Grab our RSS Feed

Bob Lutz: GM Has Discovered the Right Formula with the Volt

September 23rd, 2008 | Posted in: Original GM-Volt Interviews, Video

I had the chance to sit in on on a blogger interview with GM vice-chairman Bob Lutz. In this segment (video below) Lutz explains how he feels the effect of the Volt on fuel use will be more at the individual level rather than on a national one, the ability for the individual; to drive 40 miles without gas.

However he says he feels GM has “discovered the right formula” when it comes to the Volt. He notes while the pure EV is attractive, it has the problem of range anxiety and wide variability of function depending on accessory use and climate.

He discussed his personal range anxiety experience of how once he was 15 miles from home on his Vetrix electric scooter when it ran out of charge, he was fooled by a defective charge gauge.

He also makes the technological claim that the Volt will know how far the driver is from home and will only produce enough energy to charge the battery to get them home.

Lutz also says, despite the known EPA wrangling, that he expects the Volt to get an extremely high mpg rating label. The core of the Volt’s success thus will be because that at the same time as getting such a great sticker, people wont have to worry about running out of battery.

Yet despite all this he says his competitors remain skeptical.

Popularity: 2%

(7 votes, average: 4.86 out of 5)

Loading ...

Posted by: Lyle

93 Responses to “Bob Lutz: GM Has Discovered the Right Formula with the Volt”

RB Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:19 am

I think Mr. Lutz is right and commend him for being a strong advocate.
Aspherical Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:23 am

“Range anxiety” with a pure EV is a real concern. I can imagine how stressed out I would be on every trip with a pure EV. Of course, we can’t say they have the right formula until they get the Volt on the road!
Zach Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:29 am

The concept Volt was cool, but I never would have bought it. I’m glad GM changed it.

I can’t believe I’m #3!!!!!!
Tagamet Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:38 am

LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
Dave G Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:41 am

From the interview: “Lutz explains how he feels the effect of the Volt on fuel use will be more at the individual level rather than on a national one, the ability for the individual; to drive 40 miles without gas.”
————————————————————————————–
This sounds like bad news. It looks like GM is backing away from the promise of making the Volt and E-REV mass market.
THOM Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:43 am

MILEAGE FIGURES KEEP DROPPING..

ITS NICE HOW LUTZ STATES IT “WILL HAVE AN EXTREMELY HIGH MPG RATING LABLE.

tHIS WILL BE THE DEATH OF THIS CAR IF THE AVERAGE DRIVER PAYS 40K FOR A CAR WITH THE EXPECTATIONS OF 40 MILES ELECTRIC AND ONLY GETS 20…THEN HAVE gm TELL YOU THAT YOU ARE DRIVING IT WRONG
Gary Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:51 am

I wonder how much Coca-Cola paid for the product placement? There’s more Coke Zero than Lutz in that video!
DonC Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:05 am

From Lyle: “He also makes the technological claim that the Volt will know how far the driver is from home and will only produce enough energy to charge the battery to get them home.”

I’m looking at the phrase “energy to charge the battery.” Lutz seems to be suggesting that the gen-set will come on, actually charge the battery to some point, and then kick off. Since Farah has said the gen-set will rarely charge the battery, I’m wondering if what will happen is that the car will just let the SOC go below the customer depletion point, which is the SOC where the gen-set would ordinarily kick in.

Not a huge difference but Lutz has consistently suggested a gen-set –> battery –> drive train rather than a two propulsion system. (In looking at some earlire videos Lutz says the purpose of the gen-set will be to charge the batteries). I wonder this idea comes from?
Jason M. Hendler Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:05 am

It appears that Chrysler has partnered with Lotus to convert their Europa into an EV, copying Tesla Motors business model.

http://blogs.automobilemag.com/6300465/green/chrysler-unveiling-three-electric-vehicles-this-afternoon/index.html

Their other vehicles, the Wrangler and Mini-van, appear to mimic GM’s business model for the Chevy Volt (although Chrysler opted for conversions rather than a whole new platform).

If you can’t beat ‘em, copy ‘em.
Skip Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:12 am

I still don’t know if this is going to be strictly a comuter automoble or can I take it on a vacation. The more I hear it is not going to be practical on a long trip. My concern if I am hearing right is if I own a VOLT to go to work then I will need another auto to take on vacation. Sounds very expensive.

Tell me I am wrong.
Eliezer Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:13 am

#6 THOM:

MILEAGE FIGURES KEEP DROPPING..

Where did you hear any GM executive say that the mileage figures are dropping?
Jim in PA Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:13 am

#6 THOM - Your cynicism isn’t warranted. Re-read the posting. There is absolutely nothing in there about the all-electric range dropping. Lutz is referring to the EPA-assigned mpg rating, which will be affected by how EPA tries to factor in electric range combined with the mpg of gas operation. This is a tricky (and almost arbitary) calculation, given the all electric capabilities of the Volt for 40 miles. You could drive 10,000 miles a year and literally use ZERO gas (if all your trips are <40 miles), despite an EPA mpg rating of 60 or 80 mpg.
Cautious Fan Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:15 am

The impact on total gasoline demand will take time. But as the vehicle price goes down and the demand goes up, it’ll happen. Long-term, OPEC has got to be a little nervous about this.

And Lutz, you only wish you’re competitors were skeptical. GM has stumbled on the future and the competitors know it, especially Toyota.
RB Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:15 am

He discussed his personal range anxiety experience of how once he was 15 miles from home on his Vetrix electric scooter when it ran out of charge, he was fooled by a defective charge gauge.

This kind of error is going to occur in the Volt, too, and will cause big problems in BEV vehicles. The metering error occurs because there is not a way to measure directly the state of charge of the battery. Consequently the metering has to be based on indirect measures (voltage, time duration, miles traveled) and the metering system has to estimate (guess at) the state of charge. Such estimates are imperfect under the best of circumstances, and in automotive applications can be expected to vary with age, temperature, driving patterns, and all sorts of other external variables.

