60 miles west of Denver which is at 5280 ft., which is an average of 1.9% grade. There are sections with a much higher grade it doesn’t average 6% for any significant stretch. So lets examine what the energy demands are expected for this type of hypothetical stretch of highway.
Assumptions: 4000lbs total car weight, 6000ft change in elevation, 12KW power draw on level ground at 55mph
Ave 6% slope:
Total change in PE = m*g*h = 9.03 KWh
Total distance = 18 miles
Travel time = 19.6 minutes (@55mph)
Total Energy use = 12.95 KWh
Max Energy from generator (50KW) = 16.33 KWh
Energy required from battery = 0 KWh
Now assume 6% slope and 20KW require for level ground at 70 mph:
Travel time: 15.42 minutes (@70mph)
Total Energy Use = 14.17
Max Energy from generator (50KW) = 12.85 KWh
Energy required from battery = 1.32 KWh
Unless I’m missing something (perhaps 50KW constant is not feasible), the Volt should little problem with mountain driving. Only under the most extreme climbs (long climbs at highway speeds are most extreme for the Volt) could there be performance limitations and these are only expected for those wishing to drive greater than 70 mph.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:49 pm)#151 The Grump Says: “The benefit ? Try getting permission to run an extension cord from your third floor room in the Marriot, down the stairwell, through the lobby, out the door, across the parking lot, just to recharge your Volt ! Two guesses what the manager’s answer would be.”
————————————————————————————-
I still don’t understand the benefit. If you can’t plug in, you can always run on gas. Why is having a full charge at the beginning of the day a benefit?
You’ll end up using gas either way. In fact, you’ll probably use 10% more gas to have the ICE charge the battery, since this loses efficiency in the electrical / chemical conversions. You’ll also wear out the battery sooner, due to the increased charge/discharge cycles.
To be clear, I’m not saying that one size fits all. It’s just that I honestly can’t see why anyone would have a reason to do this.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:54 pm)148 maharguitar – Suppose the ICE charged the battery to full. Now suppose that you regularly go on a 60 mile trip. You plug in your Volt, drive for 40 miles and then the ICE powers the motor and charges the battery. When you get home you are at full charge. There is no point in plugging in.
——————————————————————————–
The Volt’s battery, at full charge, would last 40 minutes or less during highway travel (one mile per minute) before the ICE kicked in. 60 miles is only a one hour trip. How about a five hour trip to Norfolk, VA? An eight hour trip to Chapel Hill, NC ? A four hour trip to Pittsburgh, PA ? A twelve hour trip to Louisville, KY ? Or an eighteen hour trip to Orlando, FL ? (All are trips I have made, BTW) Now we’re talking distance. As I said in 151, will Marriot allow you to run an extension cord from your room to your Volt ? Even if you ask nicely ?
18 hours. 18 hours of the ICE turning on and off, on and off, over and over and over and over and over….just to keep the SOC at 30 or 35 percent ? I’d rather charge the battery, then have 40 minutes of peace and quiet – the ICE would cycle on and off less often during the trip.
Go “Mountain Mode Volt”, go !
I won’t use it anywhere but Pikes Peak – promise ! (hehehehe)
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:55 pm)#153 Ed M
I think you misunderstood my post. I know that the Volt only maintains the 35% charge level. My point was to consider the situation where it behaved like some people want it to which was to charge the battery to full. Hence the first word of my post was “Suppose”. I then went on to describe the negative consequences of full charging battery from the ICE.
My point was to illustrate why I think the proper behavior for the Volt is to do what they claim and to only maintain the battery charge level and use most of the ICE power to drive the motor.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (7:57 pm)#156 maharguitar Says: “If the ICE charges the battery to full while driving than shut off for 40 miles than repeats the cycle, you consume the same amount of gas over the whole trip …”
————————————————————————————-
I agree with what you’re saying, but note that charging and discharging the battery introduces efficiency losses due to the extra electrical / chemical conversions. So constantly charging and discharging the battery would probably use 10% more gas. It would also wear out the battery faster.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:04 pm)#156 marharguitar, and #145 Dave G
A reason that I might want to be able to fully charge the battery is the Allegany mountains. I drive from one side to the other. There are long steep sections of the road. I would like to reach each one with a fully charged battery so that I can use full power from the traction motor going up the steep part of the road.
That is, I’d like to start the climb, which is several miles in length, at 80% SOC, not at 30%. I want to go up the mountains at a speed comparable to other traffic. Perhaps I can without having a fully charged battery, but I know I cannot run my traction motor at full power without charge coming from the battery. It is my car. There is not some complex software issue, but rather control of when charging stops. I understand the warranty aspect and agree that warranty claims should take into account use.
So that’s why I would like to do it. Maybe if I had that capability, I would never use it. Maybe it will turn out I don’t really need it. But as the car is fully equipped to recharge the battery, why should GM arbitrarily prevent me from doing that? Please note that Farah himself started this discussion by postulating that one begins at the foot of the mountain in the 40th mile.
Whatever, I’ll probably still buy a Volt anyway, if, as, when available. But a simple change in the control plan would make the Volt a much more versatile machine.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:05 pm)#160 The Grump Says: “18 hours. 18 hours of the ICE turning on and off, on and off, over and over and over and over and over….just to keep the SOC at 30 or 35 percent ? I’d rather charge the battery, then have 40 minutes of peace and quiet – the ICE would cycle on and off less often during the trip.”
————————————————————————————-
The ICE does not typically cycle on and off, especially at highway speeds. Rather,the Volt constantly varies the ICE output to match the power consumed by the electric motor. In other words, the battery rarely charges or discharges when the ICE is on. Most of the electricity goes directly from the ICE generator to the electric motor, bypassing the battery. The only time the battery gets involved is when you floor it or race up a steep hill.
Now, if you are stopped in traffic, or at a red light, the ICE will probably cycle off. That’s what you want in this case.
