Chrysler to Unveil New Extended-Range Electric Car Next Tuesday
I would imagine that the other automakers might be a little jealous of all the publicity GM garnered as a result of the Volt’s unveiling last Tuesday.
Not to be left out, Chrysler has apparently decided to do a little unveiling of its own next Tuesday.
The Wall Street Journal reports that Chrysler will be revealing a new electric car it is “scrambling” to develop. They will unveil it via video conference to invited Chrysler dealers at 100 movie theaters across the nation.
The vehicle will supposedly be a compact electric car that travels for 40 miles by battery alone and then has a small gas generator to keep the car going after that. Sounds familiar, I wonder where I heard that before?
Chrysler hasn’t got any battery development contracts and may be working with partners.
Chrysler has previously indicated its intention to eventually build eclectic cars when it displayed three electric concept cars at last January’s Detroit Auto Show (ecoVoyager concept shown above) which were based on its ENVI electric vehicle architecture.
Source (Wall Street Journal)
Popularity: 2%
Related posts:
- Chrysler In Discussions With A123 to Supply Batteries For New Electric Car
- Chrysler Goes Electric
- GM Welcomes Chrysler to Join Them in the Electric Car Future
- Electric Cars and Utility Companies
- GM and Chrysler in Merger Talks
(5 votes, average: 4.2 out of 5) 
Loading ...
121 Responses to “Chrysler to Unveil New Extended-Range Electric Car Next Tuesday”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- GM’s CEO Arrives to Capitol Hill in Chevy Volt Prototype, Senate Hearings Underway
- GM CEO Will Drive Volt Mule Inside Washington DC Today, UAW Agrees to Drop Job Bank
- GM: Out of Time, Out of Money, Out of Options
- GM Submits Long-Term Viability Plan to Congress: $18 Billion Needed
- Detroit 3 Viability Plans Go To Congress Today: GM’s CEO Will Drive to DC in Hybrid Malibu
- GM-Volt Exclusive: Bob Lutz Details Volt Mule Energy Use in Highway Driving
- GM’s Canceled LA Auto Show Conference: Was it Going to be the Volt Battery Contract Announcement?
- Flextreme Concept Wins Prestigious Design Award, Still Not Production Intent
- What Would Happen to the Chevy Volt if GM Failed?
- GM Viability Proposal Leak: CEO Likely to Work for $1 and Brands Likely to be Shed
September 19th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Hey, I noticed Lyle changed the banner to show the real volt — very nice.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
2nd! Where are my free ice cream cupons?!??
JK JK….
The next 24ish months will be very exciting times for cars!
September 19th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
We’ll see if this thing comes out by 2015, if ever…
My Chrysler 300M as proof, Old Chrysler in the past could make a good, reliable car. New Chrysler LLC (with Rumsfeld lurking around in there) I’m not so sure considering it took them until this year to get hybrids out the door, and they’re all SUVs with MPG no more than 25!
All the best folks at Chrysler, if you can remain in business…
September 19th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
This is very good news.
I hope all auto makers jump on the bandwagon ASAP. I have a preference for the Volt and GM right now, but the more Extended Range Electrics on the market the better for us all.
The “40 mile range plus an ICE” is an extremely good idea that I hope will be the model for the next generation of cars in the USA.
Downside: It may become difficult to find a gasoline station once all this is commonplace. We will all be using about 5% of the gas we use now. We might have to buy gasoline on Ebay.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
I wonder if the Chrysler will be completely re-designed from this concept model shown. I’m sure the glass panels will be the first to go. The Air conditioning load would be………. substantial.
The body does look very aerodynamic however (did I spell that right?)
Good luck to Chrysler. I’ve been a mopar head all my life but I have owned Ford and GM products, I even owned a VW but don’t tell anybody………
September 19th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Want it be a great day when the way the Volt is designed, that it is the standard the way all cars are made. But the Volt is still the first in my mind to have made a real working model. What will we see over the next 3 years?
GO GM! I thank’s for the early revel of the production car. All of the car maker should be chasing you.
But 3 years is a long time in battery technology and pricing. Keep talking to Eestor and work on the Volt’s introduction pricing so I can get mine.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Excellent news for all those who want E-REVs. Competition is great for use consumers.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
It looks like a trend, now there are at least three players if you include Fisker.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Sort of looks like an iMiev. Hope it works. The more the merrier.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
The misgivings many have had about GM concerning the Volt I now understand — I have the same misgivings about Chrysler. In this case, I think I am more justified:
In addition to numerous historic examples I could cite of automotive crap (including some personal experience),
1) This news has “me too” written all over it: I think they want a cut of any new bailout proposal.
2) “Scrambling” is an understatement. You can point to an active past (even if only research, and a disasterous previous attempt) at GM, but what has there ever been at Chrysler beyond wild, instantly forgotten concepts?
3) (really a follow on to #1): They’ve already had one bailout and blown it.
4) Styling = disaster (more of a recent development, I’ll admit).
5) GM looks like a financial titan right now compared to Chrysler. Working with “partners,” huh? I wonder who (probably in Asia) that could be?
So, we do all have our automaker prejudices, and this story has found mine …
September 19th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
The more automakers who offer electric primary drive, the more component suppliers will get into the market to supply the automakers.
Competition lowers costs, increases quality and spurs innovation as long as it’s the free market and NOT politicians that chooses the winners. Gov’t funding KILLS competition. Just look at the time and energy and taxpayer money on H2 and corn ethanol.
Stop spending taxpayer money on oil and may the BEST E-REV win in Free, Open and Fair competition.
BRING IT!!!!
September 19th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Now this is an e-rev that looks like an e-rev. Hopefully this one will retain a little differentiation in style. Either way - I want to drive electric.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
I like this car.
Now, on an entirely different note, while taking a walk through my neighborhood in southern Florida, I saw a driveway with two cars in it. One had an Alaska license plate, and the other had a Hawaii plate.
How does something like that even happen? What are the odds? The one from Hawaii had to be put on a boat to get here, and the one from Alaska was as far from Alaska as a car can get without being put on a boat.
I thought it was a story that needed telling.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Awesome! Car for car, Chrysler beats GM: in looks, performance, and reliability. And it doesn’t come with a $25-50 billion taxpayer bailout.
I’m still not convinced that any American car company can do anything to rival the Japanese in quality and value, though.
Hoping GM comes out with a good car is like betting on the Cubs having a winning season. Yeah, once in a generation they come out with a winner, but you might pass away from old age first.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Easy, folks. We all know what comes between the “concept” and the “production” models.
