Grab our RSS Feed
Follow us on:
AND 
AND
VIDEO: Production Version Chevy Volt in Motion
September 20th, 2008 | Posted in: Video
Enjoy this video of the production version Chevy Volt actually in motion. Includes interior footage. No it isn’t a real Volt with E-Flex drivetrain, just the production model with a low speed electric motor, but it might send chills up your spine anyway!:
[flash http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5w2VgY4YK8]
Posted by: Lyle
111 Responses to “VIDEO: Production Version Chevy Volt in Motion”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
September 20th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Can’t wait to see the E-flex in action.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
General Motors is an innovative “hybrid” corporation — part powered by conventional manufacturing of automobiles, and part powered by a 25 gigadollar subsidy generator they’re trademarking “Volt”. This on-board generator provides a green halo for the entire corporate vehicle and draws a steady stream of taxpayer money, allowing an otherwise out-of-gas, bankrupt corporation to limp along the nation’s highways.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
hmm…….this limping company seems to be the only one with an electric car in the works for the masses. Let’s see what the competition can come up with, and how long it takes them.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
All I could do was smile.
!
I can’t wait to have a Volt and tell Opec to kiss my …
Hawk
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
The competition is crapping its pants right now. If GM survives, and with a bailout they surely will, the competition is going to need years to catch up with GM. An American Revolution, very exciting indeed.
Hawk
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Bryce.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
GM is definitely heading in the right direction and as such, forcing their competitors to get on the bandwagon as well.
Unfortunately, there are people on this website that is hoping for GM’s failure.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
The silence of the VOLT on the road is scary… Does GM plan to provide some sound to it (via some external speakers) to prevent accidents or injuries to blind people?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
I didn’t quite understand why it should send chills up my spine. They way I see it, its just a normal car on the tarmac. But what lies beneath it is what should send chills down the spine of other companies.
And Lurtz, did you mention taxpayer money??? Let me tell you something. Do you have any idea how much money goes down the drain every day in US?? It goes to war, it goes to OPEC, it goes to charities that have nothing to do with american people.
Do you realize that american public is paying through its nose for things which they themselves make available to millions around the globe for free?? It is said that the mind is like a parachute. Works best when it is open. So, please open it and do not criticize when american companies get american money cause you don’t say a word when the same taxpayer’s money goes to other countries just to make sure that american oil interests are safe.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
All we need now is a battery contract, and many many batteries. I’ve got to say I like that interior, even w/ the white console, much better than the concept.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
#6 Lurtz
You’re looking at the most exciting development in transportation in a hundred years — the electrification of transportation changes everything, including reaping huge economic rewards for what has traditionally been dead weight social losses attributable to electrical generation.
GM is the only manufacturer willing to take up the challenge of making it happen.
If you don’t understand that you then you’re intent on being ignorant. Your choice of course but since you don’t seem to be dense perhaps a fresh look is in order. Just a thought.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Eugene, I do not think that a silent car should be made noisy so that blind people can hear it. I think that it still is the driver’s responsibility to ensure the safety of pedestrians. In fact, it is a good thing that less noisy vehicles would ultimately make the world a more peaceful place to live in.
There might be other ways to alert blind people such as having proximity censors in their sticks that can detect if something is moving towards them. It would be rather easy to implement as well. Altering the lifestyles of millions so that some people can feel that they have done something worthwhile is not worthwhile in itself.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
8 Eugene: The silence of the VOLT on the road is scary… Does GM plan to provide some sound to it (via some external speakers) to prevent accidents or injuries to blind people?
Keep in mind that rolling tires of cars make noise. I do a lot of walking, and from the sidewalk I notice that many cars make mostly tire noise once they reach cruising speed. I hope there aren’t artificial noise generators added onto the car.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I wonder why the green leaf is on the right in the video? In the released GM photos it’s on the left.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
How many blind people have actually walked or run into a moving car? If the answer if few because ICE vehicles actually have engine noise and that’s how they avoid hitting cars it’s going to be quite an expensive study to PROVE that.
To me this is a non issue.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Wow, you global-warming-denying Bush-bots are a humorless bunch of Thurston Howells. Bob Lutz said he’s willing to give the EV-2 a year or two of government revenue generation and rich folk toy status before he drops it and goes back to making Hummers and Silverados.
“The Chevrolet Volt is [...], subject to GM successfully negotiating satisfactory government incentives.”
“Initially there will be enough demand from rich people, so there won’t be a worry for the first year or two.” –Bob Lutz
http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/501213
In the immortal line from Stripes: “Lighten up, Francis.”
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Hey guys, isn’t it simple to pick out the liberals in these chats. People never cease to amaze.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
#10 Grizzly
Did you notice that Lutz has said batteries will not be a limiting factor in production?
He also seems genuinely puzzled at this point by the Japanese skepticism about the batteries. One interesting bit was that he said the packs of 250 cells would be made up of modules comprising 50 cells. The packs will not be serviced locally. I’m thinking the local service department could pull the pack, check each module, and then send the defective one(s) in for replacement or repair. Great approach.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Pino Says: #17
“Hey guys, isn’t it simple to pick out the liberals in these chats.”
*** *** ***
I was just thinking that it sure isn’t difficult to determine who will be voting
“demagogue” on Nov 4.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
#16 Lurtz
Thanks.