One of the great aspects of the Volt’s design is that in the end it really does not matter too much if SOC is mis-measured, as the only consequence is that the ICE will come on at the wrong time (earlier or later than it should have),. Eventually the Volt’s system will recalibrate, and probably the driver will never notice. A BEV, though, will be like Lutz’s scooter, and a driver who depends on the meter will be left stranded.
Eliezer Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:15 am

At CNBC’s website there is an article showing additional info and pictures of the 4 potential EVs from Chrysler:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/26850309
Jim in PA Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:18 am

#10 Skip - You are mistaken. It appears that the Volt is designed to operate indefinitely in gasoline mode if the need arises. It will have a 1.4L engine powering it and charging the battery when in that mode. This is the same engine (albeit with a different configuration) slated for the new Chevy Cruz. The Volt is designed so that it can be your only car, with NO travel restrictions. That is the whole point of the Volt.
banjoez Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:26 am

Good article this morning on the Volt on CNN.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/22/news/companies/taylor_volt.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008092309
Mike-o-Matic Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:27 am

@14 RB,

>> metering has to be based on indirect measures (voltage, time
>> duration, miles traveled) and estimate (guess at) the state of charge

Seems to me that you’re right, as it pertains to past and/or low-cost BEVs. However, if you can collect such data as temperature and voltage data at the individual cell level, as opposed to the pack level, you’re going to get much more accurate metrics. Let’s hope that’s true, and such a solution is being implemented in the Volt’s pack.

I _think_ I read somewhere this would be the case, but honestly, with so much disinformation flyng around (and my less-than-perfect memory), I probably shouldn’t state that categorically. Perhaps somebody else has something to add - or better yet, something to cite.

Regards,
omatic
Jim in PA Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:27 am

A couple of comments on the cnbc link to the proposed Chrysler EREV cars:

1.) I wouldn’t be caught dead in that dinosaur egg. Chrysler needs to tone that model down a bit. I would expect anyone exiting such a vehicle to be wearing a quasi-futuristic spandex jumpsuit.

2.) The Jeep Wrangler sounds like it could be quite expensive. Why? Because a 40 mile electric range in a large heavy square box with poor aerodynamics will require a very large battery. Furthermore, the vehicle will be made even heavier by the fact that they are giving it a 400 mile total range, which means a larger gas tank. I don’t expect this one to see the light of day without substantial modifications.
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:29 am

http://blogs.automobilemag.com/6300465/green/chrysler-unveiling-three-electric-vehicles-this-afternoon/index.html
dodahman Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:33 am

Now if someone can just come up with a way to fully charge a PEV in the same amount of time it takes to fill up a gas tank, we’ll be good to go.

I can see it now, Insta-charge stations all over the country.

Ooooh, even better, electro-magnetic roadways that can charge your PEV inductively without even having to stop. Now there’s an idea!

The USDOT better start getting busy.
Jim in PA Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:33 am

#8 DonC - I have noticed this conflict also. Lutz has said several times that this is truly a serial hybrid, where the power train is always via the battery. This conflicts with earlier statements by GM engineers that the engine may drive the wheels while charging the battery. This is too late in the game and too major of an issue to be a source of confusion within GM. I am convinced they are just trying to throw off the competition at this point so it is harder to reverse engineer a copy ahead of the Volt’s release.
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:34 am

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1267946.html?page=1
Dave B Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:36 am

Since the big news of the day sounds like it will be Chrysler, I will sound off.

I think it’s fantastic news. Look out Tesla; look out GM! Because I have two years apparently to save my pennies and watch as these brands actually compete, I will take a very close look at Chrysler for a few reasons.

One, they’re minivan may simply be more conventional for a family. Two, they’re offering BOTH, an E-Rev AND a BEV. Smart move putting the BEV in a roadster–more of a play car than a traditional all-purpose car. I’d imagine this program is a little further along than just concepts, as it sounds like they are production-bound. Moreover, nobody has been looking at Chrysler so no leaks have occurred.

If GM was smart, it would start taking deposits on the Volt. Lock-in customers while it can, as competition will be harsh.
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:39 am

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/09/priustoric—-g.html
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:41 am

http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/business/story.html?id=818218
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:47 am

http://www.channel4.com/4car/news/news-story.jsp?news_id=18133
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:49 am

http://www.hybridcars.com/news/chrysler-electric-vehicles-in-2010-25035.html
DonC Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:53 am

#15 Eliezer — Very interesting view. Love the EV. Probably the performance and price of a Tesla. I still don’t like the golf carts for “a gated community”. Yikes! I can’t see either of these two vehicles being a big hit with Capital Hill Democrats already steaming about the bailout for Wall Street guys with eight figure incomes. LOL You’d think Chrysler would have come up with a family sedan for the dog and pony show.

Statik — If you’re around check out Arch’s cite at #22. If you notice the front is a bubble but the end is very long and drawn out. This is what I focused on with the i-Miev: you need a very long tail to keep the air tight against the car for as long as possible and the i-Miev shape doesn’t do this.
Jackson Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:55 am

Dave G (#5):

In spite of how GM is characterized today, it has been down the hybrid road before. Their philosophy at first drastically differed from what Lutz is saying now: They had a “mild hybrid” full-size truck which basically only stopped the engine when going downhill or stopped. Regenerative braking was used only to keep the higher-voltage battery charged (more power needed for a direct-drive starter motor which could handle more, and provide smoother, engine starts). The hybrid system did nothing to help move the wheels. Their argument was that the barely 2 - 3% efficiency improvement would be truly significant on the National scale (though offering very little help to the owner of the truck).