Also, I still have no idea what you mean by your Marriott extension cord scenario. Obviously, there will be times when you can’t plug in, but that’s what the gas engine is for.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:13 pm)#89 DonC
I can think of several common situations when I’d like to be able to keep the battery at 80%.
1 – I’m travelling with my family and put on a car-top carrier. Drag doubles. I still have to climb hills, pass, run the A/C.
2 – I put several bikes on a roof rack, some gear in the back and go hit some trails. Some freeway driving, some steep hills at the end.
3 – I use my car to pull a small trailer when I’m doing construction projects. Some hills.
4 – I’ve driven through CO several times with my family and rode the passes at 70, just like everyone else, after driving forever though Kansas.
I don’t think these scenarios are outrageous. They’re common. I think a separate mode, whatever it’s called, that keeps plenty of reserve is necessary. I don’t want the Volt to get the same rep as diesels. This set diesels back 20 years in the US. And I don’t think Americans want a pure commuter car else they’d drive those tiny 3 wheel super cars. They want a car they can use, not one that works M-F but underperforms on weekend trips.
Others have said the concept better than I. Move the CDP from 30 to 80, or maybe just “maintain charge”. Call it power mode, performance mode, torque mode, whatever. Just like the O/D off button in trucks, by default it’s off so people won’t accidentally keep it on. This is a simple idea that takes care of many weekend situations.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:15 pm)#158 Koz Nice analysis. thanks.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:16 pm)#163 RB Says: “I’d like to start the climb, which is several miles in length, at 80% SOC, not at 30%. I want to go up the mountains at a speed comparable to other traffic. Perhaps I can without having a fully charged battery,”
————————————————————————————-
According the the figures given by Andrew Farah in this article, the Volt will be able to climb a 6% grade at 80 mph for 24 miles before the 30% SOC in the battery runs out (see my post #44 for details).
How many mountain passes allow you do drive 80 mph. How many last 24 miles at a constant 6% grade. Let’s not over-design this thing!
Andrew Farah is an engineer. He is telling you the limits of the car. He then states that the people who will see these limits are few and far between. This is an understatement.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:23 pm)#165 Cautious Fan Says: “I don’t think these scenarios are outrageous.”
————————————————————————————-
No, they are not, but they would not drain the battery significantly either.
Remember what Andrew Farah said: 80 mph up a 6% grade would draw only 10-15Kw from the battery. At that rate, it would take 24 miles to completely drain the battery. Remember that a 6% grade is STEEP. It won’t last that long. In addition, going 80 mph up a 6% grade is likely to get you killed. 6% grades are typically very curvy.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:37 pm)# 149 Dave G & Jackson @ 60:
The 1.4 L Otto delivers 90 HP (66 kW), so Atkinson cycle at 70 HP (52 kW) is a very good assumption, and a near perfect match to the spec. 50 kW generator.
Can’t believe I’ve been gone long enough to mistake the engine size, considering the 1.4L aspirated 4 cylinder brouhaha vs. the 1.0L turbo 3 at the time. Senior moment, no doubt.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (8:46 pm)#167 Dave G said “According the the figures given by Andrew Farah in this article, the Volt will be able to climb a 6% grade at 80 mph for 24 miles before the 30% SOC in the battery runs out. ”
Yes, and you recall that in post #1 in this thread I said that I thought it was a good design. I still do, and I agree that the vast majority of situations will be handled fine.
But, if still more situations can be handled well by a simple change, including, perhaps, just addressing the anxieties of an owner, why not do it?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:12 pm)Dont forget a 6% slope will have a speed limit according to the abiltiy to drive safely. This speed limit is dependant on sight over blind hills and blind curves. It would be dependant on how many lanes are present. The top speed is most likely around 45mph. Hypothetically if you found yourself in a situation to drive that fast, you would not put the car in a situation such as a steep slope for that period of time. Maybe on a long flat straight away but look out for smokey, i bet he will not be limited to battery capacity or generator out put. Good news though, what goes up must come down. when you get to the bottom of the other side of the mountain, I would expect we got a good FREE charge on our volt from the regenerative braking design. Civil Engineer,BS.Michael L.
GO-VOLT!
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:21 pm)#168 Dave G
Are you assuming full charge at the base of the hill? I think that’s optimistic. When I go on vacation the battery would be at 30% by then and wouldn’t last long at all. Plus, you must consider running the A/C, or the heater, or maybe with some bikes on top. This isn’t farfetched. It’s real life. An average everyday car must be able to do this and if it can’t, it’s reputation will suffer. I really really want this concept to take hold in America. I think a performance / power / torque / customer depletion point mode can tackle this. And it costs nothing more than a discrete button.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:33 pm)I can’t believe you’re still arguing about this..
I’m with several people above:
Who really wants (let alone needs) to drive 80mph up a hill? Or even 70 or 60 for that matter. ITS A HILL.
People don’t even drive 80mph on flat freeway here.. you guys must love to speed down south.
80mph uphill would be what, 120mph on flat land? Your battery wouldn’t last long in that scenario either, why aren’t you complaining about that? Oh, right! Because its an outrageous claim to want to drive almost twice the speed limit for a sustained amount of time.
This freeway-speeds-up-a-steep-hill scenario is just as bad.
If you want to go blasting up a hill and kill yourself, go right ahead (and get your porsche/ferrari/whatever) and do it. Otherwise, accept your perfectly reasonable 55-60mph (which I would say is still high to be doing uphill) and get up that hill just the same, using less gas than everyone else (or even none if you’re close to the bottom of the hill to start)
On another note: I believe there was talk of a 110 outlet being included as standard, meaning your volt can be a (very) portable generator.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:33 pm)#137 Dave G – As I read what Andrew Farah is saying, the battery will assist by providing 10-15 kW. Added to the 50 kW that the gen-set is delivering gives 60-65 kW. This would not be maximum power. You may be envisioning something else but this seems to be how it will work. I suspect the discharge rate with the ICE operating will be governed for obvious reasons.
#146 Dave G – There is no way GM will take the battery to zero SOC. With Li-ion battery chemistry it could kill the pack.