I find it interesting that you are asking someone to “lighten up.” My read of this site, at least for the last several days, is that many, many posters here have been asking you to lighten up. Every once in a few days say something pleasant or positive about something.
There must be something that interests you about the Volt and not just makes you upset about everything. Yes?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
#16 Lurtz – “Initially there will be enough demand from rich people, so there won’t be a worry for the first year or two.” –Bob Lutz
He’s been saying this for quite some time though he’s been more diplomatic in referring to the target market as “highly educated consumers who work on the coasts.”
Most people probably had figured out what he meant but I was surprised he just came out and said it.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
DonC # 18
“One interesting bit was that he said the packs of 250 cells would be made up of modules comprising 50 cells.”
*** *** ***
Don,
Actually I don’t specifically remember that statement. Lutz has made so many do date. I’ve always felt that a modular approach to the battery would be a very good idea. Not only for defective cells/modules, but because a battery UPGRADE would simply be a replacement of 5 modules with 5 BETTER ones!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
#22 Grizzly – “because a battery UPGRADE would simply be a replacement of 5 modules with 5 BETTER ones!”
Yes, an upgrade path would be nice. In fact the upgrade path may be simpler and not involve replacement modules. During the same interview he also mentioned that not all slots were filled and that more modules could be fit into the pack, effecting changes in the price and performance of the pack and the vehicle. He was talking about alternative vehicles but that wouldn’t foreclose an upgrade to an existing one. More modules and a software upgrade and you might be good to go for 90 miles.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Has anyone noticed that the Volt mules with a Malibu body are reportedly making 40 AER, so shouldn’t the production model do significantly better?
Be well,
Tag
“LJGTVWOTR !! NPNS”
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Thanks for the video, Lyle. Good work, again.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
A friend of mine trains seeing eye dogs. They have a Prius at their school that they use to train the dogs. The Prius will run slowly on electric only. They don’t want the dogs keying off of the engine noise. The dogs can see and hear, of course, but we really don’t know which cues they use to identify an oncoming car.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
#23 Tagamet – “shouldn’t the production model do significantly better?”
If the goal is 40 miles at the battery pack EOL you’d have to assume it would be better when new. My guess would be 45 miles.
As for comparing it to the Malibu, you have to be careful about comparing mileage ranges because the type of driving and terrain will make a big difference. The 40 mile EV range for the Volt is, I’m assuming, based on the EPA test drives. The reported range for the Malibu with the Volt drive train may be something quite different.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
DonC #23
“More modules and a software upgrade and you might be good to go for 90 miles.”
*** *** ***
Yes, a very cost effective upgrade. But after a significant amount of time, like 7-10 years replacing all of them might be cheaper than anyone imagined. We may even be beyond Li-ion by that time, so a simple Li-ion replacement with more potent ones might double or triple your AER at a very reasonable cost. Regardless, the choice to modularize the battery was a very good one.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
#17 Pino
I agree. You seem to use the word “liberal” liberally. So you must be liberal, to some extent.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
I’m impressed. The old angular front in previously released photos turned me off, but this one is acceptable. I’m a woman, and I don’t buy ugly, aggressive looking cars. Period. My other requirements are that (1) my 6′2″ friend not have to worry about hitting his head when driving and (2) that I be able to open the back doors wide enough to fit a bale of hay across the back seat in a pinch. I currently drive a mature Mazda Millennia. I swore my next car would be a hybrid purchased this winter, but if I can hold out for another year…
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
DonC
I realize that they’ve been talking EOL for the 40 miles AER, and ever the optimist, I was figuring ~50 AER initially, but I’m referring to the difference in aerodynamics between the Malibu and the production Volt. They’ve stated that the concept volt (aka the brick) was about 7 or 8 AER short of 40, and by improving the aero, the *production* Volt shell got those miles back. But again, the *Malibu* surely doesn’t have the aero that the new Volt does,or does it? Assuming the Malibu body is not as slippery as the new Volt, the drive train should carry the Volt shell farther.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR NPNS.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
This video of the Volt in action is similar to the concept one rolling around with a low power electric motor onboard instead of E-Flex. If you guys want to hear what a high power electric motor in a car sounds like in a car check out on Youtube “EV1 in-car video” or “Fisker Karma test drive,” that will send chills up your spine with its awesomeness!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
I just saw the Volt design in person on the road. It looks beautiful. And it’s only $16000. ($23000 for leather/sat nav)
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Head room shouldn’t be a problem. When Lutz exited the Volt the other day at the unveiling, it seemed like he had plenty of head room and I believe he’s over 6′.
FWIW there are some excellent videos on GM Next with the various engineers talking about the production Volt. They show the plug-in at the drivers side mirror on one of them.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
#30. P. Alexander Says:
I’m a woman… My requirements are that my 6′2 friend not have to worry about hitting his head and that I be able to fit a bale of hay across the back seat in a pinch….