Perhaps GM has come to realize (at least partly), that if no one sees a personal advantage in owning efficiency technology, it won’t have a chance to become significant on the National scale. We’ll see, I guess, how it turns out … I think the Volt will turn out to be a better approach Nationally than Lutz appears to think (though it will take awhile).
RB Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:00 am

#17 Mike-o-Matic said “if you can collect such data as temperature and voltage data at the individual cell level, as opposed to the pack level, you’re going to get much more accurate metrics. Let’s hope that’s true, and such a solution is being implemented in the Volt’s pack.”
=============================

You make good points, and I agree with them. There also is the question of cost, which tends to be driven down to a low level for high-volume automotive, which works against any better way, if it is more complicated.

Nonetheless I join you in hoping for a good solution (or at least much better estimates) for the Volt. An advantage for GM is that its engineers are participating in the design of the battery, so they can have a say in what monitoring capability is built in.

A great advantage of the Volt’s design is that it makes this whole issue into a technical question that most drivers can ignore. Maybe the service dept will need to do something when they come in, but that will be about it, one expects.
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:04 am

http://www.motortrend.com/future/future_vehicles/112_0809_chrysler_envi_electric_vehicle_plans/index.html
Jim Mbongo Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:07 am

It’s nice to see all of the enthusiasm within GM and the way Lutz exprresses it day after day. The naysayers and GM’s competitors will not stop their campaign against GM and the Volt. So the only thimg GM has to do is to prove them wrong. Go GM Go! Go Volt Go!
DonC Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:08 am

#21 Jim in PA - You may be right about the misdirection of giving conflicting information. Or Lutz may be thinking about a discarded concept. I’m going with the later just cause it’s a simpler explanation.
mitch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:11 am

#21 Jim

I do not remember the engineers saying the ICE will drive the wheels..It has always been to drive the generator to produce electricity. There is NO direct connection fromthe ICE to the drive train only the electric motor.

the ICE will provide the energy to the electric motor to drive the wheels, but there is no direct connection.
Mike-o-Matic Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:11 am

@30 RB, Another thing to think about is that even regular gas gauges aren’t perfect.

(musings follow, skip if you’re busy today!)…

Speaking for myself, I tend to base my expectations for range on a combination of my analog gas gauge, my trip computer’s projected range, and the “avg mpg” computed. But the “avg mpg” and “range left” that the trip computer show, are based upon measurement of the liquid flowing through my fuel system, which can be off by as much as 5% sometimes in my truck (based upon my observations of the computer vs. actual miles/actual fill-up volume). It would think it’s got to be a LOT easier to measure current flow very accurately, than to measure fuel volume flow. That difference may also help improve the accuracy of a battery pack’s “gas” gauge.
RB Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:12 am

#29 Jackson says, speaking of Lutz ” I think the Volt will turn out to be a better approach Nationally than Lutz appears to think (though it will take awhile).”
================================

Perhaps Mr Lutz just does not want to emphasize national implications, realizing tthat such an implication depends on volume, and that he volume will be low at first. So, he emphasizes what will be a powerful change as seen by the owner.
DonC Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:21 am

Tagamet - With reference to whether Lutz uses the government data or GM’s data regarding the number of people who drive 40 miles or less a day, here is something from his blog that makes clear he’s relying on the GM data:

“What does that mean for society at large? I think it can have an enormous benefit. Our statistics show that 78 percent of Americans drive 40 miles a day or less. That means that nearly 80 percent of Americans can commute powered by electricity from the grid, never using a drop of gas.”

The 78% and the “almost 80%” are the key words he uses. Also if you look at the government statistics they suggest a higher percentage, more like 80% to 85% drive 40 miles or less. But those are really guesstimates and extrapolations more than anything.

No big deal one way or another but interesting to know where the numbers come from.
Estero Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:28 am

I’m thinking the same as #10 Skip, particularly when Bob Lutz “makes the technological claim that the Volt will know how far the driver is from home and will only produce enough energy to charge the battery to get them home.”

The Volt is sounding more and more like a commuter vehicle and less and less like something to be driven on vacation. Hope I’m wrong!
Aspherical Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:35 am

#36 RB

I agree. 10,000 Volts won’t make an indent on the current gasoline infrastructure. The short-term effect will only be individual. We need millions ON the road before we can talk national effect.

It’s funny how we take a quote from Lutz and spin it in so many ways… (I’m glad I am not so scrutinized)
kdawg Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:39 am

@ #21 Jim

The ICE will never directly drive the wheels, but only supply current to the batteries.
statik Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:41 am

CNBC had the exclusive on the new Chrysler lineup.

Streaming video and interview:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=864784364

Looks like Chrysler is as far along as Gm is.
carcus Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:47 am

Chrysler’s announcement is good news . . . . No, make that great news.

If they’d just stop talking about that $25 Billion I could enjoy all this.
GXT Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:49 am

The Volt isn’t the ideal solution at all. It is a compromised gas vehicle and a compromised electric vehicle and a car with a range that doesn’t make sense for the vast majority of people (Note that I am taking into account that batteries aren’t free… something GM should have done and that consumers will do.). It isn’t a good solution for the individual OR for the US as a whole.

Smaller range at the current time is more appropriate. You can argue because you are in love with whatever the Volt happens to be, but if you actually had to choose between:
1) A $40,000+ Volt that you can’t buy anyways because of limited production capacity but has 40 miles of electric range, much of which the typical user will pay for and haul but never use.
2) A sub ~$28,000 plug-in Prius that is widely available and has 10 miles of electric range, all of which will typically be used by ~100% of buyers and that will still satisfy the range needs of a quarter to a third (?) (Anyone stil have a link to those average commute length stats?) of North Americans

It is clear as to which choice is better for more people and for the US in general.
THOM Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:02 pm

#11, #12.