#158 Koz – There is always the issue of stocks and flows, or in this case average power and max power. There is plenty of average power. The issue is max power. You need 45 hp or 33.5 kW to climb at 70 mph ([70X4000X.06]/375). You need 26 kW to overcome aero drag (597 N) and rolling resistance (213 N) at 32 m/sec.(Not sure where you got the 20 kW). That adds up to 60 kW, which is within the max 65 kW available. But you haven’t accounted for drive train losses which might drop the available kW below 60. Additionally, if the engine has a problem with altitude you probably can’t go 70 mph on these pieces of the climb. You certainly won’t be able to do it just using the gen-set.
#165 Cautious Fan #135 RB – I understand these uses (not sure about the trailer) and think the idea is fine. I was trying to say this in #87. I was just pointing out that it’s not really performance in the sense of aggressive driving, which is max smash face. It’s more a mild assist over an extended period of time. As Dave G has pointed out, this actually puts less stress on the battery pack.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:44 pm)Here’s my take,
Question:
At what speed will the volt be able to climb a long hill after the battery has been depleted (30%SOC)?
Answer:
61.53mph
Source:
Farah’s statement: “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.”
65kw (50gen + 15battery) is to 80mph as 50kw(gen only) is to x
65/80=50/x
Solve for x,
x = 61.53mph
That’s not a terrible speed to be making the trip up to Aspen , but . . . .
it could be a little rough on the ego if you spent north of $40k for a car that looks like it should be doing 100mph.
If GM can put a switch in the car (power mode, whatever) that avoids this situation (sacrifices mpg but charges the battery to near top off before you get to the hill climb). Then I’d say do it. Put the switch in. This car looks like an ego car and needs to perform like one if at all possible.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:55 pm)Plus, it would be fun to flip the switch.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (9:58 pm)It seems to me that one simple 2-position switch gives Grump (#151) his freedom and RB (#163) and others their “Mountain” mode. (A soft switch, of course!)
The first position is “Normal” mode. Most everyone knows by now what that means, so I won’t elaborate.
The other position maintains the battery at 80% (+/- 5%) SOC.
Now RB has oodles of power when he hits the mountain roads, and Grump can decide when to use those cheap, (relativey) clean grid electrons.
You could “throw” the switch to normal as soon as you start going down the mountain, or get within 40 miles of a known charging outlet.
If you forget … well, I can’t think of anything really bad that will happen.
You know, I used to think that a swtch like this was an awful idea … subject to abuse by the ignorant masses. But it’s growing on me. Hey GM, a little more debate on this can’t hurt.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:02 pm)DonC #174
I was doing a rough worst case energy analysis. 6% constant is not a real scenario. Average power is what is so important to the Volt and this is what will narrow the limiting scenarios to very few driving situations within reaonable speed (not limited to the law). Yes, there are a lot of circumstances that can affect the analysis but they are minor to neglible. Don’t know how the power loss with altitude vs. reduced drag will play out but I was intentional conservative with some things too. 20KW for 70mph on level ground was a guestimate (conservative I felt) loosely based on Tom’s very detailed analysis on the forum and GM’s older comments for power draw on slight incline. Where did you find the 26KW figure? The added drivetrain losses from the incline (remember other losses are already accounted for in the power demands for level ground being used) are pretty small (<3.3KW I believe).
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:15 pm)Carcus #175,
Don’t worry, Volt drivers should be able to arrive at Aspen unscathed. Power demand is not linear with velocity, so you would get about 65mph (guestimate, I didn’t do the math) in your scenario. In addition, very little of the drive is at 6% so the Volt could go faster without issue (70+ with 4000 road weight in my estimation).
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:20 pm)DonC asks “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?”
Not a good idea to allow customers to overcharge the batteries, as that would shorten the battery life. I agree with Jackson, a ‘Mountain Mode’ switch would reset the ‘Range Extender On’ from the normal 35% SOC up to 45% or maybe 50%, and ‘Range Extender Off’ would be reset to 55% SOC – gotta make allowance for regen downhill. Of course it would increase fuel use, so the ‘Mountain Mode’ should automatically switch off whenever the car is parked and turned off.
Jim in PA asks “How will a car like this DESCEND long hills?”
Very well. It will use regenerative braking, where the motor acts as a generator, converting momentum into electricity to slow the car or maintain speed downhill. Just as acceleration and speed can be controlled, regenerative braking can also be controlled and regulated to apply just the right amount of braking. Motors with regenerative braking on hybrids and EVs are much more sophisticated than the simple DC motors in a golf cart! BTW, AC induction motors (used by Tesla, AC Propulsion, GM EV1) will coast very nicely when the power is switched off.
The electrical power from that downhill braking can be used to charge batteries and run accessories, but what happens when the battery reaches full charge and you’ve still got some downhill miles to go? Well, it will have to “dump” that excess power, perhaps in a resistor bank with a fan like an overgrown hair dryer, or more likely it will power the starter motor/generator to spin the IC engine with the fuel shut off as a type of engine brake. Unlike hydraulic friction brakes, these “regenerative brakes” would never fade or overheat.
The Toyota Prius handles mountain passes without a problem, the high torque of the electric motors really helps. The Prius also has a gearshft position for downhill runs, “B”, that applies engine braking, spinning the engine with the fuel off. So the Prius actually has 4 braking systems: Hydraulic brakes, Parking brakes, Regenerative braking, Engine braking. The cruise control on the Prius and the Tesla Roadster can activate braking when needed, unlike older cruise controls that only control the throttle.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:23 pm)#172 Cautious Fan Says: “Are you assuming full charge at the base of the hill?”
————————————————————————————-
No. 30% charge (4.8 kWH) at the base of the hill. This is what the gas engine normally maintains. See post #44 for details.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:36 pm)#174 DonC,
What Andrew Farah said is that it will take 60-65 kW to drive the Volt 80 mph up a 6 % grade. This is nowhere near the max power of 120 kW. So you have room to accelerate if you want to kill yourself even faster.