The points about competition and incentive for suppliers are well taken.
Truer words were never spoken, solo. That thing looks like a solar oven you could bake bread in.
Lurtz, how did I know you were going to love this?
September 19th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
To all the people who say that the way a car looks doesn’t matter, this is where looks matter. Two companies competing with pretty much the same drive train. Which ever one looks better to me gets my cash. I don’t have high hopes for Chrysler winning this competition, but let the games begin!!
September 19th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Excellent! I was hoping somebody else would build one. This is excellent. Yes!
Now that there is some competition in the E-REV market, I’m sure things will pick up. GM is no longer the “lone wolf”. I’ll bet news articles change their tone on the Volt now. Hopefully, 2 or 3 other car makers will follow suit. In the end, this will help GM lower prices and deliver on time.
This is a great day!
By the way, I heard a story a while back that Tesla was licensing their technology to Chrysler, so maybe this is the result…
September 19th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Thank heaven for competition. This is good for everyone.
So is this a concept Chrysler, or a pre-Production mule. I think it looks better than the production volt, but not as good as the concept volt. Still….. add some larger wheels and tires, and a pair of wheel hub motors for the rear wheels (for added boost), and it would look so cool, and really scoot too!
P.S. is this a 4 door? Can anyone tell? look at the seams in the panels. Now thats would be something
September 19th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Actually, I can think of one scenario in which Chrysler succeeds, and even beats the pants off GM:
1) EEStor turns out to be real, and Chrysler’s “partners” are EEStor and Zenn Energy Systems.
2) Chrysler’s serial hybrid technology leapfrogs GM’s relatively new, expensively won Lithium Ion technology.
3) GM must discard Li-Ion before even beginning to recoup it’s development costs, in order to stay competitive. So soon after the present economic difficulties, this will prove too much to bear, and the automaker fails to make it to the end of the twenty-teens.
So no, the odds are not high that Chrysler will succeed; but they’re not nonexistent.
September 19th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
@14 Lurtz……I am kind of confused by why Japanese cars are said to be better cars?? I have driven nothing but American made cars and trucks without problems. For most of my driving life it was with GM and those cars have treated me very well. I have put them through alot of hell, more than most people would ever put a car through, and they just kept on going. Where are the statistics that support your claims?
September 19th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
I don’t say I love it. I’m happy for more competition, though. And Chrysler’s products have been a improving a lot faster than GM’s lately: Crossfire, Charger, Caliber — they’re all very good.
This has less chance of coming to market than the Volt. Cerberus may just sell of all the pieces of Chrysler individually.
But what do I know? I’m just the guy who defended GM and the Volt in the lefty/enviro blogs when people brought up the “Who Killed the Electric Car” and where people loved their Priuses and predicted that anything GM would make would be ugly, gas-guzzling, and unreliable. I don’t agree, but Bob Lutz just undid all my volunteer PR efforts.
So go spend a few million in advertising trying to convince the Prius demographic otherwise. You’re not going to get much positive word-of-mouth, since Bob “Global Warming is for Morans” Lutz opened his piehole and made GM a dirty word around the lefties/enviros.
(Yeah, hippies. Pfff. Who needs their money. 1,000,000 Priuses… 1,000,001 Priuses… 1,000,002 …)
P.S. Imp - I wrote a long story a few weeks back, but to summarize, when I and all of my friends and family bought their “entry level” cars, those who bought cheap Japanese cars were very happy, they were clunkers but ran forever. Those of us who bought American cars were very frustrated and soon ended up buying cheap Japanese cars. This was in the ‘crap’ era of American car manufacturing, and I know American car companies have improved, but in my generation none of us want to risk getting a lemon again when the cheap clunker Japanese cars have treated us so well. *That’s* the environment in which I was trying to evangelize for the Volt: My friends, family and co-workers who have been satisfied customers of Japanese cars for twenty years, and just think you’re nuts to suggest an American car.
September 19th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
RE #4
“Downside: It may become difficult to find a gasoline station once all this is commonplace. We will all be using about 5% of the gas we use now. We might have to buy gasoline on Ebay.”
I suspect that what will happen in the long term is that there will become less gas stations. Then the remaining gas stations will stay in business by offering electric fast charging and gasoline / ethanol (or maybe methanol). Of course your OnStar or Internet connected integrated GPS unit will be able to plan your route via refueling stops since it will be able to predict when you will need refueling.
So no worries, unless you are a gasoline retailer!
September 19th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
#14 Lurtz Says: “I’m still not convinced that any American car company can do anything to rival the Japanese in quality and value, though.”
————————————————————————————-
You have to understand how Japanese car makers work. They take existing designs and make small incremental improvements that improve reliability and value. So the Japanese car makers are all about evolutionary innovation. In fact, this is part of Toyota’s stated mission.
A good example of this is the Prius. In 1993, the U.S. government started the “Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles”, which created the General Motors Precept, Ford Prodigy, and Chrysler ESX-3. So it was the U.S. car makers that pioneered hybrid vehicles. Notice how much the early Prius models look like the GM Precept.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partnership_for_a_New_Generation_of_Vehicles
Then in the late 90’s, OPEC dropped the price of gasoline to less than $1/gallon. American car makers abandoned these vehicles for higher profit SUVs. And so it came to pass that Toyota gets credit for pioneering hybrids, when in fact all they did was copy an existing design and improve on it.
So when it comes to revolutionary innovation, American car makers lead, but when it comes to evolutionary innovation, Japanese car makers do much better.
September 19th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
#20 everything.imp Says: “I am kind of confused by why Japanese cars are said to be better cars?? I have driven nothing but American made cars and trucks … Where are the statistics that support your claims?”
————————————————————————————-
Here are the statistics:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/tt.jpg
Toyota is the best, then Honda.
GM, Hyundai, Chrysler, and Volkswagon tie for worst.
However, as I said in my last post, the Japanese will never do anthing revolutionary, so if you want an E-REV, it will be American.
September 19th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
This is great news. Not that I want to buy a Chysler, but that it will keep GM in check on pricing
Unless they make secret agreements to not go below 35,000…
I wouldn’t put them past that… :s
September 19th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
The specs from the all battery concept cars and the 40 mile e-rev concept seem to be coming from the Tesla spec sheets…… Would it be called Tesler or Chrysla? Either way sounds like every one is getting the right ideas……
September 19th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
If I were Chrysler, I would select the battery maker that will NOT be selected for the Chevy VOLT, as a source for its batteries (GM checked them both and they are both equally qualified and good technologically).