Wow! Does that conjure up an image or what.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Troll alert!!! It should be obvious by now that Lurtz is trolling. The only way to get rid of a troll is to STOP FEEDING THEM! Please, folks, ignore him. Thank you.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Two Tesla cars were already involved in accidents in Bay Area due to the silent mode of operation. Blind people were not involved in these road incidents. Other cars were and their drivers complained that Tesla cars were too silent.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
when do you guys think GM will beat Toyota like USA defeated USSR? Can’t wait for that day to come. Volt is a fraud project with zero chance of success. No bail out for GM, they are lying by putting up a phony project!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Awesome video! cant wait to buy one. Id like one in green please
BTW dont mind Lurtz, shes just mad because Colbert made a comment about her hairy legs lol
http://gm-volt.com/2008/09/18/laugh-break-bob-lutz-on-colbert-nation-photovoltaic-roof-option-confirmed/
And, not everyone has jumped on the Gore bandwagon. Not everyone believes increased CO2 is causing global warming. Some people dont know how to react when they encounter a differing view. Does anyone have quantitative data on CO2 increases? What about algae in the ocean/other plant life? Dont they convert the CO2 back? How has the suns output increased?
Though I would like some fresher air to breath, I dont believe our CO2 is the cause. My primary motivation for buying this car is so I dont have to buy hardly any gasoline! Take that OPEC!! They look for any reason to jack the price up in a heartbeat, and it takes months for oil to come down if it does at all. So much for maintaining price stability (their stated goal) am I right??
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Note to GM…STOP shooting the thing from head hieght or higher angles and too close..it makes her look fat. Lyle got it right at the unvieling: long lens and mid-body hieght.
OK. time for me to really man up and admit I was over-reacting to those early photos. After looking at Lyle’s video from the unvieling Monday, I can safely say the car is good looking enough to do the job. This outdoor video, in the seafoam color, still isn’t great. But the one at the unvieling has a great forward rake (not shown as much in this outdoor video), The back half is very nice, the front…well..I know a good body shop and I’ll customize it.
In the back I particularly like how the rear wheel position, the rake, and the back of the rear door lines and rear side window try try try VERY hard to make up for the gastly tiny rear wheels. Almost does the job, wouldn’t you agree?…but it is CRYING out for a larger wheel and tire right there.
Looks good from the helicopter position.
Looks definitely more stretched than I thought…which is a complete relief and pulls it out of econobox territory.
It could just be a tad sportier with a little help from the rear wheel-well area and then it might kinda remind me of the BMW sportier 4 doors. Which is JUST what it needs to do.
Overall, I must make apologies for my earlier harsher views on the looks from the early photos. Mea Culpa. It still could be easily better, but it is a “B-” at his point.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Is the Volt for real?
Chris Paine, author of “Who Killed the Electric Car” weighs in.
11 minutes into Ron Reagan’s 30 minute radio show.
http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1531
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
#31 Tagamet – “ever the optimist, I was figuring ~50 AER initially”
Yes, you are the optimist!
Anyway, what I’ve read is that the range is based on a “roughly calibrated” mule. I’m assuming that “roughly calibrated” means they start with the range of the mule and then approximate the range of production Volt, taking into account things like the CdA and any mass difference.
FWIW if you go a 100 mph you are not getting anything near a 40 mile range. It’s just not possible with the aerodynamics of the Volt, which are good but not anything to write home about. Most modern cars are bricks. You have to go back to a 1939 Maybach or a Tucker to see designs that are more aerodynamic.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
#27 Don C and Tagamet
Range will be limited (moderated) by software. Remember Lutz talking about onstar and getting home on a depleted battery. Software can moderate battery use to higher or lower limits. Usually lower to extend the life of the battery initially, would be my best guess.
#37 Eugene Capatina
If I hit a $100,000 car I would say it was at least partly because you cannot hear them. Might be worth a try, couldn’t hurt…don’t tell the lawyers I said that.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Why aren’t the big 3 rushing to put a Nimh prius killer on the market today?
I think some pretty big clues are contained in this audio:
Ford’s Ted Miller talks about the prospects for electric vehicle battery technology is this exclusive EV World MP3 report from ACG Battery Investment Summit.
http://www.evworld.com/evworld_audio/acg2008_ted_miller.mp3
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
DonC@42 re roughly calibrated mule and 40 mile AER.
During one of the videos a while back Bob and some of the engineers drove around the test track in a very roughly calibrated test mule. Bob commented about how much work remained on making the transitions smoother, but when asked about the engine kicking in he said “it didn’t we didn’t go 40 miles”. Could he have inadvertently been referring to the super secret quantum computer transmission? Hmmm. Granted there’s a ton of difference between “real” driving and a nice even test track, but 40 miles without the engine turning on, in a roughly calibrated mule with a Malibu body still seems good on a lot of levels (but then again, I’m an optimist)(G).
Be well,
Tag
PS matt@39 Three words: Duck and cover! (lol)
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
OK, at the top is a full frontal picture of the Volt. Look closely. Now, tell me where you attach the front licence plate?
GM has been in the auto business for 100 years now. Tell me they didn’t screw up the Volt by forgetting a place for a front plate. Many states require a front license plate.
If you live in a state that requires a front plate, you better be concerned. Only 19 states – Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia – do not require a front license plate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License_plate
(No, you cannot use a rope, or tape – sticking it inside the front windshield is illegal, and honestly, would you drill holes in the front bumper of a $40,000 Volt and ruin the aerodynamics ?)
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
I hope you start selling bumper stickers that say “KISS MY ASS OPEC” cause they will sell like crazy.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
The Grump,
I hope your lobbying your harder to drop the requirement for front license plate.