I agree that GM wont let the battery pack get to total zero, but it could get pretty close, maybe 5-10%, which would easily get up any steep hill fast enough to kill you.
The point is that there is no problem here. Let’s not over-design this…
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:38 pm)Koz #179,
I’d like to believe your numbers, but . . .as my simple math in earlier post demonstrates. . . I’m a little more simple minded.
I’m just having a hard time imagining that a 1.4 litre non turbocharged 90hp engine climbing at much better than low average speeds on I 70 west out of Denver . Especially at 4000lbs.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (10:57 pm)#154 ThomThumb
“JonP
I want to know how my Volt will perform when I go to the Sierras. A lot of Californians visit the Sierras. People also visit the Rockies, Poconos, Appalachians, etc. The mountains are a favorite destination for many, many people. Auto companies consider mountain driving when designing a car. Please don’t think the world revolves around you.”
——————————————————————————————
How do you expect GM to answer that? Were 2 years away from the launch, if this was any other car from GM or any other manufacturer we wouldn’t know 75% of what we already do. Would you like them to setup a website that you can enter your grade, duration, etc and it will give you hard numbers for speed & distance. Your asking questions that can’t be answered, that’s why there pointless. Just wait till 2010 then take the Volt for a test drive.
I’m sure Farah is reading this and thinking, man i’m not answering any more of lyle’s questions. All his guys do is take the answers and find situations that make the Volt look bad.
Save the center of the universe crap, my girlfriend whines enough, i don’t need you crying. You don’t like the fact that i think your concerns are misplaced, and premature. How do you think i feel listening to you ask questions no one in the world could answer. Unless you expect Farah to contact you directly.
You won’t be able to buy a Volt for probably 3 years at least and your asking questions like your at your local Chevy dealer.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:02 pm)#184 JonP Says:
“You won’t be able to buy a Volt for probably 3 years at least”
Hey troll there’s something we agree on. Looking forward to some economical numbers tomorrow, try to keep the GM won’t make it another 6 months crap to a minimum
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:18 pm)Hey JonP,
One of the reasons I like this website is because I get to armchair quarterback (or armchair engineer) a concept car into production. This would involve imagining all the worst case scenarios and how to beat the competition in the process. I’m sure that’s what your good friends Lutz, Farah, and the rest spend a lot of time doing. I’m just trying to ride along.
You’re spoiling my ride.
Switch to decaf,
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:19 pm)#155 DaveG
“I’ve asked GM previously to provide 110v AC convenience outlets for the Volt, at least as an option. 15 amps would do the trick. When the battery drops below 30% SOC, the gas engine would turn on provide power to the 110v outlets. In other words, the Volt would make the perfect gas generator!”
Finally something that dosen’t have to do with pike’s peak. !
So if no AC plugs, will the dc be able to be stepped down to say a cigarette lighter for things like car charges and power supplies for GPS, etc..
I thought the Volt would be able to be used as a “very expensive generator” in cases like electrical failure at your house? Wasn’t that part of the whole V2G (vehicle 2 grid) thing?
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:38 pm)Lyle,
as Tag posted at # 37,
“- great site! You’re listening and asking them our questions, and they’re answering. How much better could it be? Thanks!”
ditto, from me.
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:48 pm)Yep, JonP is a troll with a girlfriend – A GIRLFRIEND! Can you believe it? a whiney girlfriend.
JonP, you and your girlfriend should spend some time at “http://www.coda.org”
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:53 pm)“coda.org” ………funny
Sep 2nd, 2008 (11:55 pm)Off topic.
Funny is a weird word. I never realized it till now. It looks weird when it comes off the keyboard, sitting there, all alone . . . . funny.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (12:08 am)Carcus
Now that you mention it, “funny” does look funny. You are commenting at midnight – get some rest.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (12:39 am)#178 Koz – “Where did you find the 26KW figure?”
Good catch. My bad, 70 mph is 32 m/sec. I took CdA as .58 and the density of air at 1.225. So V^2 * CdA * rho * .5 = 366 N. For rolling resistance I used 2000 Kg and .011 which gave me 2000 Kg * 9.8 * .011 = 216 N. For power we have (216 N + 366 N) * 32 = 17,984 Watts (I fat fingered the aero equation and got 597 N, don’t ask me how). So yes, you’re right, I’m at 18 kW and the 20 kW you used is conservative.
#182 Dave G – “This is nowhere near the max power of 120 kW.”
I may be assuming too much, but I read the 10-15 kW drawn from the battery as the maximum assist. I’m probably making this assumption because 15 kW would be 1C and I’m thinking GM won’t let the pack discharge faster than that below 30% SOC. I could be wrong. Would make a good follow up question along with whether there is a maximum draw on the pack. 120kW suggests a discharge rate of 7.5C which seems scary. The other question of course would be: if this is true, then what the heck is the 120 kW motor for?
Sep 3rd, 2008 (12:45 am)noel park #126
I agree, the Prius example is one worth noting, slow to gain sales but now over a million sold and not easy to get.
If the Volt takes off and I’m pretty sure it will, it might be quite a while before we’re able to buy one.
About the styling, I really like the proportional look, and the differentiated fenders with big wheels. Makes my mouth water. The profile is classic. Forget finding one used, these cars will be keepers.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (12:50 am)Late to the party, but some comments…
A lot of people posting here have clearly never lived in or near mountains. You can do all the math you want but any Colorado resident can tell you that a 70 HP 3000+ lb car will struggle in many common situations, e.g., going skiing. Okay, so it’s electric and has a battery buffer, but even if it performs like a 100-110 HP gas car, you’re still going to find yourself flooring it fairly often and wishing for some extra oomph. That being said, I can’t imagine you’d literally not be able to drive from point A to point B.
As for a “performance mode”… on one hand, it seems like too much of an engineering detail to put in the effort of making it customer-configurable… but on the other hand, your nicer cars are more and more often coming with buttons and dials to adjust suspension stiffness, traction control, etc. And cars with automatic transmissions have always given you some control over when they shift (D-1-2)… so maybe a setting for target battery charge isn’t too far out of the question.