September 19th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Happy to see Chrysler getting in the game. This means there will be several battery providers awarded new contracts. I wouldn’t be surprised to see either GM or Chrysler go to China for the li-poly units. Seems like China has 90% of li-poly battery knowledge and sales to this point. I hope at least one stays at home with American/Canadian manufactured batteries.
The Chrysler ERE pictured above is not even trying to sell as a sports model. Looks like an American attempt at the electric CR-V. Not a bad idea.
Yes, exciting times.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
See, now that looks nice. And, being second to market means that they can springboard ahead based on what GM does wrong. That’s a winning strategy. And it looks nice too…
September 19th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
So I guess the question is:
When will Ford jump off the bridge?
September 19th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
This is really good news. Now we have two parties that can shoulder the burden of educating the public about EREVs.
Also, instead of an eco-marketing-gimmick/oddity, the Volt will now be seen as the leader of things to come… a whole new class of cars.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Chrysler can not buy the batteries from either supplier that GM vetted. GM is smart and has contracted both to block the compettion and protect it from shortages.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Now, don’t get too excited when you see the concept on Tuesday. I can’t go through that letdown again. Too emotionally scarred from the last concept to production route…
September 19th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
if you buy a gas car now and in 36 months or so when you trade it in it might not be worth much, this is great news I hope gas is hard to find soon, this is the start of a change, go volt go eco, go tesla, go mdi, go 49ers (how did that get in there) ——-NO PLUG NO SALE
September 19th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Who’s going to start the Chrysler E-REV blog?
September 19th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Competition is very good for the consumer. So if Chrysler puts out an EREV (which will be half baked like most of their cars) for 30K GM will have to follow suit and the electrification of the automobile truly begins. Bring it on, Nissan is next. I love it! GM the ball is in your court for now. On another note whens the last time Chrystler actually put a concept in to production the new 300 and the challenger which took them what 5 years? As you can tell Im not a fan of theirs.
PS that thing is fugly! Volt on my #1 list for now. Well actually the Cruze is since I cant afford one or get one until probably 2013 or later.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
#24 Dave G
Interesting chart. Thanks.
The problem with the chart of course would be that the ten year mark measures the quality of cars made ten years ago. It will be very insensitive to changes in quality over time. Not to write off the conclusions but GM does seem to be making better vehicles during the last three or four years. We won’t know about that for another six or seven years.
The bigger issue is that the chart is misleading in that it multiples the numbers by 100. If you don’t do that the actual number of problems seems very low and the differences between manufacturers is minimal on an absolute scale. For example at ten years you can expect to have less than one problem with a Toyota and a problem and a half with a Ford. My point would be that all these cars are essentially trouble free. If you just took a graph and had it run from zero to ten problems per vehicle all the manufacturers would be clumped together, which seems to me to be a good part of the story.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Wonder how that shape does in a wind tunnel…
September 19th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Competition! Go USA! The more American companies that are in the race - the better it will be for all of us to get off of the oil and to stop sending our money out of the country.
Chrysler makes good looking cars but their quality needs to improve. Hopefully they will work on that.
GM makes great cars. Most are ugly but some are good looking. Pontiacs have always looked good and the new Saturns have gotten much better.
The new photos of the Volt look better than the 1st unofficial release - but it still looks kind of blah. Hopefully it looks better in person.
Will Ford jump into the race too?
This is exciting technology and eventually will be great for us and the US.
What’s cool about this web site (thanks Lyle!) - a lot of us have differing opinions but in the big picture - we all want the same thing. We just need GM, Chrysler, Ford, and new companies like Fisker and Tesla to help us out.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
#8 Jim Rowland:
“It looks like a trend, now there are at least three players if you include Fisker.”
#30 GXT:
“So I guess the question is: When will Ford jump off the bridge?”
_________________________________________________
I consider Mazda to be currently the most serious contender to Volt.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
I think it looks like a Caddy.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
#39 LB Says: “We just need GM, Chrysler, Ford, and new companies like Fisker and Tesla to help us out.”
————————————————————————————-
Don’t forget the Volvo ReCharge
http://www.volvocars.com/us/footer/about/NewsAndEvents/Pages/Volvo_Recharge_Concept.aspx
September 19th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
#32 said:
Chrysler can not buy the batteries from either supplier that GM vetted. GM is smart and has contracted both to block the compettion and protect it from shortages.
Chrysler then should hire EnerDel which is an American battery company. EnerDel is located in Indiana and provides batteries for ‘Think’ cars. There was an article a few weeks ago from EnerDel saying that the company could soon reduce the battery cost to half what it is now. Great news!
September 19th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
The company that has the best price and warranty will get my purchase…30k is the benchmark.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
#40 mien green Says: “I consider Mazda to be currently the most serious contender to Volt.”
————————————————————————————-
I’ve only heard rumors about a Mazda E-REV. Do you have more specific info? A link? I’m definately interested.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Lyle.
“Chrysler hasn’t got any battery development contracts and may be working with partners.”
Actually Chrysler is working with GE for battery and powertrain development.
http://www.grcblog.com/?p=319
Looks like GE made great strides in Sodium battery technology and also its an investor in A123. They are proposing something called dual battery technology. So I guess Chrysler may get combination of Sodium and A123 batteries, Sodium for energy and A123 for power.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Oh boy.. I can just see vision of the future ads… “Our car runs 50 miles on a single charge”.. no wait ours runs 60! No, 70! The race is on and it’s a darned good thing.
Just that the world still needs to raise the price of oil.
Any attempt to get off the oil use will be blocked by the cheapness of oil. Volt and other similar enterprises will do one thing - lower the demand for oil and thus also contribute to the cheapening of the oil.
Industrialized countries that plan to get off the oil must do two things to succeed (if they plan to succeed while there is still oil left in the ground) - 1. Impose domestic fuel taxes, 2. Impose import taxes on countries that do not tax oil accordingly ( think China, India, Russia, Venezuela etc )
September 19th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Maybe Chrysler will deliver an exciting looking car, maybe something like the concept Volt. Several of their cars have a similar front end look now. hmmmmm Maybe the real Volt isn’t dead after all.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
#38 Vincent:
Yeah, that’s the first question that crossed my mind too. Not very well would be my guess. Everybody who compained about looks of the “production” Volt, check this one out!!!
#46 Talks:
GE? Sounds pretty serious to me.
Forgive me but, for about the 10th time:
“Don’t look back, somethin’ might be gainin’ on ya!”
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS!