Hint: Appeal to their patriotism
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
#28 Grizzly
Modular good. Agreed. I just want to add 2 more reasons.
1) Modular designs are more scalable. So maybe a 20 mile Volt or a 40 mile minivan. You don’t have to develop a whole new battery each time.
2) Maintenance is cheaper. If one cell goes bad, you replace that module and not the whole battery. I think you may have been alluding to this.
#9 Gary
Are you suggesting 2 wrongs make a right? Though in our gov’t case maybe 3,4, or 5. lol. How about none of the above.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Carcus@44 re Ford
Ford has consistently been dragging their feet re plugins. Felix Kramer at calcars follows all the major players and he’s WAY past annoyed with Ford’s stubborn anti plugin stance. A lot of what I hear in the tape was Ford talking about the need for “collaboration” – sounds like he wants to buy the innovations which are the result of other companies burning R&D resources. Maybe I’m listening with a prejudiced ear because of all Felix’s info (but her really does stay on top of all things plugin).
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
48 koz – “lobbying your harder”?
Is that obscene ? This is a wholesome family website.
BTW, which of the 19 states do you live in, hmmmm ?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
The Grump re front mounted plates.
Sounds like an excellent reason to start Volt distribution ONLY in those states that do not require a front plate. I’m sure they’ll eventually work out a solution – 5 maybe 10 years down the road. (I live in Penna).
Be well and relax. Plenty of time before the Volt’s arrive (especially in those two plate states)(eg),
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS and “Two Plates, No Sale! (at least not right away)”
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
#15 Grizzly
The noise isn’t just a concern for the blind. I’m more concerned about young kids who may dart out in front of a car because they don’t hear it. Good kids with good parents will still do this sometimes. Even myself, I’m accustomed to hearing cars coming. I don’t always look both ways. I trust my ears. I think if GM doesn’t get ahead of the issue, they’ll pay for it it court. Consumers have an expectation of audible warning from the past 100 years of experience.
Noisemakers can be incorporated that are inaudible on the inside.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
It is obviously an ordinary looking car. What is underneath had better be as good as promised or this thing will be another Edsel. Why couldn’t they have kept some of the showroom designs? Do they intentionally want to present a boring car? Why?
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Tagamet #50
Lots of info from Mr. Miller’s presentation. From what I’ve digested so far, Miller (Ford) thinks the reason they’re not pursuing a Prius killer today:
1. Nimh is good enough (but it’s too expensive)
2. Gas is still to cheap
3. Batteries are still to expensive.
4. This will change, but not soon. Maybe by 2015.
No doubt, Ford (or any of the big 3, at this point) would like to avoid R&D costs.
I’ll look for Kramer’s take.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
#45 Tagamet – “making the transitions smoother, but when asked about the engine kicking in he said “it didn’t we didn’t go 40 miles”.
I’ve always assumed he meant the transition between electric operation using the battery and the gen-set. That transition might be bumpy because the the motor is switching from being powered by the battery to being powered by the generator – which might have a hiccup — and at the same time the ICE is kicking in. The latter would I think be the expected cause of a rough transition. Maybe I’m missing something.
#43 Jeffhre – “Range will be limited (moderated) by software.”
Generally I don’t think software will limit the range. One exception would be the obvious one where you could use the battery pack if the ICE died. The Onstar use seemed to refer to a situation where you were close to home so the Volt would go ahead and have the battery pack go below the customer depletion point rather than having the ICE kick in.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
52 Tag – Do you realize some of those “mandatory front plate” states include California, Oregon, Washington, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts – all hotbeds of enviromentalist, and the some of the best potential Volt owners.
Shuting out three-fifth of the nation is not a smart way to sell a car, much less the Volt. There is no way Bob could be that stupid. Prove it to me, and I still won’t believe it – GM has been making cars for 100 years.
Hey California, No Volt for you ! (Prove me wrong – Please!)
Don’t worry though, California – Tag promised he would buy your Volt. Too bad about that CA front plate law.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
The Grump@53 saidin part
“52 Tag – Do you realize some of those “mandatory front plate” states include California, Oregon, Washington, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts – all hotbeds of enviromentalist, and the some of the best potential Volt owner”
I think they call that “Karma” (g). The only thing about the two plates that concerns me is that you think that the same engineers that could come up with the Volt, haven’t thought about every state regulation under the sun – including two plates. Seriously.
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
#57 Grump – From my experience in CA about 50% of the cars on the road don’t have a front plate. The worst that happens, and it never happens, is that you get a “fix it” ticket. I don’t know what the deal is but a lot of cars really don’t have a place for them, and some people prefer not to attach them for various reasons, one of which I’m assuming would be the aesthetics.
CA will get the Volt. Probably first and in larger numbers. It’s where all those “highly educated” consumers who haven’t ever thought about GM vehicles live. To add to Tag’s comment, if Lutz is targeting consumers who live on the coasts I think the Volt will be legal to sell on the coasts!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
DonC re transitions
I’d always assumed the same thing and for the same reasons, but if he then said that the engine didn’t kick in because they hadn’t gone 40 miles (and he DID say that), how could that assumption be correct? Maybe it was just a bit of Bob’s hyperbole…
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
What a waste of a golf cart chassis! I want to see a real volt!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Indeed… how long? I think I have a chub.