I don’t see that the “performance mode” as discussed would significantly impact the longevity of the battery. Instead of trying to maintain the charge at 30-35%, it would just maintain a charge of, say, 70%… both fairly arbitrary numbers. If you never really stressed the car out, it would have almost zero impact on how often the battery is charged/discharged. Actually it would probably be better for the battery in most cases… instead of cycling from 80->30->80, you’d typically be doing 80->70->80… but you would end up using extra gas obviously.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (1:25 am)Just saw this:
http://www.komonews.com/news/tech/27763379.html
Sep 3rd, 2008 (2:02 am)Tom #195
I suppose that 80->50->80 for “performance mode” or “mountain mode” would be enough.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (3:43 am)All this Mountain Mode stuff is really just a tempest in a teapot, anyway. I know in my heart that Bob Lutz would never, EVER, authorize a user-selectable “mode” for the battery. He is paranoid enough about the Volt’s battery lifespan without giving us “morons” [Bob's opinion] a “mode” that could potentially shorten that lifespan.
These batteries are the heart of Bob’s new baby – and he is not about to endanger his baby by giving us a “mode”. This whole thing is just a mental exercise, really, so calm down. It may be my dream to have a “mode” switch, but really, it’s not going to happen with Bob in charge. In fact, I would be very surprised if Bob let us use the Volt as a generator.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (4:49 am)Come on guys you are scaring the sh..t out of GM. They have to assume that all of us will drive these things like we are human and not like this was some kind of electric supercar with a fairly new battery technology. I promise GM if you let me put a deposit on a Volt I will drive it like a human.
Take Care,
TED
Sep 3rd, 2008 (5:12 am)apparently GM is worried about the durability of the battery.. per a report, GM is budgeting a battery replacement under warranty for each and every Volt.
“http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/09/02/lutz-says-volts-batteries-are-flawless/”
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/09/02/lutz-says-volts-batteries-are-flawless/
Sep 3rd, 2008 (6:33 am)This thread has pretty much stayed on topic from start to finish. Amazing, and a good post to start it, too.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (6:59 am)#194 Tom Says: “You can do all the math you want but any Colorado resident can tell you that a 70 HP 3000+ lb car will struggle in many common situations, e.g., going skiing. Okay, so it’s electric and has a battery buffer, but even if it performs like a 100-110 HP gas car…”
————————————————————————————–
The Volt’s electric motor and batteries produce up to 120kW of power, or around 160 horsepower.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (7:10 am)I’m confused … if so many folks want to run the ICE nearly constantly to keep the battery pack charged because you’re concerned about performance … why bother with the Volt at all? Why aren’t you looking at a non-EV with an efficient ICE (or diesel or FlexFuel, etc) or “basic” hybrid that will give you decent mileage and your 200+ hp that you seem to want? Because by running the Volt’s ICE nearly constantly, you’re a) not going to save any fuel over one of those efficient but more traditional drive trains and b) you’re going to either wear out your battery earlier than expected or, at the least, invalidate your warranty.
I thought the whole point of the EV was to dramatically reduce gas requirements and these requests for the ability to run the ICE so much just throw that out the window.
Or am I missing something? Because after reading 200 postings in this thread … that what I’m getting out of it – many of you want to use & pay for more gas. Remember … while a hammer can pound a screw into two pieces of wood, a hammer is not a screwdriver, that’s not how you’re supposed to use a screw to hold something together and it’s likely that those two pieces of wood will not stay connected for as long nor as well as if a screw driver had driven the screw in properly.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (7:16 am)The point is that these steep uphill grades don’t last forever. There are level and downhill spots, and you have to slow down on the curves anyway. The speed limits on these steep grades are much lower than 80 mph.
So yes, the battery will dip below 30% SOC to supply up to 160 hp, but there will be plenty of places where the battery can recharge back to 30%.
Let’s put it another way. People here are asking to for a switch change the point at which the ICE turns on, so that there will be enough juice in the battery to get them up the mountain. Well, maybe GM already did this. 30% of the Volt’s battery is 4.8kWH. That’s more than the entire battery capacity of most other plug-in hybrids. What GM is saying is that unless you’re driving fast enough to get you killed, you’re not going to have a problem.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (7:57 am)With 200+ submissions so far on this thread, a few generalizations can be made about the misconceptions that apparently afflict many of this thread’s respondents. 1) Many folks who live in flat areas don’t travel in the mountains much. 2) Many folks who live in cities don’t travel in the country much. 3) Many folks here overemphasize one aspect of a car and too easily accept limitations in other areas, forcing them to own two or more cars. 4) Quite a few folks here don’t consider the entire financial cost of ownership when selecting an automobile.
First, for you flatlanders, mountain roads are NOT for the most part snow and ice covered. They do not regularly wind back and forth and limit your travel speed to less than 55 mph. They are not limited to 6% slopes unless part of the interstate system. Speed limits in the mountains regularly hit 65 or 70 mph.
Second, for you city folks, all towns and cities are NOT located at the bottom of a hill or mountain. Many, many of America’s great towns and cities are located up in the hills and mountains. Therefore, hill and mountain driving is a part of commuting to work everyday for average, everyday American citizens.
Third, AER and battery life are NOT the largest priorities when “the masses” select a four door, Chevrolet sedan. Those on this thread who would pass on the “mountain” or “performance” mode place too much emphasis on battery life and not enough emphasis on the driving experience and the ownership experience. This historically common attitude has doomed many of the carmakers’ chances for greater success.
And fourth, those folks that have their priorities out of whack, as in number three above, always find themselves having to pay much, much more for their basic transportation needs as compared to those that see the bigger picture during vehicle selection. Why would anyone buy a Chevy Volt which, for $40,000, can perform MOST of their required use cases when they can buy a Honda Civic, for $20,000, which will satisfy ALL of their needs. The Volt buyer would still need to spend even more for a different type of vehicle that can fill in for weak areas of the Volt’s design. Don’t get me wrong, I understand the concept of owning a second, more efficient car which you use as your daily commuter when fuel prices are as high as they are.