“Lutz explains how he feels the effect of the Volt on fuel use will be more at the individual level rather than on a national one, the ability for the individual; to drive 40 miles without gas.” ****FOR THE INDIVIDUAL TO DRIVE 40 MILES WITHOUT GAS???? Shouldnt every individual be able to drive 40 miles w/o gas or just a couple of “special” people like GM the developers.

Will GM buy the car back if you cannot get 40MPG on a flat Highway with the cruise on??
Anthony BC Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:02 pm

I want a Diet Coke after watching that video!

Chrysler’s announment is GREAT for all! The more competition means the better the prices!

GO GM, GO VOLT for 2010!
Mikie Casey Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Its obvious that Lutz (GM) is not thinking less oil consumption by building the Volt, it seems that none of the makers think we are serious about getting off oil, I think they really think this is going to blow over and get back to normal, by keeping the Volt expensive and low production, it will just be a boy toy and nothing else, while they keep on building gas cars. what we must do to make it obvious to them is not buy anymore gas cars, The Volt really is the answer they just don’t know it ——–NO PLUG NO SALE
Aspherical Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:05 pm

#43 GXT

How does a solution that will satisfy a quarter to a third (or what the number is) of Americans be better than one that would satisfy 80%? Of those people who drive less than 10 miles a day, how many of those really care about the higher MPG cars (hybrids with a premium, for example) since they drive so few miles? Just honest questions. Of course this argument will only be valid in about 5 years or so, but I believe the Volt is the better long-term solution…
FME III Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:09 pm

#38 Estero

Go back and re-read the threads on battery management. The reason Lutz says that the Volt’s engine will only make enough juice to get the car home is so that the owner can plug it in, thereby using less gas in the long run.

Otherwise, you’re in a situation where the engine might get the battery to a full state of charge just as you arrive home — and that defeats the purpose of having a plug-in EV.

Sensing distance from home gets around this problem.

# 24 Dave B: I wouldn’t count on a Chrysler RE-EV anytime soon. I find their “me too” announcement comic given what we know about how difficult an engineering and software feat GM is attempting to pull off with the Volt.

Finally, it’s clear, from comments made by newbies to this blog and by Ron Reagan on his recent radio program on the Volt (link can be found at EV World), that GM’s going to have a challenge getting the general public to understand the concept of the Volt. 40 miles AER does not equate to the car’s ONLY range, nor does it make the car inferior to an all-electric car with a 200-plus range.
Mikie Casey Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:14 pm

What if you don’t want to go home/ ——NO PLUG NO SALE
Cautious Fan Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:15 pm

#8 DonC

My recollection was the ICE would go directly to the electric motor and only recharge the battery to keep it at the CDP. Sending everything through the battery will incur an additional efficiency loss. So there is a parallel electrical system, but it’s still called a series hybrid because there’s no parallel mechanical system.

From Lutz’s comments, I gather the CDP point has some flexibility to it. Maybe adjusts based on driver styles and location. Seems unnecessarily complex to me but I’m sure they know what they’re doing.
THOM Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:15 pm

The chrysler EV rocks! 150 miles per charge…i would take that any day over 40 miles plus engine! Figure this

Per interview “200 to 300 mile extended range”
per previous design specs gas tank = 12 gallons US

********************************************************************************
On a “bad day” with full charge…AC on, headwind, radio cranked
(200mi(gas)+25mi(electric)) / 12gal = 18.75 Miles per gallon + Electric costs
THIS IS ABOUT AS EFFICIENT AS A FULL SIZE PICKUP TRUCK
************************************************************************************
On a good day
(300MI (GAS)+40MI (ELECTRIC)) / 12GAL GAS TANK = 28.4miles per gallon + electric costs
THIS IS NOT AS GOOD AS A CAMARY OR ACCORD
************************************************************************************
FME III Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:19 pm

#51 THOM

Calm down, son. Chrysler can say anything it wants to make their vapor-car sound better. We all know what GM’s had to do to deliver on their initial promise of the Volt — such as radially depart from the concept….
jerry Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:21 pm

Jim in PA #19: ”

A couple of comments on the cnbc link to the proposed Chrysler EREV cars:

1.) I wouldn’t be caught dead in that dinosaur egg. Chrysler needs to tone that model down a bit. I would expect anyone exiting such a vehicle to be wearing a quasi-futuristic spandex jumpsuit.

2.) The Jeep Wrangler sounds like it could be quite expensive. Why? Because a 40 mile electric range in a large heavy square box with poor aerodynamics will require a very large battery. Furthermore, the vehicle will be made even heavier by the fact that they are giving it a 400 mile total range, which means a larger gas tank. I don’t expect this one to see the light of day without substantial modifications.”

It will all get modified before you have to decide whether to part with your money. There is no point in getting too excited just yet.
Aspherical Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:25 pm

#51 THOM

I would hold off on the calculations until you know the gas tank capacity. I have also heard about a 7 gallon tank.
statik Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:25 pm

#48 FME III

I wouldn’t count on a Chrysler RE-EV anytime soon. I find their “me too” announcement comic given what we know about how difficult an engineering and software feat GM is attempting to pull off with the Volt.
———

I don’t see how it is ‘me too,’ they have THREE working prototypes right now. GM has nothing in comparison…well they have some mules, and a 15mpg shell mockup.

In my books they are ahead of GM…they just chose to not wave a flag about it for the last year. They are saying they are on the road in 2010 (in the interview the CEO refernces some fleet action in 2009), which I don’t see as unreasonable given these vehicles existing architecture.

On top of that it looks like done what GM probably should have started out with, ‘put a battery in a Cobalt’ (which is pretty much where they ended up anyway)–or any car they already have infrastructure built for that matter.