September 19th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Well I’ll be! Now this car really looks like an electric car! What a surprise! At least it looks better than the production Volt. It stands out. Go Chyrsler! I may have a change of heart.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Build it and they will buy it.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Let’s keep in mind that Chrysler is a long way from producing this car. However, just the announcement of it is great news. I hope they can pull it off, as I’ve always said, I’d rather rely on competition than congress.
Where would we be if GM (Lutz) didn’t have the foresight to push the envelope?
September 19th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
#49 Noel Park.
Yes. Chrysler is woking with American technological giant GE.
I think its a winning combination. No one can stop them.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
#23 Dave G said
“So when it comes to revolutionary innovation, American car makers lead, but when it comes to evolutionary innovation, Japanese car makers do much better.”
So first generation prius is a revolution or evolution ?
September 19th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
RE #4 mikeinatl
“Downside: It may become difficult to find a gasoline station once all this is commonplace. We will all be using about 5% of the gas we use now. We might have to buy gasoline on Ebay.”
There’s plenty of time for the business model to change. How many gasoline stations still have “service bays” that are operationg?
RE #22 Mark Bartosik
“.. offering electric fast charging and gasoline / ethanol .. So no worries, unless you are a gasoline retailer!”
No, actually gasoline retailers make more money on twinkees and soda than gasoline. Maybe their margins will be better on the “quick charge”.
RE #24 Dave G
“why Japanese cars are said to be better cars”
It’s common perception by the consumer .. so Toyota is outselling GM.
“the Japanese will never do anthing revolutionary”
Old story, but the Prius is rather revolutionary. Don’t count out the Japanese.
RE #25 canehdian
“Not that I want to buy a Chysler, but that it will keep GM in check on pricing”
There’s still the “new technology premium”.. it will take a while for the pricing model to come down. Just look at big screen & HD TVs. But it will happen.
As far as I’m concerned.. this is GOOD NEWS because the EV is being taken seriously. Not just a “red herring” like the EV-1.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
This car is far from being produced. I give GM props for being so inventive in design. They should have saved their, “Revolution” commercials for the Volt! As far as American cars not being as good in quality and reliability, that was true in the 80’s, and most of the 90’s, but all things being considered, especially GM, they have made a fantastic turn-a-round in quality and reliabitlity and it is no longer an issue. The issue is perception, even though it is no longer a valid reason to avoid them. Generally, people, especially the media, perceive the big three in a negative way and the imports (even though they may be made here) in a positive way. Hopefully, cars like the Volt will change this perception.
Hawk
September 19th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Where is Ford in the E-REV race?
It is good that they have the plug-in Escape hybrid. They need an E-REV to compete with the other Detroit 2.
Ford might work with Mazda for the E-REV with a rotary engine.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Still waiting for one of them to make one that looks good and looks like it is big enough for taller people.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
If the “Transformers movie” Volt looked loke a big purple sausage, The new Chrysler “Amp” (hey, they copied everything else) looks like a blueberry Jelly Belly jellybean with wheels. I guess the production Volt COULD have looked worse - it could have looked like Chrysler’s jellybean car.
Wind tunnels are the work of the devil - they take perfectly good concept cars, and turn them into, well, I can’t say that sort of thing on a wholesome family website like GM-Volt.com. Wind tunnels are evil - EVIL ! They must be destroyed ! (The line for the angry mob starts here, Pitchforks and Flaming Torches sold separately).
————————————————————-
BTW, I’m still waiting for someone to tell me where a front license plate attaches to the Volt. Many states require a front plate. (rope and tape are NOT legal options, and I’m not drilling into the bumper of a $40,000 car).
September 19th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
In regards to Chrysler’s entry in to the EREV and hybrid market:
Kind of reminds me of when I’m at a health club and I see some porker just chewing gum, b.s.ing and playing around with the equipment.
My first thought is to be very critical . . . . “look you fat b*stard, you’re never going to get in shape like that” . . . .. but then I remind myself, . . . “well, at least he’s at the gym”.
http://www.chrysler.com/en/2009/aspen_hybrid/overview/two_mode_system/
You just have to wonder why the big three (if they were serious about getting in shape) don’t have something to compete with the Prius, now?
September 19th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
The Volt looks much better than that vehicle.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Proof that Honda and Toyota build the most reliable and problem free cars.
Just pick up an issue of Consumer Reports. Honda and Japan nearly always beat any US car maker on most quality/reliability marks.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
#54 Talks,
#55 BluesBrian,
The Toyota Prius evolved from the GM Precept, as I said in post #23.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
#62 JEC Says: “Just pick up an issue of Consumer Reports. Honda and Japan nearly always beat any US car maker on most quality/reliability marks.”
————————————————————————————
See graph from link in post #24.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
#45 Dave G:
“I’ve only heard rumors about a Mazda E-REV. Do you have more specific info? A link? I’m definitely interested.”
___________________________________________________
The info was posted on this very site Aug. 28th,
http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/234607/
This is what I wrote at the time, but being very late to the party, I don’t think anyone actually read it but me:
“In reading the thread here, it seems that the majority of the posts have missed the point, with the notable exceptions of Estero, Dave G, CM and a few others above. I believe that this so far closest announced technology competitor to the GM Volt is all about the advantages of the Wankel engine as a range extender. Mazda’s most recent developments with its rotary engine have been in the areas of fuel economy and weight, as well as emissions, power and wide range torque (13B-MSP, 16X). This means that, while fuel efficiency may not be as good as an Atkinson cycle reciprocating ICE, running the rotary at constant rpm(s) minimizes a good deal of the comparable fuel inefficiency, and more to the point, the potential saving in dead weight while the vehicle is in AER is bound to make an impact, since the rotary engine size required for 65-70 HP to run the generator comparable to Volt-like performance should be in the order of 0.5L or less. Moreover, with Mazda’s announced intentions of utilizing lightweight technologies throughout its nextgen lineup, the size and weight of the engine, generator and motor needed to move the range-extended vehicle along could be even further reduced, along the line of the Aptera and Hypercar arguments.
Also, Mazda has been quick to exploit the inherent advantage of the rotary engine over conventional ICEs for using hydrogen for combustion, thus positioning the rotary as an alternative to next generation fuel cell range extenders, should the hydrogen infrastructure ever come to pass.
Further reading:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/06/26/mazda-declares-it-will-consumption-by-30-by-2015/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_Wankel_engine “
September 19th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
I really hope that all the automakers are sitting around conference tables debating whether “going full hybrid” in their product line is enough for them to survive or if going “part hybrid and part electric” will be required.