Why is Chevrolet designing a “second” car, one that they know will disappoint when used in an all too common manner; driving long distances or climbing long hills? You only have to be stuck in the truck lane once to “lose the love” for your ride! Is ultimate battery life really worth not being a “first” class automobile? It’s just an operating mode! It’s just a little bit of battery life! Is that really worth the risk of earning a bad reputation?
Sep 3rd, 2008 (9:16 am)It is really bad publicity if you are stuck behind a Volt at 45mph going up a hill.. to prevent this is why GM chose such a large 50kw charge sustaining generator.. I beleive it will do 65mph going up a 6% grade fully loaded by design, with the battery empty (I really want to believe). On level ground the Volt will do 110mph with an empty battery.
When the Volt was first announced, the size of the generator was ridiculed, no one needs an electric car that will do 110mph. An 8-9kw generator would have been enough to do about 55mph on level ground and would have been a lot lighter.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (9:47 am)In the first place, I think I would have called my initial suggestion, of raising the value of “Empty” a modest 10 or so percent a “Trip” mode. Simply because, unless you’re willing to drag extension cords everywhere you go, AER is pretty much meaningless on a long trip.
In the second place, I don’t imagine that I myself would need to use such a mode for the sake of performance.
I’m only posting this to point out that any move which limits the amount of battery power which is discharged will improve it’s life, not shorten it. The ICE is doing more of the work.
Let’s suppose that, for whatever unlikely reason, the price of gas plummets the year after you spend close to $40K for your Volt. What do you do? You know gas will go up again. If you have the capability to limit how much AER you have (which is the other side of that “more power” coin), you could concievably push that button in, leave it there, and never plug in until the price goes up again — in order to hang on to battery life for when it’s really needed.
Finally, I’ll say that if the engineers at GM find that such a mode (even supporting a relatively minor change in charge behavior) is unnecessary, I don’t have a problem with that.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (10:46 am)#142 the Grump says:
“131 Aspherical and 132 Amul – I cannot believe all the people near the Appalachian Mountains (encompassing areas in the states of Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, and North Carolina, as well as sometimes extending as far south as northern Georgia and western South Carolina, as far north as Pennsylvania, and as far west as southern Ohio) are just not significant to JonP, and he would want them to buy another type or car. And that’s only the east coast !”
Okay i’ll repost Farah’s comments again:
“There are limitations to the E-REV concept, but the people who will experience a problem with this are far and few between.”
So your right it’s me and the head of the Volt’s design team against you and “all the people near the Appalachian Mountains”
Sep 3rd, 2008 (10:49 am)Thombdumb Says:
“Yep, JonP is a troll with a girlfriend – A GIRLFRIEND! Can you believe it? a whiney girlfriend.
JonP, you and your girlfriend should spend some time at “http://www.coda.org” ”
—————————————————————————————
LMFAO, i’ll take that retort as a total acceptance of my view as correct!
Sep 3rd, 2008 (11:32 am)208 JonP – I was actually defending you. Do you really believe that people in West Virginia are “few and far between” ? There’s a whole lot of West Virginians who would disagree with that. Personally, I cannot believe you think that.
What I am saying is, telling people you disagree with to go away and buy another type of car is not the best way to promote the Volt. We need more people to be interested in the Volt – GM’s future may depend on it.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (12:06 pm)#209 JonP
At a Volt enthusiasts’ discussion forum about mountain driving, you say Volt enthusiasts shouldn’t discuss mountain driving. In a post where GM answers a question about mountain driving, you say GM can’t answer a question about mountain driving. You say we should wait two years and test drive up a mountain. What dealer allows you a 6-hour test drive? You are not convincing.
I’m not angry at you. I just think you are ridiculous, unreasonable, and looking for another co-dependent that you can bully. That’s not for me. Good luck with that. I’m done responding to your dysfunctional blather.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (12:10 pm)Carcus #183,
You’re concerns are important and merit good discussion like the one started by Lyle and Mr. Farah. I believe GM has spent a lot of effort to create a drivetrain with very few limitations while still having tremendous economy. The genset is sized at 50KW instead of 35KW for hill climbing. The latest discharge cycle is 35%-85%. I believe the 35% is to have extra capacity for aggressive climbs as mentioned by Mr. Farah. It helps for battery life too, but from what A123 shows for their specs cycling to 20% won’t noticeably affect battery life.
It’s good you focus the issues standard ICE vehicles face in the mountains. They are real and most people have first hand experience. This just crystallizes how different the Volt’s drivetrain is and how the old paradigms don’t necessarily apply (or apply somewhat differently). I’ve drive I70 west from Denver many times and there are plenty of steep grades by interstate standards but a lot of the drive is at 2-4% and some is less. Until the Volt’s battery is fully depleted, somewhere beyond charge sustaining point, there will be 120KW available. The cars you are comparing do not have this. So, the question is what situations will fully deplete the battery and what performance can then be expected.
A big part of the standard ICE problems with mountiains is gearing. I assume that CVT equipped cars do much better than 4 speeds and 6 speeds perform somewhere inbetween. Basically, the power may be available from the engine but transmitting it to the wheels effectively for the incline and speed causes problems. Also, change gears with the changing slope is also part of the problem. Think what typically happens on a steep incline with a 4-speed automatic. The car is traveling at 70 mph then the inclining increases, the torque at high gear is not enough so the speed starts to fall. The driver depresses the accelerator, partially offsetting the additional slope but eventually the pedal is depressed enough to force a downshift. I don’t know the specifics of the gear ratios and RPM’s but do know the RPMs and torque jump when downshifting occurs. This usually happens at, what, 45 mph or so? Then the car accelerates slowly but is limit because of gear ratios. Air density also takes a toll, more so on certain engines.
The physics of driving on an incline versus on level ground is pretty simple, when minor components such as air density and rolling resistance are ignored. Basically you have all of the loads for a speed on level ground plus the load to raise the vehicle. Assuming the Volt consumes 18KW at 67mph, this will be roughly the steady state speed for 50KW generator output at 6%. Obviously wind, auxiliary loads, altitude, etc will adjust this up or down.