Hey Grump, trust me, they’re smart enough to integrate a seemless clear cover for a plate in a bumper. Seriously, that’s like tonka toy silly to figure out. And I’ve lived in CA for about 20 years and practically nobody has a front plate out here.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Didn’t know that Acura was redesigning the TSX again already!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
DonC and Whistleteeth – I told you not to worry. Tag promised he would buy your Volt. Is that the sound of whistling through the graveyard I hear coming from CA ? You could move to New Mexico or Arizona – no front plate required there.
You’ll have to do better than “get inspection tickets” or an invisible “plate cover” which cannot be seen in the Volt’s photographs.
Front plate required ? – no Volt. Sorry. (I wonder if Canada requires front license plates ? If so, Statik is out of luck, too).
* Purchase of Chevrolet Volt only legal in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, and countries which do not require a front license plate.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Cool
and noise ?
With a modern V6 at the moment if I coast in a residential area people can’t hear that and it scares the shite out of them – whats different ?
Pointless having noise when were all trying to have less all the time any way.
The fans will be running for the AC etc. there will always be some noise any way.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
#64 The Grump – “Front plate required ? – no Volt. Sorry.”
Here’s documentary proof that in CA electric vehicles require neither front NOR back plates. LOL
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/07/worlds-first-fo.html
#65 ausmartin – “it scares the shite out of them”
Where I live we try to scare the sunni out of them..
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
#60 Tag
I must be missing something. If the EV range is 40 miles and the gen-set takes over after that, then if you go 20 or 30 miles — something less than 40 miles — the ICE doesn’t kick in and you don’t experience a transition.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
45 Tagamet………
—————————————————————————————————————————————–
You said, “During one of the videos a while back Bob and some of the engineers drove around the test track in a very roughly calibrated test mule. Bob commented about how much work remained on making the transitions smoother, but when asked about the engine kicking in he said “it didn’t we didn’t go 40 miles”. Could he have inadvertently been referring to the super secret quantum computer transmission?”
Great deduction, Tag —and it’s likely you’ve hit the bullseye! During questions in the Bob Lutz’ chat session last Tuesday as to whether the Volt has a transmission, he responded that the Volt has “a top secret transmission that no other manufacturer has even though of”. I agree that Lutz was not talking about the ICE/GEN transition when he said, ‘work remained on making the transitions smoother’, because they hadn’t gone 40 miles. (I also wonder if that early mule even had the ICE/GEN installed & operating). So I believe what GM has done is design the drive motor & the control electronics to achieve the SPORT mode (as well as a “passing gear” effect and perhaps even an improved 0-60 time) is to electrically switch the motor windings. If I’m guessing right, an accelerator position sensor (combined with vehicle speed) could be used to enhance performance in the following ways….
1- When the accelerator is pressed down 2/3rds or more & the car is at a stop (or moving slowly), briefly increase the motor torque …..resulting in an improvement in the usual 0-60 time of perhaps 9 secs to more like perhaps 6-7 secs
2- When the accelerator is “floor-boarded” at moderate highway speeds of perhaps 45-65MPH, briefly increase the motor torque ….resulting in a reduction in passing times by perhaps several seconds
3- When the SPORT mode has been selected, a milder but noticeable increase in motor torque over a wide range of vehicle speeds could be provided ….during continuous extended driving such as up long steep grades, at the expense of more rapid battery drain
Speculative, I know, but based on the fact that an electric motor’s windings can be instantly reconfigured by switching to achieve significant torque increases!
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
#8
You can’t be serious, are you? Speakers so blind people can hear it coming? I didn’t know blind people play in the street. In the 30 years I have spent on the road I may have sceen 4 or 5 blind people walking through a cross walk.
Have you ever stood by the road and listened to cars coming at you? I have, I don’t hear the engine, I hear the tires rolling. The only time I hear the engine when a car is approaching is if the exhaust is defective. There is absolutely no difference in sound between a Prius (running in electric mode) and a similar size standard auto. If the tires are warn, it will double the sound level you hear.
Maybe everybody should take a hack saw to their exhaust pipe to make the world safer for all. Better yet, outlaw cars, everybody rolls on a Harley with straight pipes! That makes aboud as much since as speakers in the grill. Illinois law states if you can hear a sound system from 75 feet away you can get a citation. This would effectively make your grill speakers illegal. Believe me, I’ll be happy to write citations for grill speakers if the car comes so equipped. Maybe your grill speakers will be required in the People’s Republic of Europe but they won’t fly here, at least in Illinois.
Everybody else, sorry for my ranting but this nanny state B.S. needs a response.
P.S. The car looks cool! I’m sure it gets better mileage than my worn out Crown Victoria.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
nasaman,
COOL!
Be well (and time will tell…)
Tag
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
CF #53
Most vehicles, unless under heavy acceleration, don’t make a whole lot of engine noise. In fact it’s mostly tire noise that you hear, but that doesn’t make much difference. I’ve been driving for almost 30 years and even engine noise doesn’t stop children from darting out into traffic, it happens to me all the time. Just one of the reasons I’ve become such a defensive driver. The point is that when children ride a bike out into the street or dart out on foot, they never stop to do anything like look to see what’s coming or listen for cars.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
nasaman #68
It would be nice if you were right about the controller / motor windings changing the torque curve of the motor, but I’ve got a funny feeling it’s something else. I’ve got a feeling that it could be something as simple as turning on the ICE in sport mode to deliver a wallop of juice to the motor. I wish we could get GM to explain this.