I honestly think that going full hybrid on their product line will be the minimum for survival and that the difference between survival and thriving will be the amount of electric/serial hybrid that they have on the showroom floor.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Toyota is sure keeping quiet in releasing any real details on its new Prius. If I were GM and other car makers, I would be a little nervous.
Toyota has a lot of experience in the Hybrid market, and I believe they will be surprising a lot of people when they unveil.
I am excited about all the new fuel efficient cars coming to market. I am in desperate need of replacing my car, and will be buying the best in class, that comes in under $25,0000. I think I can hold out until late 2009 if needed, but I have great expectations for spring of 2009.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
It’s an interesting race… but the IMO the more conservative lines of the production Volt look a lot cleaner than this Chrysler concept. I like that the Volt looks like a normal car, rather than some goofy ugly duckling that only a greenie could love.
As far as the whole quality comparison thing… I bet in another 10 or 20 years when my 87 Fiero needs replacing they’ll have that price down to a much more reasonable range
Short term, my plan to get off gasoline involves a 3800 series 1 n/a swapped into my other (86GT) Fiero, a CNG conversion, and a Phill station.
WE DRIVE EXCITEMENT BABY
September 19th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
4 seats or 5? I suspect this car might be a bit too compact for my needs (as is the Volt most likely), but it’s a start.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
#23 Dave G says:
You have to understand how Japanese car makers work. They take existing designs and make small incremental improvements that improve reliability and value. So the Japanese car makers are all about evolutionary innovation. In fact, this is part of Toyota’s stated mission.
A good example of this is the Prius. In 1993, the U.S. government started the “Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles”, which created the General Motors Precept, Ford Prodigy, and Chrysler ESX-3. So it was the U.S. car makers that pioneered hybrid vehicles. Notice how much the early Prius models look like the GM Precept.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partnership_for_a_New_Generation_of_Vehicles
Then in the late 90’s, OPEC dropped the price of gasoline to less than $1/gallon. American car makers abandoned these vehicles for higher profit SUVs. And so it came to pass that Toyota gets credit for pioneering hybrids, when in fact all they did was copy an existing design and improve on it
Dave: Just a thought here: What if in a year or so, just before the arrival of all these EREV’s, OPEC cranks up oil production again and the price at the pump drops in half. Will history repeat itself and cause the consumers to go back to gas sucking beheamoths, causing the EREV’s be taken out behind the barn and shot? Hmmmm….
Canuk
September 19th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
If oil price drops dramatically, obviously many people will not be willing to shell out extra (or very little more) for an hybrid or electric.
But, I expect the cost of hybrids (Honda is already on this trail, with a goal of hybrid adder cost less than $2,500) and electrics to drop and be comparable to traditional ICE. So, even if oil drops significantly in the future, people will still buy E-revs and hybrids for both economics and for environmentalist ideals.
JMO, and as usual it is right
September 19th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Even if gas prices plummeted I’d bet it wouldn’t stop the hybrid’s momentum. With all the investment made in the technology, the federal government would probably step in and tax gas up to the point where the hybrids remained competitive. Don’t forget we the taxpayers will have some big loans to collect on.
Even now Saudi Arabia is seeing the writing on the wall. Their refusal to cut output to support crude prices over $100/bbl shows that they realise what’s happening. At the point where a lot of people started plunking down a C-note to fill their gas tanks, mainstream thinking began an abrupt change in direction. I doubt we’ll see a reversal in this thought process after this summer.
But then I’ve been wrong before….
September 19th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
#71
Volt and hybrids are just storm in a tea cup. They will not affect oil consumption for years / decades to come. OPEC will lose more money by dropping oil prices (assuming they can up the volume, which is a big IF) - than the what reduction in oil demand because of 10,000 volts.
The big thing that will determine the oil price in the future is the economic growth of the world (esp. keep an eye on China and India).
September 19th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Someone earlier said that Chrysler’s quality was far better than GM’s. So that’s why Mercedes-Benz dumped them on Cerberus? Because for some reason, they lost millions on Chrysler because no one was buying them, yet GM was selling a crapload of Cobalts. Sounds like someone needs to get their facts straight. I honestly DO hope Chrysler can pull something off that puts them in contention for consumer dollars, rather than make concepts and then become forgotten. Maybe we should applaud Chrysler for trying something new, yet I cannot say innovative because GM thought of it first. Toyota’s Prius is innovative, yet for all the advancements and sales that Toyota have garnered, they only have a parallel hybrid rather than an E-REV. They put down GM’s moonshot for quite some time before “scrambling” to make a plug-in Prius.
Face it, Toyota has been about quality for sometime and GM not much so. They have, however been improving. Now they come out with the Volt and everyone wants to bash them for it. When GM comes out with the Volt, the naysayers will shut up. When Chrysler can deliver this…this…concept, the competition will inevitably benefit us in higher quality and lower costs. I think some people owe the domestic manufacturers an apology…or at least a “job well done”.
September 19th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
It’s still a little early for a “job well done”. But I’m waiting with baited breath for the appropriate time to give them one.
At the present time, I think Alan Shepard said it best right before they lit that first Mercury Redstone he was sitting on top of.
“Don’t F— This Up”
September 19th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Well hopefully Chryslers’ car won’t have a transmission to fall apart, for thier sake. To me it would be one more Chrysler product I would never ever ever ever consider buying. Chrysler=junk. nobody wants junk. I would rather be seen in a very darkly tinted window………dare I say TOYMOTA Prius, YUCKY, than be seen alive in a Chrysler, just my opinion, I’m done now, Take care all!!
LJGTVWOTR NPNS!!!!
September 19th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Bob Lutz in a battle with Tom LaSorda - two heavy weights in the car business that I’m sure would like to leave a lasting lagasy on the auto industry.
Both are legendary leaders and I would love to see Chrysler in the EREV race.
September 19th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Fantastic! It better be more reliable than my ‘02 Jeep Grand Cheroke. It sucks!–I’m not kidding.
September 19th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
[...] on Tuesday with a 40 mile range and a generator range-extender. Sounds a little like the Volt: GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site Blog Archive Chrysler to Unveil New Extended-Range Electric C… In either case, good news if it is true. It had better be better quality than my Jeep or Chrysler [...]
September 19th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Hmm…while I am cautiously feeling good about this annoucement since it means one more model of electric car on the road, Chrysler is way too behind to save itself using the electric car like GM will with the VOLT and E-Flex platform. It just did not invest enough til now, and now it may be too late for them. To top it all off, if I have to choose between Chrysler=some pretty cars but worse quality and GM=good quality cars whose quality is continuously improving, I’d choose GM every time.