Hermant, so where are there unabated 5+% highways with 65+mph speed limits for 15+ mile stretches that many Americans regularly commute at 70+mph speeds?
Sep 3rd, 2008 (1:46 pm)#211 Thombdumb says:
“I’m not angry at you. I just think you are ridiculous, unreasonable, and looking for another co-dependent that you can bully. That’s not for me. Good luck with that. I’m done responding to your dysfunctional blather.”
————————————————————
LOL Here is the last thing you posted before that. I’m the one with dysfunctional blather?!
————————————————————
#189 Thombdumb says:
“Yep, JonP is a troll with a girlfriend – A GIRLFRIEND! Can you believe it? a whiney girlfriend.
JonP, you and your girlfriend should spend some time at “http://www.coda.org” ”
—————————————————————–
How short your memory is.
——————————————————————-
#209 Thomb dumb says:
“#209 JonP
At a Volt enthusiasts’ discussion forum about mountain driving, you say Volt enthusiasts shouldn’t discuss mountain driving. In a post where GM answers a question about mountain driving, you say GM can’t answer a question about mountain driving. You say we should wait two years and test drive up a mountain. What dealer allows you a 6-hour test drive? You are not convincing.”
I’m on this board every day for 2+ years, the only reason were even talking about this is because of people questioning it. So Lyle asked Farah about it. He answers it in the best way possible(very generally because every trip/road/grade/driver is different) but that’s not enough. I said GM couldn’t answer your question because they don’t have the time to crunch the numbers on every one of our driving scenarios, they have a revolutionary car to build.
Do you really need a 6 hour test drive to figure out it’s performance. I’m sure you could go 40 miles than up a slope in an hour.
All i’m asking you to do is be reasonable with your expectations, both in the amount of information that is disseminated to us, and in the volt’s ability.
PS do you really think GM would put out a car that only went 30mph & under on mouantins? Not to mention what speed do you think is reasonable? What is everyone else driving that you pass on your way to work.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (2:06 pm)#205 hermant Says: “… mountain roads are NOT for the most part snow and ice covered. They do not regularly wind back and forth and limit your travel speed to less than 55 mph. They are not limited to 6% slopes unless part of the interstate system. Speed limits in the mountains regularly hit 65 or 70 mph.”
————————————————————————————–
Yes, everything you say is true, but I think you are missing the point.
Andrew Farah of GM is saying that going 80 MPH up a 6% grade will only draw 10 or 15 kw of power from the battery. At this rate, the 30% charge left in the battery would last for over 20 miles (see my post #44). Note that this is a constant speed of 80 MPH (never slowing down) up a constant grade of 6% (no level or downhill spots) for around 20 miles before you start to lose power. There is no road I know of that would allow you to do this!
In other words:
1) Yes, mountain roads have spots where the speed limit is 65 or 70 mph.
2) Yes, mountain roads can exceed 6% grades.
3) Yes, they’re are not all curves and switch-backs, some parts are straight.
4) Yes, some mountain passes last many miles.
But there is no road that I know of that combines all 4 of these together. In other words, if there is a straight fast part, it’s usually not that steep. If there is a steep part that’s also straight and fast, it only lasts a few miles. Steep uphill parts also last only 5-6 miles max before it levels off or goes downhill.
The closest I’ve ever seen for a road matching all 4 items above is going west out of Death Valley, California. The valley is below sea level, and the mountain peaks to the west are 14,000 feet. I would guess the pass where the road goes is around 8000 feet. This road is has a two-lanes (one lane in each direction), and I believe the speed limit is 60 mph, but some people go faster. When you start up out of the valey, the road is straight for several miles, but then gets more curvy at the top. There are pull-offs about every 1/4 mile with running water for overheating. So this road is tough on all cars.
My point is that the scenario Andrew Farah is describing is beyond the worst case that any normal mountain driver would see.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (2:21 pm)Now BOYS! (Thomb and JonP) – Careful or you’ll get something placed in your “permanent record” (g). Seriously, it looks like it’s time to take a step back and a deep breath. We all have our views and a desire for the Volt to come out ASAP, so all that remains is a need for civility.
Be well,
The Hall Monitor
Sep 3rd, 2008 (2:41 pm)#205 hermant Says: “Why would anyone buy a Chevy Volt which, for $40,000, can perform MOST of their required use cases when they can buy a Honda Civic, for $20,000, which will satisfy ALL of their needs. The Volt buyer would still need to spend even more for a different type of vehicle that can fill in for weak areas of the Volt’s design.”
————————————————————————————-
First, the Volt will satisfy all of a driver’s needs, or at least as much as a Honda Civic would satisfy their needs. This includes mountain driving.
Second, the Volt would cost about the same or may even be cheaper than the Civic. Here’s why:
The Honda Civic gets 29 combined MPG:
http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-sedan/environment.aspx
I like to keep my cars a while, like 10 years. I also drive around 12,000 miles a year, which according to Consumer Reports is fairly typical. Let’s also say that of the 12,000 miles I drive a year, 80% of those are under 40 miles per day. That’s 9600 miles on electricity. If you do the math, the Volt saves 3658 gallons of gas compared to the Civic over the 10-year life of the vehicle. At $4/gallon, that’s over $14,000. Now add the tax credit. For Obama it would be $7000, for McCain it would be $5000.
Obviously, a lot of this depends on the price of gasoline, but with world oil production leveling off and increasing demand from China and India, it’s likely that gas prices will continue to rise.