(Quote)
September 20th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
If GM does not address the issue of the silence of the Volt, this is an opportunity for one of our engineers here on this site to develop and market a system (software) and or speaker system that has different sounds that could be programed? has anyone seen the movie “Artificial Intelligence”? The cars in that movie have a great sound to them…I’m sure there are many cool sounds…just an idea…
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:03 am
#68 nasaman – “Speculative, I know, but based on the fact that an electric motor’s windings can be instantly reconfigured by switching to achieve significant torque increases!”
I know that with a DC motor you can switch between windings but I’ve never heard of this in an AC motor and I’ve never heard of electronically reconfiguring a winding. Is there some information on this?
It couldn’t just be a variable frequency drive could it?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:30 am
DonC #74
http://tinyurl.com/3ql7ss
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:31 am
74 DonC…….
Don, if there were references I could cite or if AC Propulsion or anyone else had already done this, it’s unlikely Lutz would have called it a “top secret that no other manufacturers have thought of” (almost his exact words). Sorry I can’t be more help, but the physics of electric motors*, whether DC or AC, clearly show that winding lengths affect the attraction/repulsion of the armature windings by the field coil windings, which increases the output shaft’s torque. Beyond that, we’ll just have to wait for GM to explain how the SPORT mode works, and how they implement a “passing gear” effect (if they do). And if they’re doing something like this, they’ve probably already got patent attorneys at work on this, and they’ll disclose very little about it.
*I’m a physicist and an electrical engineer; both disciplines support the argument that electric motor torque is a function of winding configurations (as well as other parameters such as frequency)
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 1:23 am
Hardly moving at the speed of light. It looks like it is free-rolling downhill at about 3mph.
Could make an interesting entry in a soapbox derby, but I wouldn’t spend $40,000 for it.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 1:29 am
firehawk72 #5:
No way they will get a bailout. With the socialization of the financial markets, there’s no way the car companies will see a cent. For a bailout to happen would require not only funding the bailout, but also having Congress vote to increase the ceiling for the national debt. It would be political suicide.
With Lehmann and Bear Stearns being allowed to fail, I don’t see GM rising to the importance of a bailout.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 1:29 am
Pino #17 and Grizzly #19
You guys are right on but was it the use of “global-warming-denying Bush-bots” that tipped you off ?? heh heh
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 1:39 am
74 DonC…….
“top secret that no other manufacturers have thought of”
From the guy who upped the price $5000 for the stereo system. With that kind of genius, I can’t wait to hear how GM “revolutionized” the AC motor.
From what I have read, the Volt accelerates like a snail. That is sad for a car with an AC motor. The car is clearly underpowered as current AC tech gives high torque from a standstill and allows 0-60mph times in 3-4sec range. With the stated 40 mile range, there is nothing here that sounds revolutionary.
Volt= 40mile EV range, 0-60 in 8-9sec, top speed 100mph(?). Where is the action in this revolution? No meat here.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 1:40 am
I can’t believe my ears. People are concerned about too little traffic noise ? Boy, am I from the wrong century. The blind listen better than anybody and will hear tire noise long before the average person hears or sees the car coming. And kids being kids will run out in front of anything that’s noisy or not.
Of course we could install each Volt with an awwooga air horn that senses blind people, kids and babes in bikinis in the vicinity and goes off spontaneously.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 6:53 am
nasaman #76
Here’s my guess on the sprt/econ button.
In the econ mode, it limits current flow (extends battery life).
It does it by limiting acceleration (g’s) to programmed levels.
These acceleration levels are changed by the driver when:
1. pushing the sprt/econ button
2. pushing on the “throttle” in different ways: rate of throttle change, how far down the throttle is pushed, or other.
This system would involve a relatively new (and cheap) technology, acceleration sensor IC’s, which are used in the nintendo wii.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 7:11 am
nasaman #76 (cont’d)
The acceleration level would be variable depending on car speed (i.e. the faster the car is traveling, the less acceleration (g’s) is allowed.
P.S. all of my guess just involves hardware/software in the AC controller. (nothing mechanical, per se)
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 7:17 am
Just another bland jellybean for $40K.
Is GM crazy? Why buy this over the Cruze?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 8:04 am
#78 Jerry – Better check out the breaking news. Congress is preparing to vote on bailouts AND raising the national debt this weekend. Not for automakers of course, but still…
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 8:11 am
Regarding that “Top Secret Transmission” and the Sport / Econ button….
I’m going to venture a guess here and predict that the production Volt will employ a small CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission).
Perhaps when it’s in “Sport” mode, no overdrive available. When in “Econ” mode, a computer might modulate the amount of overdrive available.
A link to some of the preliminary specs / pictures that came out this week…..
http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2008/09/chevy-volt-production-version-official.html
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 8:11 am
82, 83 carcus………
——————————————————————————————————————————
Good reasoning ….I presume you’re an engineer.
I agree that it’s likely GM is controlling the drive motor current flow, although I don’t see why they’d need to use accelerometers in a closed-loop scheme —which might be difficult to stabilize for all conditions, making it harder to “make transitions smoother” as Lutz said it. For example, I have a car with a PERF/NORM mode switch that simply controls transmission gear ratios & shift points that works perfectly without feedback. BTW, that car also has the same 3 basic operating modes I think the Volt might very well achieve by use of instantaneous controller/drive motor winding switching, namely…..
1- When the accelerator is pressed down 2/3rds or more & the car is at a stop (or moving slowly), briefly increase the motor torque …..resulting in an improvement in the usual 0-60 time of perhaps 9 secs to more like perhaps 6-7 secs
2- When the accelerator is “floor-boarded” at moderate highway speeds of perhaps 45-65MPH, briefly (10 secs or so) increase the motor torque ….resulting in a reduction in passing times by perhaps several seconds
3- When the SPORT mode’s been selected, a milder but noticeable increase in motor torque over a wide range of vehicle speeds could be provided ….for continuous extended driving such as up long steep grades, the tradeoff being only faster battery drain
We probably won’t be given any details until GM’s patent attorneys have secured patent office acceptance of their submission & granted the design a “patent applied for” status ….and perhaps not even then.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 8:47 am
Hi all,
Lots of trolls out today, so
PDNFTT
Interesting discussion of the transmission possibilities, and we’re just creeping up on that two year wait window.
GM’s 25B is in the bill now being considered before Congress goes on yet another vacation.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNSP (No plug, No sale, PERIOD!)(lol)
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 9:19 am
#64 The Grump – “Front plate required ? – no Volt. Sorry.”
Most Canadian provinces require front plates
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 9:37 am
All right, my posts aren’t being uploaded . . . again. Did I hit another nerve?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 9:56 am
All right, my posts aren’t being uploaded . . . again. Did I hit another nerve?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 10:02 am
If you’re going to block that out, you might as well take #82 and 83 as well.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 10:08 am
Carcas,
It might just be server lag?
Tag
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 10:10 am
no
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 10:17 am
Shrug. No idea then.
Be well,
Tag
PS New thread going now. Come on over!
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 10:30 am
#82 Carcus
“This system would involve a relatively new (and cheap) technology, acceleration sensor IC’s, which are used in the nintendo wii.”
———————
Acceleration sensors (ie: Accelerometers) have been around for decades. The fact that the Wi developed a SUPER low cost solution is based on the price you pay for a Wii controller ($30).
The motor controller will now how much torque is being applied and how to control the motors to regulate them. It has no need to know the numbers of g’s your pulling.
The motor controllers will be programmed for an Economy/Sport mode. I would be very surprised if they actually attempt to switch motor windings on-the-fly, to increase torque (for both cost and reliability, this would require special motors and would increase the cost substantially) This will likely just control the peak torque that the controller will allow to be applied to the motors.
The economy mode will likely be the mode most people will normally use, unless your trying to impress your friends by laying a little rubber.
Whether they actually spin up the ICE may also be based on the Economy/Sport setting. In the economy mode, they would keep the ICE off until very near the lower 30 SOC limit. For the Sport mode they may turn the ICE on at an earlier point, to try to provide performance for a longer period of time.
Once the batteries reach that magical 30% (or whatever they set the limit to), the amount of power available will be limited to mainly the generator. I know you will get some peak power from the batteries, but for sustained Sport mode, you will eventually be running totally off the ICE.
JMHO, of course!
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 10:49 am
#96,
Of course you’re right! The Wii is just a child’s toy. There’s no way the technology inside could be of any use in the sophisticated automobile industry. Pulling g’s , duh, . . . . . . what was I thinking?
JYDC, of course
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 11:08 am
97 Carcus
Mellow…
My point on the Wii remote was that this was developed to be a super low cost solution. The accelerometers used in the controllers costs only couple bucks and they are intended as a toy. Could GM use a inexpensive accelerometer in the Volt, sure. Would it be used in the feedback loop of the controller for settings related to economy/sport mode? I don’t think so. The Volt can control the torque and I do not see any use for the accelerometers.
I could understand using these for other reasons in an auto, such as stability and air bag deployment (well, they are already used in cars today, so not sure if this is really anything new). Would GM want to save a buck or two on the accelerometer, sure.
AC induction motor control algorithms are highly complex and sophisticated, and they already exist. I am only telling you that they can perform anything related to torque control without any need for accelerometer feedback.
JMHO, of course… lolr
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 11:20 am
#98,
For best control, real feedback will be needed. What tells the AC controller how much actual torque is being applied?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:05 pm
99
Feedback devices will almost always improve the response time of a control system, but the point is that for controlling the motor shaft output driving the wheels on a automobile, the resolution is not needed. If you were trying to control your output torque to less then a few tenths of a percent, then feedback devices would be helpful, but you do not need anywhere need this type of resolution to get the performance you will need for turning the motor shaft on an auto.
There are several motor control methods, with the simplest being a PWM drive, which can run either open loop, or with a speed feedback device (ie: encoder). This a basic method that would not be up to the task for the Volt.
Then you have the sensorless vector control, which will allow you to control the motor speed or torque w/o any feedback mechanisms (Torque is calculated, not measured). These alogrithms require the use of detailed motor parameters, to allow it to calculate the proper modulation to be applied. This fits well with the Volt, since you know exactly what the motor parameters are and your have a fixed length (controlled) for the motor wiring. (In industrial control the cable lengths and motors vary to infinite, and make it more difficult to tune the motor controller, that will not be the case with the Volt).
Anyway, I am really mixing two different characteristics, one dealing with G force calculations and one dealing with motor torque.
The auto already has feedback of speed, so it would seem reasonable to use this any acceleration calculations.
I apologize if my earlier post was so confrontational. I had not had my coffee yet….
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:19 pm
# 85 Michael: “#78 Jerry – Better check out the breaking news. Congress is preparing to vote on bailouts AND raising the national debt this weekend. Not for automakers of course, but still…”
That is exactly my point. Perhaps you should read the morning papers. The early agreement is already falling apart. I’m assuming the financial bailout will go through in some form, but when Bushie says “now what about the car makers?” The expletives will be deafening.
Ain’t gonna happen.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:31 pm
JEC #100,
“Anyway, I am really mixing two different characteristics, one dealing with G force calculations and one dealing with motor torque.”
——————————————
It would seem to me that g force and torque become directly related when you’re trying to maximize economy ( of electricity or petrol)
This subject seems somewhat related to how INS (with very expensive accelerometers) was the best thing going until GPS came on line.
My guess is that the volt often times (and in particular, low speed situations) will have too much torque (and current flow) available, causing both jerkiness and low electricity economy for the driver.
To solve this problem you’d need a transmission or substitute.
Solutions offered so far on this string have been.
1. Two speed electric motor [nasaman]
2. Continuous Variable Transmission [EngTech]
3. Computer control of current through AC controller [carcus]
You’d have to have some sort feedback loop in any of these solutions. (sensing torque, speed, and probably much more)
Accelerometer ICs and software seem to have the most potential to me; but would, admittadely, require miles and miles of programming to be written.
If they were doing something like this, I would hope the software and hardware on the volt would be easily upgradeable. As a volt v1.0 buyer, I wouldn’t want to find myself in an obsolete piece of equipment a few versions later.
Accelerometers may indeed be to tricky for this scenario, but electronic torque sensors aren’t simple either.
What was Tesla’s big production problem, again?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 12:42 pm
#100 JEC,
“Anyway, I am really mixing two different characteristics, one dealing with G force calculations and one dealing with motor torque.”
————————-
It would seem to me that g force and torque become directly related when trying to maximize economy (of electricity or fuel).
This subject seems somewhat related to when INS (using very expensive accelerometers) got replaced by GPS.
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 2:14 pm
#101 Jerry – morning news here didn’t have the agreement falling apart yet. I do understand your point, but my point was that the national debt will go up for the Wall Street financial bailout “to keep it from reaching Main Street.”
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 3:29 pm
The soundtrack was very appropriate
Was it your addition Lyle, or does GM actually licence this music from Coldplay (that’s their song called Speed of Sound btw) ?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Gm volt
Nasaman #87,
My guess is that the volt often times (and in particular, low speed situations) will have too much torque (and current flow) available, causing both jerkiness and low electricity economy for the driver.
To solve this problem you’d need a transmission or substitute.
Solutions offered so far on this string have been.
1. Two speed electric motor [nasaman]
2. Continuous Variable Transmission [EngTech]
3. Computer control of current through AC controller [carcus]
You’d have to have some sort feedback loop in any of these solutions. (sensing torque, speed, and probably much more)
Accelerometer ICs and software seem to have the most potential to me; but would, admittadely, require miles and miles of programming to be written.
If they were doing something like this, I would hope the software and hardware on the volt would be easily upgradeable. As a volt v1.0 buyer, I wouldn’t want to find myself in an obsolete piece of equipment a few versions later.
Accelerometers may indeed be to tricky for this scenario, but electronic torque sensors aren’t simple either.
What was Tesla’s big production problem, again?
(Quote)
September 21st, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Amendment to #105
Solutions offered so far on this string have been.
1. Two speed electric motor [nasaman]
2. Continuous Variable Transmission [EngTech]
3. Computer control of current through AC controller — feedback system involving accelerometer IC’s [carcus]
4. Computer control of current through AC controller — feedback system involving car speed (only) [JEC]
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:59 am
Needs a much larger nicer looking display in front of the steering wheels
Its hard to read. They should put the display in the center like the EV1 upper top or some status lights.
The white center has to go way too fugly make is stainless or black/gray..
The doors need some more design to them but seeem nice
Overall its ok just need some tweaks.
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2008 at 6:03 am
WD-40 would probably take the stupid grill sticker off the front. Hey GM! If you don’t need the grill for air intake to cool the engine then don’t fake it up. Make the grill sticker optional!
IMO the front would look alot better without the grill sticker…
Other than that the rest of the car looks great, when can I get mine…
(Quote)
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:07 am
Sorry about the duplicates, not sure what happened there.
JEC,
thanks for the technical input.
(Quote)
September 24th, 2008 at 3:29 am
Here’s what’s wrong with Chevrolet: the out-of-date yellow of the logo. It defeats the lines of every vehicle body they produce, and screams “welcome to the 70s!”. It’s also too large thereby reducing the apparent size of the vehicle (and consumers equate size with value).
(Quote)