So what do I think about this announcement? It’s good for GM and good for us; competition will mean more R&D, better quality, lower price. For Chrysler, I’m afraid it will only slow not reverse the downfall of once mighty automotive giant.
GO VOLT!!
September 19th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
I am glad to hear this. If they come out at the same time, I will look at both cars and decide. I am pretty impressed with the Volt though, it will be hard to win me over Chrysler.
September 19th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Competition…nice to hear.
So hopefully the other automakers will follow. I figured Toyota would be the next company with some news.
I wonder if one of them can beat GM to market.
September 19th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
These are exciting times! I’d love to have the main problem being which EREV to buy. Late 2010 seems to be the event horizon for the beginning of the electrification of personal transportation in the USA. Granted, it’ll take a couple of decades to make a significant difference, but it’s going to happen.
I’m still on record that GM will beat that Nov 2010 date by 5 months (Independence Day 2010) and that Toyota will have a 2009 “surprise”. As I said, exciting times!
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!!! NPNS!
September 19th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Lyle asks why a car that goes X number of miles on electricity alone, then has an onboard generator to power it, sounds familiar? ….
…. check out Volvo’s 1992 ECC prototype… which GM copied 7 years later in their prototype, and most recently in yea… the Chevy Volt
September 19th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
82 Jeff: “I wonder if one of them can beat GM to market.”
Toyota will.
And no amount of long explanations about how their hybrid is inferior to your hybrid will convince anyone. “E-REV? Whatev.”
They’ll just walk away from you, shaking their head. Why wait for a unreleased, vaporware car from a manufacturer that is notoriously unreliable, when you can get a car you *know* will be excellently made, right then? Oh yeah. Sorry about all that OTHER junk we built, this time it’ll be different! Really! GM’ll be better this time! As reliable as Honda (only twice as expensive, and not available yet!)
September 19th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Looks like a Ford Verve (soon to be US Fiesta) concept with Cadillac lights and a Chrysler/Cadillac grille. UGLY. But glad to see some competition. Hopefully it competes very well with the Volt and comes in at a lower price.
Still waiting to see what Ford/Mazda is coming up with.
September 19th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Oddly. Volt actually did end up being vaporware. None of the concept that we were originally shown remains anymore.
Adaptation to transform it (pun intended) to a vehicle with long-term mainstream potential eliminated the very aspects that drew in those original enthusiasts. And now that there is a production version, it’s pretty obvious that the process of starting all over again with the promotion is taking place.
The irony makes for good history.
Makes you wonder what happens next, eh?
September 19th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
Lurtz #85
The reliability gap has been closed. The difference is about 15 problems per 100 cars, so that’s less than 1/5 of a problem per car, or by all practical purposes insignificant.
September 19th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Like we have been saying. The Chevy Volt is a game changer. This leaves no doubt. For all you naysayers, I hope you keep your opinions to your selves. I don’t mean I don’t want to hear from a naysayer, I do. But only if they have actual real world, true to life things to say. In other words, back up you negative comments. Take Statik, for an example. Statik does give negative comments but they are based on facts, not his biases. Statik is a prime example of a good commenter on this site and most of us could learn a lot by reading his comments very carefully.
September 19th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
#59 The Grump
I image the voice saying EVIL to be like Mermaid Man in Sponge Bob, one of my sons favorite cartoons. And yes, I’ve been known to watch the occasional Sponge Bob.
But I digress, the more competition the better!
September 20th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Who else thinks that even Chrysler is sketching better looking cars than Toyota? I mean, what’s up with the new Corolla? Gag me! And then I read that Toyota owners are seeing red over the recent increases in cost of ownership. And their production costs are soaring due to recalls and litigation! I’ve heard they have had to retrain their sales staff on the finer points of “dickering” on price now that they cannot demand retail-only pricing. Wow! It must be tough getting knocked off their lofty perch. Is this Honda’s doing?
September 20th, 2008 at 12:50 am
It took 2 1/2 years for the Volt to go from where Chrysler is now to a production car. Using that time line it will take Chrysler to mid 2013 before their first model comes on line. By then they’ll be competing with Honda and Toyota and an improved Volt and all its variants. Somehow I think that will be too little too late. As for Ford, what are they planning, bankruptcy ?
September 20th, 2008 at 1:25 am
All it will take is for one of them to get something to market (hope its the Volt) then things will get going, if your worried about batteries how long do you think if will take Napa or some other auto parts company to come out with a replacement universal battery for $29.95, and new supped up electric motors that don’t need an ice for generation, we just gotta get going.get something out to market. ——–NO PLUG NO SALE
September 20th, 2008 at 2:13 am
Check out the Volt’s FIFTH DOOR
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4283152.html
September 20th, 2008 at 5:54 am
#88 Grizzly says “The reliability gap has been closed. The difference is about 15 problems per 100 cars, so that’s less than 1/5 of a problem per car, or by all practical purposes insignificant.”
———————————————-
With so few problems per car, what matters more is the quality of the dealer to fix the occasional problem that does occur and do the routine items. Chevy dealers as a whole, while uneven, include some that have excellent service and many that are average. Toyota dealers’ service as a whole is much worse. Some cite them as the number 1 reason that Toyota has low repeat ownership even though most owners like the car.
September 20th, 2008 at 6:03 am
#92 Ed said “It took 2 1/2 years for the Volt to go from where Chrysler is now to a production car. Using that time line it will take Chrysler to mid 2013 before their first model comes on line.”
——————————————
The CEO of Chrysler (Robert Nardelli) was previously at Home Depot. He left after HD’s stock price declined, during a time period when competitors stock price was rising. Many HD stockholders viewed him as a person who loved to make grand announcements, but under whose leadership execution was lacking and performance suffered. That is, based on his HD track record there is good reason to expect the Chrysler concept’s transition to production to proceed slowly.
September 20th, 2008 at 8:22 am
#91 I totally agree with you. Chrysler body designs are bold and attractive. They are not necessarily aerodynamic: the concept Volt looked more like some of the Dodge designs to me than a Chevy. For better or worse, the production Volt looks a lot more like a Cobalt. The concept Chrsyler looks great. They may deliver on it.
September 20th, 2008 at 8:47 am
#70 Canuk Says: “What if in a year or so, just before the arrival of all these EREV’s, OPEC cranks up oil production again and the price at the pump drops in half.”
————————————————————————————-
I think the U.S. should set a minimum price of gasoline at $3/gallon. If market prices fall below that, oil import tariffs should be raised until the price goes back up around $3 a gallon.