And then there is the issue of terrorism. 70% of our oil is imported, mostly from countries that are hostile towards the United States. Oil money is making Iran more powerful. They’re building nukes. They’re chanting “Death To America” in their parliament.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/10/31/iran.nuclear/index.html
So even if I have to pay a little bit more for the Volt over the life of the vehicle, I would do it.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (3:26 pm)Here’s a thought:
With GPS Navigation and XM Radio’s Real-Time traffic data hopefully being an option in the Volt, why not factor navigational and traffic data into the battery charge algorithm? If you program it to go up Pike’s Peak, maybe the battery will maintain a higher charge. For a long mountain passes, maybe the traffic data will tell the car that you won’t be going over 40mph anyway, so no need to keep the battery at a higher charge. I doubt that this type of feature will make it into the first-gen Volt, but surely it’s being considered for future generations to raise efficiency even higher.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (3:50 pm)#215 The hall monitor (Tag)
It’s just that interventions sometimes are met with resistance. I guess he is not ready to admit his problem yet. As a shrink, I’m sure you’ve seen his type before. Nonetheless, I’ve already stepped back away from him. Thanks for your advice.
I thought I was being civil. I’m not the first or only one on this topic that said JonP was a troll. He proved it to me when he lashed out. I feel justified in pointing that out. He can take it constructiveluy and imnprove, or he can continue to wallow in his ugly world. JonP established that he had a whiney girlfriend. I was just shocked that he had one, given his abusive nature (refer to this topic for evidence). I thought my recommendation for co-dependents anonymous was being helpful.
Sep 3rd, 2008 (4:44 pm)ThombDbhomb #218.
Agreed 100%
Sep 5th, 2008 (1:50 am)If it gets me up I-70 at a reasonable pace, say 70 mph, I will be happy.
I regularly drive west of Denver on I-70. There are sections of 5-6% grade lasting many miles, and the road is straight enough to drive quite fast. I think the official SL is 65 or so, but people regularly drive 75+. The overall climb to Eisenhower is around 6000 ft elevation gain.
A lot of this depends on the car’s weight, too, which I don’t think is known yet (but GM has an uncanny ability to make cars much heavier than you’d think they would be. If Honda was making this it would probably be 2400 lbs or something, but GM – I’ll be glad if they just get it into the low 3000′s).
Anyway the car is an awesome idea and I hope GM pulls it off.
Sep 5th, 2008 (12:07 pm)50 kw Generator? So where’s the hookup to power the house after a hurricane? It’d be pretty popular in the southeast!
Sep 5th, 2008 (12:43 pm)Ron@221
Re V2G
That’s something they are looking at for Volt V2.0 or 3.0. Right now they are working with the power companies regarding standards.
FOR NOW though, we need to…
LJGTVWOTR!!!!
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!!!!
Sep 5th, 2008 (10:05 pm)I wonder how the volt would perform if I decided to take it on a cross country trip. mountains or not at some point the battery will deplete and the performance will drop.
Sep 6th, 2008 (4:39 pm)if you had access to the power of that 50kw generator the Volt would be the fastest selling car in history, in Florida, LA and the east coast.. some people have rigged Priuses with inverters and it is sweet, the engine will come on automaticatilly when the battery drops to a certain level.
Sep 6th, 2008 (5:03 pm)>>I wonder how the volt would perform if I decided to take it on a cross country trip. mountains or not at some point the battery will deplete and the performance will drop>>>
Your average speed would have to be very fast, in flatland you would have to average over 100mph to deplete the battery.. towing something with a certain amount of drag at a lower speed would also do it. At some point the Volt will not let you deplete fully to 100% and it will throttle your speed back somehow.
Sep 21st, 2008 (8:30 am)This is a very important issue all over the western US, particularly California. I can see now that the Volt is a city car only for California.
– Sacramento to Truckee/Reno: 132 miles, 7,200 ft elevation gain, 70mph posted speed limit. (and the elevation gain comes unevenly; this will be a 40mph car on the freeway)
– San Francsisco to South Shore Tahoe: 188 miles, 7,200 ft elevation gain, 55 – 65 mph posted speed limit
– Palmdale – Glendale – and return: 83 miles, 3,200 ft elevation gain
California is full of big hills that people drive on every weekend and, for many, every day of the week. Pacific Northwest too. I could list 100 examples.
What would help is a switch to manually control battery vs. charge operation. If I could save my battery for the climb, I could probably manage. Ultimately the nav system could automatically help if I keyed in my destination for the trip.
Comments?
Sep 21st, 2008 (9:27 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
If GM configures the Volt to use regen braking to charge the battery, the most if can save you is 80 cents, the cost of a full charge at home. And remember, it is doing a partial battery cycle to do this, consuming some of the life of your $10,000 battery.
Feb 11th, 2009 (7:24 pm)You guys are really missing the point. Yes the Corolla has a 130 HP engine, or whatever car your looking at. Yes, that car is still gutless. And yes, 67 HP doesn’t seem like a lot. But the Corolla only makes 130 HP at it’s HP peak. Which is somewhere near it’s redline. Let me ask you, how long do you think you can keep an engine at redline, and expect it to last? Short answer: Not long.
That 67 HP figure is available all the time. The Corolla i doubt could do that. Just a cursory look at the math, but i would bet your top speed would still be 55 MPH up pikes peak. Probably faster then a lot of the traffic up there goes. It’s not like you’d be crawling. The whole idea that “this is a 40 MPH highway car” is ridiculous and unfounded. In my commute, the Volt would yield 150 MPG results. Untouchable by anything else. And it’ll will climb mountains.
+1
Aug 13th, 2009 (2:39 pm)You are right on with your concern. The Volt weighs as much as a Malibu and has an engine half the size. Imagine being in the creeper lane and having an 18 wheeler on your tail.
-1
Oct 9th, 2009 (9:30 am)Hermant, you’re right the Volt’s generator only puts out about 50kw, or 67 horsepower. Given that the generator delivers power to the electrical engine however, what you get is actually a constant 67 horsepower, and a strong torque.
A Toyota Corolla with 132 horsepower has 132 horsepower available at about 6500-7000 rpm. In normal conditions (i.e. when you’re between 2000 rpm and 4000 rpm you only have 60 -100 horsepower available, and LESS torque than the Volt.
So in other words, the Volt should when using only the generator be able to put out about the same performance as the cars you mention.