They have taken components they do well, vans and Jeeps and thrown a battery in. Nothing fancy, just getting it done. (If you want fancy you can buy their all electric Europa, or Chrysler EV or whatever…which is also just a engine swap). A 40-mile EV van/Jeep will sell great…people still want large vehicle and people carriers, they just dont want $80 fills at the pumps.
DaveP Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:28 pm

#43 GXT:
But a sub ~$28,000 plug in \Volt would be even better.
It’s gotta start somewhere. The first generation Prius was expensive and a money loser for Toyota. It was 4 years before they redesigned it to use fewer batteries and get the costs down. If they hadn’t produced a vehicle that didn’t really make any sense, originally, there wouldn’t be a follow on vehicle that DOES make sense.

So, yes. The \Volt itself may not make a lot of sense, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a necessary step in a direction that does make a lot of sense.

A different way to look at it is that we tried the “let’s build more efficient cars to reduce oil consumption” back in the 80’s and it worked…. for awhile. But the reduction in demand made oil prices fall and everything went right back to the way it was, eventually.

Moving to eliminate oil consumption with eflex is a better long term solution than just reducing oil consumption with more efficient gas cars which is a better short term solution.
statik Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:33 pm

#51 THOM

The chrysler EV rocks! 150 miles per charge…i would take that any day over 40 miles plus engine! Figure this

Per interview “200 to 300 mile extended range”
per previous design specs gas tank = 12 gallons US

********************************************************************************
On a “bad day” with full charge…AC on, headwind, radio cranked
(200mi(gas)+25mi(electric)) / 12gal = 18.75 Miles per gallon + Electric costs
THIS IS ABOUT AS EFFICIENT AS A FULL SIZE PICKUP TRUCK
************************************************************************************
On a good day
(300MI (GAS)+40MI (ELECTRIC)) / 12GAL GAS TANK = 28.4miles per gallon + electric costs
THIS IS NOT AS GOOD AS A CAMARY OR ACCORD
************************************************************************************
.
———————-
.
THOM,

In the interview (3:30) I linked to he says range is about 400 miles on 8 or 9 gallons of gasoline…of interest he is referring to the VAN/JEEP here.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=864784364

…or are you talking about the Volt (it went from 12 to 8…I guess)
Eliezer Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:34 pm

#51 THOM:

There are a few problems with your calculations:

1)

It’s not a good idea to combine old designs specs with new information. Nobody outside of GM knows what the final size of the gas tank will be, and I have heard that it could be as small as 6 or 8 gallons.

2) The ICE in the Volt is a 1.4L 4 cylinder engine, and I doubt that an engine of that size would get anything less than 30 mpg hwy. This alone should tell you that the old gas tank size info no longer applies.

3) Even if your numbers are correct, who drives 200-300 miles a day? Remember, over 80% of consumers drive less than 40 miles a day on average, so most people will never use the range extender on a daily basis.
statik Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Of interest, I’d really be interested to know the architecture/design/specs on this 4 wheel independant electric motor set up Chrysler has going.
statik Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:41 pm

I’m guessing that by having a 4 wheel/electric set up that it is more efficient for recouping regenerative breaking juice right at the wheel and would give you some redundancy if one of the engine went ‘kaput’?
Jay Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:42 pm

This whole rhetorical continuing dialog or the Volt is very interesting to see how many educated people, who can’t get pass the fact that there is a lot more technology out there that can solve our problems of transportation and nobody is looking at them or asking the questions. GM is one of the worlds largest manufactures of cars, trucks, and other wheeled vehicles with an almost unlimited source of engineering to support their efforts and the Volt is the best they can come up with? As I have said before, 40 pulse years in aerospace and even I know there are better solutions to the problem of doing away with fossil fuels for transportation. America is car crazy and will never give them up until there is no more fuel to run them and that is the bottom-line, like it or not! People will pay whatever the fuel cost and the oil companies know this. So keep hoping for a magic solution but you will only get a pacifier. The US could be off fossil fuel in the next ten years but there is too much money to be made until it runs out. So just drive up to the old pump and fill your vehicle and pay the price. That’s the way it is and will continue for the foreseeable future.
statik Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:44 pm

Chrysler has their official blog up…lots of goodies there:

http://blog.chryslerllc.com/blog.do?id=490&p=entry

“Like a bolt out of the blue, Chrysler unveiled today three production-intent electric-drive vehicles which, with a jolt of electricity, could give consumers a gas-free commute and help the environment.”

“A fleet of more than 100 Chrysler electric vehicles will be on the road in government, business and Chrysler development fleets NEXT YEAR. Then, in 2010, at least one of the electric-drive vehicles will go on sale to consumers in North America, and later in Europe”

The Dodge EV is a two-passenger rear-wheel drive sports car that offers high performance and zero emissions. The Dodge EV has three primary components: a 200 kW (268 horsepower) electric motor, an advanced lithium-ion battery and an integrated power controller. The 200 kW electric-drive motor produces 480 lb.-ft. of torque, accelerating the vehicle from zero to 60 mph in less than five seconds, with a top speed of more than 120 mph.
Eliezer Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:47 pm

THOM,

Here’s another example of bad math: If the average American drives less than 25 miles a day (therefore using no gas) and has solar panels installed at their house…

********************************************************************************
On a “bad day” with full charge…AC on, headwind, radio cranked
(0mi(gas)+25mi(electric)) / 0gal = INFINITY Miles per gallon
THIS IS ABOUT AS EFFICIENT AS HAN SOLO’S MILLENIUM FALCON
************************************************************************************
On a good day
(0MI (GAS)+40MI (ELECTRIC)) / 0GAL GAS TANK = INFINITY miles per gallon
THIS IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE STAR TREK ENTERPRISE
************************************************************************************
jerry Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:48 pm

FME III #48: “Go back and re-read the threads on battery management. The reason Lutz says that the Volt’s engine will only make enough juice to get the car home is so that the owner can plug it in, thereby using less gas in the long run.