This would not only encourage plug-ins, but also ethanol, bio-diesel, and domestic oil production from sources that are harder to extract.
September 20th, 2008 at 8:50 am
#98 Dave G says “I think the U.S. should set a minimum price of gasoline at $3/gallon. If market prices fall below that, oil import tariffs should be raised until the price goes back up around $3 a gallon.”
———————————————-
Maybe it would be better to change the gas tax to $2 per gallon. That would accomplish the same objective insofar as incentives and give some money for road improvements, which still are much needed.
Of course, anyone in congress brave enough to vote for either of these ideas will be close to retirement.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:18 am
I give Chrysler credit for going the “honest route” and not throwing out there an easy-to-develop-but-impractical pure (battery-only) electric vehicle, which is what those like Renault/Nissan’s Ghosn are doing. They are simply trying to cash in on public enthusiasm before the public gets wise.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:44 am
You know what’s funny… Chrysler’s best selling cars (and their only good ones IMO) were created under Bob Lutz. The PT Cruiser, Viper, Charger, 300, Magnum, and Grand Cherokee were all Bob Lutz’s ideas. And here they are still getting their ideas from them.
I seriously doubt they will be able to put this car together in time. Chrysler is a mess. They are unable to make nice cars.
September 20th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Hmmm, I smell a Chrsyler-EV.com site.
Lyle you got some free time between this site, the doctor thing, marathons and the family right? Maybe you could hook that up for us.
I’d like to go on record again and call ’shenanigans’ on about 100 different things on this concept and any future plans.
September 20th, 2008 at 11:24 am
GM should be this forward thinking with design and not just concepts. Today’s designs need to be bold. Chrysler has a great design if they hold true to this concept. GM did too with their concept. Well, see if Chrysler does the same.
September 20th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
#99 RB Says: “Maybe it would be better to change the gas tax to $2 per gallon. That would accomplish the same objective insofar as incentives and give some money for road improvements, which still are much needed. Of course, anyone in congress brave enough to vote for either of these ideas will be close to retirement.”
————————————————————————————
Three points:
1) Gas taxes in Europe are around $3/gallon or more already. That’s why they pay over $7/gallon at the pump.
2) Suddenly increasing the gas tax in the U.S. that much would be disastrous for the economy.
3) A gas tax that kicks in as gas prices fall may not be that unpopular. After looking around a little, I’ve found that I’m not the first one with this idea:
http://zfacts.com/p/carbonomics-book.html
September 20th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
“”"if you buy a gas car now and in 36 months or so when you trade it in it might not be worth much, this is great news I hope gas is hard to find soon, this is the start of a change, go volt go eco, go tesla, go mdi, go 49ers (how did that get in there) ——-NO PLUG NO SALE”"”
I think you have the right idea, but are a little advanced on the timing. 36 months from now, GM will still not have built its 10,000th Volt, so the retail gasoline, and ICE car markets will still be 99.9% of what they are today.
Once sales of PHEVs hit the million per year mark, we will start to see shifts.
September 20th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
“”"This is really good news. Now we have two parties that can shoulder the burden of educating the public about EREVs.”"”
This is a very insightful comment. From a marketing point of view, the addition of a Chrysler PHEV would create a category. It is very difficult to sell a unique product, much easier to tout the reasons why my entry is better than the other guy’s.
I spent many years trying to peddle l a unique enterprise software product. When competitors introduced a me-to product, credibility was enhanced, and sales for both companies took off.
September 20th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
82 Jeff: “I wonder if one of them can beat GM to market.”
Toyota will.
And no amount of long explanations about how their hybrid is inferior to your hybrid will convince anyone. “E-REV? Whatev.”
They’ll just walk away from you, shaking their head. —————————————–
Think of the difference between the average consumer and the average poster on this board. We want to know how things work, and to evaluate technology. The consumer looks at price and performance. Those being equal, he will choose the styling he likes.
The battle in 2013 will be based on price and gas mileage, two things customers understand. If Toyota is still doing hybrid, and tweaks Prius up to 48 mpg, the consumer will be asked to choose between 48 mpg and 105 mpg. If gas is expensive, and the Volt premium comes way down, people will go with 105 mpg, without ever understanding the difference in technology. There will be no argument about “my hybrid is better than your hybrid”.
All of that being said. I think by 2013 Toyota will be way past the NiCad hybrid and be offering either PHEV or leapfrom to BEV, technology and price permitting,
September 20th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
#70 Canuk Says: “What if in a year or so, just before the arrival of all these EREV’s, OPEC cranks up oil production again and the price at the pump drops in half.”
————————————————————————————-
I think the U.S. should set a minimum price of gasoline at $3/gallon. If market prices fall below that, oil import tariffs should be raised until the price goes back up around $3 a gallon.
This would not only encourage plug-ins, but also ethanol, bio-diesel, and domestic oil production from sources that are harder to extract.———————————————————————————————-
————-
I agree with your govt policy prescription, but the American people are a long way from voting for a candidate who promises higher gas ttaxes. Look at the platforms on both sides of the current election. One is offering more drilling and gas tax holidays, the other is offering solar and hope,
September 20th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
This only illustrates that there is no intrinsic reason why any and all automakers cannot build electrified vehicles. The gating problem simply is the creation of large component supplier factories able to produce the components needed in large numbers.
Chrysler, Ford and all the automakers are developing such vehicles. It is only a matter of time before they start showing up in the dealer lots. We can expect the next two years to be an auto enthusiast’s dream as the product announcements flow from all the automakers.
September 20th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Regarding the subject of quality and the quality chart, It is based on uneven and non-scientific data, from Consumer Reports.
Hence… Garbage In and Garbage Out.
CR may be many things but a statistical service it is not. At one time when it first began reporting in the early 1970s, and Detroit was in the midst of its first major downsizing, it was using lots of new downsized componetry in its vehicles, while Japanese brands only brought two year refined models ot America. Japanese consumers were the “guinea pigs” who debugged the “first and second year model ” bugs. By the time the cars arrived here they were pretty solid.
At one time, you did not have to use much in the way of valid statistical tests to ascertain the difference. American cars produced around 750 problems per 100 vehicles and the Europeans did a little worse. The unrepresentative samples of “pre-debugged” vehicles from Japan produced only about 325 problems per hundred vehicles. There WAS a substantial difference, that even the most primitive measures could adduce.
Over time, all the automakers improved. Reliability of new downsized parts in America went up with experience and American cars improved rapidly. Japanese companies also continued to improve. The Europeans tagged along afterward, but competition forced some of them to improve, and several EU brands were driven from the US marketplace by their poor reliability.
That was the 1980s. For the past twenty years, the Japanese have improved to about 100-115 defects per hundred vehicles. They now suffer a problem in that the “guinea pigs” are now sometimes Americans, testing “first year models” from Japanese/American factories. nevertheless highest quality vehicles are still made in Japan and “guinea pigged” by Japanese consumers before they arrive at American dealers.
The US manufacturers, not having the “first and second year Japanese consumer guinea pigs” still average higher defect measures, but even with that handicap, they average around 110-120 defects per hundred vehicles.
The real statistical difference has vanished. and it vanished a decade or more ago.
Now the crude, unreliable, statistical measures effect the results. CR does not control its sample sizes, or control the samplers. Any subscriber may report.
Including the pecksniffian ones who purchase their vehicle, convinced of its superiority. These people then report that they were wise purchasers by reporting they made a wonderful buying decision This affirms to them that they were so wise to start with.
Then there are the buyers who buy the “best” as they see it, and then duly report how good their new toy is. Porche, the snobs choice as a sport car, even if an antique design, with a terrible polar moment or inertia, gets an inordinate regard in these CR surveys. Porsche are seldom driven hard as they are meant “to be seen in” and not to perform in.
Even though it shares many of the same unreliable components that appear in and with the rest of the VW group cars, the Porsche leads the quality ratings from CR.
Fortunately, there are now many other valid firms who measure quality of the automakers output, without the smug certainty of the Birkenstockian clad reporters from CR, convinced of the superiority of their long time love affairs with Volvo, Toyota and Honda.
I tend to respect JD Powers ratings systems, much more than CR. Quality is to all intents and purposes indistinguishable in today’s auto market. It is now just an expected given.
Except in the minds of the self-satisfied, self-loathing, anti- American snobs.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
>> The battle in 2013 will be based on price and gas mileage, two things customers understand. If Toyota is still doing hybrid, and tweaks Prius up to 48 mpg, the consumer will be asked to choose between 48 mpg and 105 mpg. If gas is expensive, and the Volt premium comes way down, people will go with 105 mpg, without ever understanding the difference in technology.
Prius is already at 48 MPG. That’s what the average is on mine as of 104,584 miles, despite using E10 for fuel the entire time.
Also, the 105 MPG plug-in Prius is already on the road. Aftermarket upgrades have begun. By 2013, it should be available as a factory option… giving Prius a huge advantage over Volt due to much greater production volume (just swap in a larger pack and add a charging module).
GM success in the plug-in market ultimately boils down to how many Volts can be produced and at what price.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Another ugly concept car. Oh well, it fits in real well with Volt and Prius - small, short and dumpy looking with barely any room to carry anything. I’m not impressed.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:56 am
If it’s an electric Jeep might be a winner.
September 21st, 2008 at 10:23 am
Whoever comes out with a “stand-out” car like the volt wins my money. The volt is just a car now, with a high sticker price. If this thing comes out in a very stand-out way, i’ll buy this instead
September 21st, 2008 at 11:38 am
I’ve had time to reflect upon my Chrysler misgivings, and must now concede that all of the US manufacturers had a contributing role to the success of the Japanese.
I find the Tesla tie-in intriguing, if they truly follow that model, it means that they are planning to use existing, off the shelf ‘cells’ in their battery. This can only mean a completely different philosophy from GM’s: GM has attempted to make a car & battery with a service life similar to that of an ICE-only car; using advanced, leading edge battery technology (and severely limiting how it is used).
Chrysler/Tesla, on the other hand, may have no plan whatever to extend the life of it’s battery; making it a dealer replacement item every 3 - 4 years. This sounds rugged on the poor car owner, but what if they build in the cost of replacement batteries into the purchase price (as GM has reportedly done simply to hedge it’s bets)? The Chrysler/Tesla battery would be much cheaper than the Volt’s, not only because of off-the-shelf components going into it, but because there’s less incentive to reduce it’s usable capacity for longevity: smaller case, fewer cells = lower cost.
Now what happens four years on from rollout? The state of the art in off-the-shelf lithium-ion cells will have advanced (partly because of the Volt program), accellarating cost-savings for anyone on the four-year replacement/Tesla model: Maybe the third replacement would be unnecessary.
So, if you’re GM, you’re hoping not to “lose” by replacing a Volt battery halfway through the car’s life. If you’re Chrysler/Tesla, you’re hoping to “win” by cutting back on an otherwise-needed third or fourth replacement.
It’s an interesting scenario, and it would be interesting to see how the market responds to this philosophy.
September 21st, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Nothing attracts a crowd, like a crowd.
Chrysler is a total disaster so it would be nice to see them get back on solid footing. Like GM, though, many of the recent steps are in the right direction. For example, eliminating all of the redundancy in the dealerships is a good place to start. Reducing total number of models and using similar components to maximize mass production are a few others. I have never considered a Chrysler, but an E-REV would change that.
Maybe Chrysler will have the courage to come up with something like the concept version of the Volt for around 30k?
September 21st, 2008 at 8:51 pm
This is a very good news.
Whoever comes out 1st.
Whoever is selling for $25k.
Whoever makes more than 10k the 1st year (10k is about 2 per dealer).
September 22nd, 2008 at 7:49 am
Since GM couldn’t deliver on the Volt concept, I won’t hold my breath on the Chrysler, either. But, it does look pretty sweet, compared to the official Chevy Volt.
September 22nd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
I still don’t need the ICE.
Can I yank it out with a simple mod??
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Unless GE is moving fast I suspect that Chrysler’s confidence that they can get suitable batteries from this comes from the fact that GM has been working with two vendor groups, one of which is going to be turned down and then will be free to sell their batteries to others. Which leads to why I think GM has reportedly decided which vendor they are going to go with but are keeping it secret a few months. That much more delay before the losing team gets to get down to business with competitors such as Chrysler.
September 26th, 2008 at 1:39 am
It’s great to see GM and Chrysler duking it out for the electric car. However, let’s not forget about the Tesla. They came out first and really have a nice electric car. Ok, cost is high but that can turn around in the next couple of years. The Volt is a nice looking car but only good for 40 miles and not those long drives you normally take on vacation. Chrysler on the other hand will go 400 miles (I hope). The Tesla roadster can go 244 miles on a charge. Doesn’t use gasoline!. Only takes 10 minutes to recharge the batteries while the volt will take 24 hours. Why can’t GM and Chrysler do the same?