Otherwise, you’re in a situation where the engine might get the battery to a full state of charge just as you arrive home — and that defeats the purpose of having a plug-in EV.

Sensing distance from home gets around this problem.”

Assuming you are going home. I thought the whole point of the Volt was to build a car that wasn’t an A to B and back again vehicle.

The software managing all of this in the Volt seems to be complex. It has added at least $5000 to the price of the car and is partly responsible for the production delays. It will be interesting to see if it is really a good idea over obvious simpler systems, and how many recalls are required to address bugs.

With all the changes since the original concept, it is hard to see how anyone can say the Volt is the “right formula.” It’s hard to argue that a car with a target MSRP that only about 20% of Americans can afford yet designed for 80% of Americans that travel up to 40 miles to work is the right formula. The price inflation screws up the formula.
ThombDbhomb Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:52 pm

Change is in the air wrt my auto choices. This BEV and E-REV speculation is fun. But, I can’t wait until I am presented with real considerations come 2010/11(/12?). Everybody (even atheists), please help me out; pray that 1) my ‘92 Honda Civic lasts until I can get a decent, affordable BEV or E-REV and 2) that my wife doesn’t get new car fever before then.

…and you, automakers, make me proud of you. Rise to the challenge/competition. This effort means so much to so many.
DonC Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:00 pm

#61 Statik

You are ordinarily so level headed about these things. What has happened to you? LOL

Another word for a “production intent vehicle” is a “concept vehicle.” This seems all very thrown together to me. What do we have? A Tesla competitor. A golf cart for “gated communities”. And a four wheel drive vehicle for off-roading. They’re saying this is a complete lineup but it strikes me as a mish-mash. Not such a great line-up when begging for low cost loans from a Democratic Congress! Actually this part is funny.

If you notice the questions are whether any of them will see actual production in 2012.
Arch Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:03 pm

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/09/chrysler_electric.html
Eliezer Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:05 pm

#63 jerry:

“The software managing all of this in the Volt seems to be complex. It has added at least $5000 to the price of the car and is partly responsible for the production delays. ”

————————————————————————————–

I don’t remember reading an article where that was mentioned. Could you please send me the link?
Mikie Casey Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:06 pm

#60 Jay has got it right your guys need to listen to him its what I’ve been trying to say but can’t get the words out as well, they are fooling us they don;t want off oil we have to make them——NO PLUG NO SALE—- go Volt we need you badly (GM get it out now PLEASE)
statik Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:21 pm

#67 DonC

#61 Statik

You are ordinarily so level headed about these things. What has happened to you? LOL

Another word for a “production intent vehicle” is a “concept vehicle.” This seems all very thrown together to me. What do we have? A Tesla competitor. A golf cart for “gated communities”. And a four wheel drive vehicle for off-roading. They’re saying this is a complete lineup but it strikes me as a mish-mash. Not such a great line-up when begging for low cost loans from a Democratic Congress! Actually this part is funny.

If you notice the questions are whether any of them will see actual production in 2012.
————

Well, yes, your right. To be fair, I have little faith in any of them getting me a ‘actual’ EV by 2012.

I know for sure GM won’t deliver by this date to me…as they have no capacity and they already announced where the first ‘to the public’ models are going to be…so best case for me in Toronto is probably 2013? 2014? You might have a better shot in California though.

I don’t put GM’s odds any better than that of Chrysler, or Mitsu…I’d say the ‘odds on favoUrite’ is still the Plug-In Prius.

As I said before, the first EV I can buy with 4+ seats that I can service locally gets my business (10 miles, 40 miles, 100 miles, 200 miles…I don’t care). I’m not waiting a minute longer than I have to…I might have loyalties if this was a standard car purchase, (I try to always buy domestic), but for this one…I have none.
Tim Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:25 pm

HUGE fan of this project and prospective VOLT owner!!!! I have a suggestion to the powers that be: I have a Prius and when I’m in all electric mode, people really can’t hear me coming. But… I feel like honking the horn would be a bit overboard and shocking. Could there be two horn blasts? One type that could be a courtesy “look out, quiet car coming” and one big old for when someone in another car needs a serious shoutout?
Jim in PA Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:28 pm

OK, someone straighten this out for me. Lutz is saying that at low battery the ICE will recharge the battery and the electric motor that turns the wheels will ALWAYS run off the battery. Although this makes the most senses to me, it is contrary to what has been previously stated, which is that at low battery the ICE would simultaneously charge the battery and turn the wheels. Which is it?

(And yes, I know that the ICE would never DIRECTLY turn the wheels. Rather, it would power the generator that sends electricty to the electric motor that powers the wheels…)

Bottom line…. is the Volt a true serial hybrid (always pulling exclusively from the battery), or does it go somewhat “parallel” at low battery (pulling electricity from the ICE genset AND battery)? Enquiring minds want to know.
Jim in PA Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:37 pm

#72 Tim - This reminds me of riding in the car with my grandfather when I was a little kid. He came upon someone strolling slowly across the street with no apparent knowledge of our oncoming car. Ole grandpa let out a politely brief, but uncontrollably loud, horn blast which scared the crap out of the guy. It was only then when we noticed his white cane. Oh dear god, we must have scared that poor blind guy half to death….

Good luck with your quest for a polite horn. In the mean time, turn up your stereo.
Jim I Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:42 pm

I think that Mr. Lutz is right. The Volt design goals are right on target.

Now they just have to get it out the door.

And Nov, 2010 is looking a long way off………….

No Plug - No Sale!
Jim 75 Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:49 pm

I’ve got to say that as much as I like the volt the Town and Country is a better option for my wife and I. 40 miles on electric means that she can do all of the things that a volt can with 2-4 kids and two dogs. I most say that stow and go is priceless. Didn’t Chysler have a different BEV sports model a few years back?
Speedy Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:53 pm

The E-Flex Drive System can be and will be on other car’s.
Tom H Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Ooooh, even better, electro-magnetic roadways that can charge your PEV inductively without even having to stop. Now there’s an idea!
——————————————————————————–
I have enough knowledge to immediately recognize that hydrogen cars will be ultimately impractical, compressed air cars ridiculous, and water cars impossible.

But inductively range extended BEVs? Is it possible? Can this technology, already in use for low power applications be scaled up without safety or engineering problems?

Do we have any EEs out there who can comment?

Think of the potential. You would not bury power inductors in every road in America before the next century, but how about installing them on every interstate system over 10-20 years. Coast to coast, no gas. Tractor trailers as well? Railroads? Depending on your driving patterns, you might be able to buy a cheaper car without an ICE range extender, and/or a smaller battery.

The economic driver is the difference between electric power (2 cets/mile) and ICE power (12 cents /mile). In a peak oil, nuclear powered future, this gap will only widen.
jerry Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:25 pm

Eliezer #69:

I don’t save yahoo and google news links, and I can’t go back chasing them every time someone asks. If it were a really important point, I would make the effort. Sorry.

Alternatively, if you have a better explanation as to why the price has increased ~$15,000 before a single weld is made, I would love to hear it.
Tom H Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:38 pm

#60 Jay has got it right your guys need to listen to him its what I’ve been trying to say but can’t get the words out as well, they are fooling us they don;t want off oil we have to make them——NO PLUG NO SALE—- go Volt we need you badly (GM get it out now PLEASE)

Jay’s post is #62, for those who want to check it out. I thought it was one of the worst posts I have read on this board. He states that he is well aware of numerous technologies better than those used in the Volt, but in his wisdom does not deign to name even one. Sounds like troll tactics to me.

PS…This bit about “they do not want to get off oil” is nuts. GM wants to make money for GM. They do not want to go bankrupt to protect the profits of the oil companies. If they can be first to market with an ultra high milage car which works and they can sell at a popular price, they will do it. And dont use the EV-1 as an example. That car was built during a time when California law mandated every car company to market a ZEV. They designed the EV-1 and leased it out, but to make a profit, they would have had to sell it for $80k. As soon as Calif repealed the ZEV law, there was no place in the GM line-up for an $80 two seater with a charge limited range.
psquared Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:46 pm

Was this video sponsored by Coke Zero?

Thanks for the post - always good to hear the details.
BillR Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:58 pm

#73 Jim In PA

I believe that when the battery is discharged to its low depletion level, the ICE will start and operate at one of several load points (let’s just say 12 kW, 30 kW, or 50 kW).

Based on your average demand over the past several minutes, the Volt’s software will select one of these preset levels (for instance, intown driving with a lot of regen braking, 12 kW, but for continuous 70 mph, 30 kW). For city driving, the ICE will provide power to the batteries, and power for the drive motor.

However, the power required by the drive motor is constantly fluctuating. When you accelerate hard, the power draw will exceed the 12 kW being produced by the ICE, so additional power will be drawn from the batteries. As you brake for a stoplight, regen braking plus ICE power will be sent to the batteries.

If you are running the AC at full, and drag racing from stoplight to stoplight, the Volt’s ECM will sense that average power draw has increased to more than 12 kW, and will index the ICE to 30 kW to keep the battery pack from draining further.

So in essence, the ICE functions to provide the average power needed for the vehicle, with a little extra to maintain the battery. After charging the battery pack to an upper limit, the ICE may go to idle, or even shut down.

I think Bob’s comment regarding the Volt knowing its home base allows the battery pack to be at minimum charge upon return, therby maximizing the use of electric power. Also, this may mean that for extended trips, the ICE may (and I emphasize MAY) have the ability to run continuous until the battery is restored (80% SOC) so that the ICE will cycle less and have longer run and longer shutdown periods.
phil Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:54 pm

did you see the colbert report.. when lutz said you can still pick up chicks with it.. it just will by “crunchy” older women with hairy legs.. or at least thats the way the conversation went.. too funny
Colin Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:11 pm

#78 Tom - What about inductive charging in the garage - or parking spaces that businesses offer for EV vehicles only. Wal-mart will have EV charge while you shop parking, you can bet on it. Inductive charging may be the way to go. As soon as EVs start being sold there will be numerous 3rd party add ons, inventions, and must haves available - I can imagine very quickly someone marketing a way to charge the vehicle without manually having to plug in.

I would think it would be a small charge though - I can not imagine walking across a road that has 240 volts running through it.
omegaman66 Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:20 pm

Mark my words the only problem to be faced is the price of the batteries will not come down for a number of years, not the 2 or 3 most people are thinking.
john1701a Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:03 pm

>> The first generation Prius was expensive and a money loser for Toyota. It was 4 years before they redesigned it to use fewer batteries and get the costs down.

No, the Classic model became profitable its final year… before the redesigned HSD model. And battery “quantity” wasn’t reduced. In fact, the physical size didn’t change much either. Cost came down as a result of chemistry & production improvements.
Jeff M Says:
September 24th, 2008 at 12:06 pm

I still get a kick out of the worry over “range anxiety”, which of course I can’t blame GM trying to use to instill fear in folks that a non-hybrid (aka “pure” or “regular”) BEV will leave them stranded as GM itself doesn’t have any plans currently to offer a non-hybrid BEV.

The reality is “range anxiety” for regular BEV’s is no more an issue than it is for conventional liquid fueled vehicles… the fear comes from a lack of understanding and unfamiliarity with a different technology, which of course is understandable.

I’ve had “range anxiety” many a times with all my cars I’ve owned/driven in my over 25 years of driving, and for good reason, I’ve run out of gas at least twice. A few months ago I thought I was going to run out of gas when I had to go somewhere and forgot to leave earlier to get gas so didn’t have time to. If I had a plug-in (regular or hybrid BEV like the Volt) it would have actually avoided the anxiety in this case because it would have been plugged in all night and ready to go.

The real issue is that folks have a “one size fits all” mentality, meaning that one type of vehicle has to meet the needs of 100% of the population. But there is a sizable market for regular BEV’s where it satisfies what it’s being bought for. The obvious one is as an everyday commuter where the household has another vehicle that can be used for vacations and such.

I wish I could quote the real world data, and it’s probably out there somewhere, but I don’t recall hearing of anyone depleting their charge in their BEV’s during the age of ZEV (California’s Zero Emission Vehicle mandate that had GM’s EV1, Toyota’s Rav4-EV, Ford’s S10-EV and Th!nk, etc on the road), or the ones still surviving (Rav4-EV’s and S10-EV’s).

The other preconditioning I think folks have when it comes to range is that they equate a BEV’s range with that of a gasoline fueled vehicle and don’t understand that unless you drive enough that you have to fill up your gas tank every day, the two can not be directly equated.
James Says:
September 24th, 2008 at 10:13 pm

My Bubble has been burst. Today GM issued a press release illuminating the true modality of the Volt. The only way to take it is, the American people are being bamboozled.

The Volt only goes 40 miles on a charge. Period. In 2007 while touring the Volt Concept all over the world, GM’s press releases proudly exclaimed that the three cylinder, turbocharged ICE would run at a constant rpm after the car’s drive batteries were depleted to recharge the batteries. Today, GM issued a new detail - to go along with the production version rollout. It seems now, they’ve retracted the former explanation,and now say that after the 40-ish mile electric capability is over, all battery powered power is over.Done.

So now-as GM has pulled this shell game over on all of us, the Volt sits as a piece that is unable to charge it’s batteries beyond keeping them at a level charge above damaging them, but not capable of continuing on your trip on electric. So who cares if a little three cylinder turbo is fueling an electric motor—IT’S DOING SO ON GAS GAS GAS!!!!

This means TOYOTA MOTOR CORP., who earlier this year claimed GM’s claims for the Volt were impossible to acheive, WERE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!

The Volt has gone from a promising new technology to basically a hybrid car who, rather than start out a gas-assisted electric hybrid automobile, has turned out to be a plug-in electric that goes 40 miles before you have to plug it in again. NOT GOOD!

This is going to be a big debacle for the General, not it’s saviour as advertised. My Prius will run a 1,000 mile trip and transfer between ICE and electric power based upon load and charge. The Volt will go 40 miles on all electric then burn gas all the rest of the 960 miles to my destination. Sorry GM, please go back to the drawing board.

So what if you can plug it in?!!! It’s far less efficient than even the most inefficient PHEV conversion or car on the drawing board, no matter the battery composition!

The moral of the Volt story is just what Grandma taught us all: If it looks too good to be true-IT IS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE.
agroni Says:
September 25th, 2008 at 9:16 am

a good article

GM recharges for the future

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080925.whGMmain0925/BNStory/specialGlobeAuto
law Says:
September 25th, 2008 at 10:18 am

#88 are you really that ignorant?
GM has been claiming 40 miles all electric from day one and then a switch to gasoline or other alternative source for a range extender.

“It seems now, they’ve retracted the former explanation,and now say that after the 40-ish mile electric capability is over, all battery powered power is over.Done.”

Yes this is the real world, once a battery is out of electricity, that’s it no more electricity.

It switchs to the generator after the battery runs out but you don’t want the generator to charge up the battery because you’ll burn gas to charge up the battery when you could just charge up later at home. The range extender’s job is to just keep you going and use as little gasoline as possible until you get home.

“This is going to be a big debacle for the General, not it’s saviour as advertised. My Prius will run a 1,000 mile trip and transfer between ICE and electric power based upon load and charge. The Volt will go 40 miles on all electric then burn gas all the rest of the 960 miles to my destination. Sorry GM, please go back to the drawing board.”

Look, I drive a prius also but I’m not a dumb prius groupie like you. Who drives 1,000 miles? Tell me who does that. Maybe taxi drivers but normal people drive around 35 miles per day. That is a fact and I actually drive a bit less, so as soon as I trade in my PRIUS for a new VOLT I will cut my gasoline consumption down by about 80 percent.

The volt is going to be a much better car than the prius and will allow most people to eliminate ALL of their gasoline consumption. The prius will still be one of the best cars on the road, but it will not be the best anymore.

“The moral of the Volt story is just what Grandma taught us all: If it looks too good to be true-IT IS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE.”

The moral of the story you just taught us is that, illegal DRUGS ARE BAD AND THEY FRY THE BRAIN.
igotzzoom Says:
September 25th, 2008 at 8:18 pm

I’m a little confused about how it can calculate how far you are from home. Based on prevailing driving patterns, or real-time geographic proximity? I’d be a little nervous if you routinely did your 40-mi round-trip commute, and then had to run some errands, and the battery decided to poop out on you. Guess we’ll have to wait & see on further details.
mien green Says:
September 25th, 2008 at 8:21 pm

I assume it’ll be per GPS positioning and your home and/or destination you enter in.
BluesBrian Says:
September 28th, 2008 at 5:07 pm

In the audio-book version of his work “Where Have All the Leaders Gone?”, Lee Iacocca makes the claim that GM has never had a profitable quarter with the Saturn division.

Why not convert the entire Saturn division to work the Volt drive-train into a variety of cars that people will want?

Bob Lutz: GM Has Discovered the Right Formula with the Volt

93 Responses to “Bob Lutz: GM Has Discovered the Right Formula with the Volt”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts