The Production Chevy Volt Has One Charging Port, and Unnamed Object Identified
Prior to seeing the production version of the Volt unveiled, we speculated whether it would have two charging ports as did the concept, or one. We actually took a poll here indicating that most readers preferred one well-placed charging port to two.
It turned out the production car has one charging port which is located just to the front of the driver side mirror under a sliding door (shown above). GM Volt vehicle line executive Frank Weber confirmed to me during the unveiling that indeed the car would have only one charging port.
Many readers here noticed on the GM diagram above that there seemed to be another structure further forward and lower than the charging port that appeared as though it might be accessible from the car’s exterior, and speculation began as to what that structure is (shown as blow-up above with blue arrow).
I asked GM.
GM spokesman Rob Peterson simply stated it was the “charging unit.” When asked to explain further, because readers really wanted to know, all Rob would say is GM was “not going to share any details at this time.”
I went to an outside source who is an expert in the PHEV field, who analyzed the image and gave us the following statement:
That is quite simply the charger. The cable coming into the car is AC, and the box in question has a heat sink, so it must mean power conversion. The cables lead directly to the batteries so this must be DC. No other boxes or chargers are shown. This must be the AC to DC power converter. It is a ~1-1.5kW charger. 8kWh needed, 6-8 hours to charge.
From what we also know, it is a smart charger that will automatically recognize AC input as being either 110 or 220V, charging in 3 hours with 220V. And at 220 V, the pack will be 50% charged in 1 hour.
Popularity: 2%
Related posts:
- Chevy Volt Chief Designer Bob Boniface on One Versus Two Charging Ports (With Poll)
- Volt Will Charge at Both 110V and 220V: Half of Range Charge Within an Hour
- Production Volt to Have Left and Right Charging Ports
- Mitsubishi i-MiEV to Use Wireless Charging System
- Hyatt Builds Charging Station for the Tesla Roadster
(11 votes, average: 4.82 out of 5) 
Loading ...
October 6th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Great news! It’s exactly where I would have put it. The flexibility to use 110 or 220 means we have options without limitations.
October 6th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Sweet.
This may be irrelevant, but I wonder how much power is lost during the AC/DC conversion. Does it take 15kW-hr to charge 12.8kW-hr of energy (80% of 16kW-hr) due to heat loss in the charger? Or does it take 12.800001kW-hr?
October 6th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
It looks vulnerable out there
October 6th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
50% in an hour is very cool. I voted for two charging ports.
3 hours for a full charge is great!
220 is easy in your home…and as you can see by the charge time more efficient.
October 6th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Great technical info. That’s why I regularly visit this site. OK, I’m the nerdy type. I admit it.
Did you find out what the ECON/SPRT button is for?
Will the Volt have a driver selectable mode where the control system attempts to preserve battery power at full SOC in anticipation of a long upwards climb later in the day?
Will the Volt computer generate a display showing miles made purely electrically vs. with the ICE? That would be great info to accumulate over time.
What’s the AER when traveling at constant speed on the highway (at 55mph; 60mph; 65mph; and 70mph please)?
GM has stated that in really cold weather, the ICE will come on until the batteries have warmed up. Approximately how many miles will I have to drive before the ICE shuts off (answers wanted at 40, 30, 20, 10, and 0 degrees farenheit please) ?
There’s so much more to know … and, Lyle, you’re the guy we are all counting on to get it!
October 6th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Very cloak and dagger of GM to decline to comment on an obvious essential to the whole system, as if it were the Mr. Fusion or something.
October 6th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
While this could be considered interesting….I wonder if enough topics exist until the Volt is in the few showrooms in 2+years.
#6
I agree…maybe it has one or two flux capacitors in the black box.
October 6th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Jeff, #7
I’m sure Lyle learned a lot at the Volt unveiling … and we’ll all be kept in suspense while he releases the info over the next few months in dribs and drabs.
Hey … I understand … it’s hard to come up with a new topic and keep up the suspense every day! And the responsibility must be weighing heavily on our favourite neurologist.
But Lyle, I’ll bet you are just dying to tell us everything
October 6th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
That is a very odd location. It would seem to be more efficient and better suited to be either part on the power module unit or at least located near the power module unit.
Running the cables as shown seems like both a waste of cable and also potential for other problems.
I am not convinced that this is just the rectifier for the incoming ac. Also, I am not sure how true the picture is, but the size of these cables seems large, but maybe they are using some type of armored cable to protect it in the abusive environment.
Oh yeah, has anyone asked GM how much that fancy “plug” they are using to plug into the charge port, will cost. Looks expensive, and a likely candidate for a thief. The large handle will also pose a risk of breaking off either the plug itself or the socket. It appears to protrude quite a way.
Why not just let someone use an ordinary extension cord? Does that fancy plug have electronics for doing more than just connecting to the car? What happens if I lose it? What happens if one of the kids uses it a Star Wars laser gun, and loses it in the woods?
October 6th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
#9 JEC
Oh yeah, has anyone asked GM how much that fancy “plug” they are using to plug into the charge port, will cost. Looks expensive, and a likely candidate for a thief. The large handle will also pose a risk of breaking off either the plug itself or the socket. It appears to protrude quite a way.
Why not just let someone use an ordinary extension cord? Does that fancy plug have electronics for doing more than just connecting to the car? What happens if I lose it? What happens if one of the kids uses it a Star Wars laser gun, and loses it in the woods?
——————————————————–
If you ask too many questions that make sense I am afraid we are going to have to ask you to leave.
Seriously, it is good question. There is no reason to have a plug like that. I want to use the orange hardware store special. It’s what is in use in the Prius Plug-In concept, the SMART ed fleet and production ready iMiev…so whats the issue here?
October 6th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
make big electric cars like an e-rev 3/4 ton suburban we need virsitilaty. stupid gm
October 6th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
LOL Statik
There is a very good reason to use a special plug. It will cost you big bucks! JMHO
Take Care
Arch
October 6th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
#5 Shaft - Will the Volt computer generate a display showing miles made purely electrically vs. with the ICE? That would be great info to accumulate over time.
On a recent post, I believe it was about the Volt interior, we were told that the All Electric miles and ICE generated miles would be displayed separately. (The post was: “More Chevy Volt Interior Details.”) “The display in front of the driver will show vehicle speed, total range (electric range and fuel range), total miles driven (total EV only miles and total fuel only miles), a trip odometer (again, with EV trip and fuel trip), and an efficiency meter. . .”
October 6th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
#9 JEC
#10 Statik
Lutz did say there was agreement on what the plug would look like between all manufacturers. This may be the standard. He also said something about slide and lock.
A 50a connection would be a very good idea. That could end up being a big deal since those connections are already available in many public places.
OT: I actually agree that nasaman had the better idea of two charging ports, one on each side.
October 6th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
#9 JEC: I would bet a big part of the placement for the rectifier is for heat dissipation. Take any ‘wall wart’ (even your cell phone’s charger) and feel it after it’s been up for a while - that converts milliamps of energy (usually under 500ma) to a very low voltage (don’t know if the voltage delta has much to do with it though). This is doing something over 10 amps of charge rate* (about 20 times your cellphone charger). Having played with R.C cars I know fast charging batterys generates a lot of heat (and this is charging at probably 5x the rate I used to). It may be desireable to stick that extra heat source right where it can dissipate heat easily.
* I’m not an electrical engineer so my math may be off.
I’ll also guess that they’re using a ’special’ plug to give it safe disconnect ability when someone spaces out and drives away without unplugging it. At least that will be their public reason…
October 6th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
NO PLUG NO SALE =D–
October 6th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Is there an echo in here?
WOT
October 6th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Michael #13
Thanks! I missed that.
October 6th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
#14 DonC
#9 JEC
#10 Statik
Lutz did say there was agreement on what the plug would look like between all manufacturers. This may be the standard. He also said something about slide and lock.
————————————
Geesh, I don’t remeber this at all, I must be losing it…you got a linky that I can have a ‘boo’ at at? Is there specs on some kind of universally accepted plug?
That is good news if there is such a agreement, that means I can chuck the ‘fancy’ GM one and just get a cheap…and more importantly cheap looking universal one. That must be what I am seeing on the autoshow pics of the iMiev, just a cheap looking universal EV cord…but not a standard ‘hardware’ store cord.
Thanks for the info.
October 6th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
#2 Aspherical:
From Wikipedia: “Transformers are some of the most efficient electrical ‘machines’, with some large units able to transfer 99.75% of their input power to their output.”
Combined with solidstate voltage regulators to make the DC more palatable to the batteries, I imagine you’ll see very little loss in the AC/DC conversion. My guess is less than 2%.
October 6th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
#19 Statik
I can’t remember what interview it was. It was video not a transcript. He was talking about how you could plug it in when outside the home. I remember his saying that “all the manufacturers had agreed” on the design. You plugged it in, slide the credit card, and it locked so no one could take it to charge their vehicle. When you were ready you slide the card again and it opened.
Maybe some one else can help with a cite.
October 6th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
I’m not an EE, but the explanation only makes partial sense to me. If this unit is simply for converting AC to DC, why place it there? I imagine it takes 4 feet of extra wiring this way, as opposed to inline somewhere. Why not place it right behind the socket, or right on the battery? Heat dissipation maybe?
October 6th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
From the look of it, that connector IS in fact the (soon to be?) standardized SAE J-1772 connector.
As for wanting to use an inexpensive cable for charging, I find it interesting that people are willing to pay $30-40k for this car, but want to “cheap out” on the power lead. Most curious.
Yeah, I get the “they’re just screwing me because they can!” mentality, and the desire to have inexpensive additional plug cords, and so forth. Those -are- factors, but personally I’d want the best engineered, smartest connector mechanism available — one that helps prevent accidental shocks, arcing, drive-offs while plugged in, etc. I expect it to minimize risks to myself and my rather pricey new automobile. Saving a few bucks is important, but decidedly secondary.
But that’s just me. To each his own, I guess!
October 6th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Thanks for getting the (very plausible) answers on this, Lyle! [Since we only had an overhead view, and the mystery item appears to be well outside & below the "underhood" components, it was tempting to think it might be a junction box for an optional electromagnetically-coupled charger input that could be coupled to a garage-floor-mounted charger input device.]
October 6th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
The reason for a proprietary plug is simple. If you wanted to plug into a 220 outlet, a normal extension cord wouldn’t work, (the plug wouldn’t fit in either end). You don’t want to make a cord that fits 220 on one end and 110 on the other, talk about blowing stuff up if someone plugs their weed wacker into 220.
October 6th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
I suspect the placement of the recharging port has a lot to do with making sure it’s AS FAR AS POSSIBLE from the fuel filler.
It would only taken one errant spark combined with fuel vapor to brand the Volt as a modern day Hindenburg.
It certainly looks as though it would have been cheaper and easier for GM to have put the charging port in the back or on the passenger side.
It’s a lot more convenient, and probably much safer for them to have put it where it is.
October 6th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
The location of the unit is interesting. It’s a great location for cooling. It’s also a great location for a more stealthy plug-in port. I don’t know about you but I really don’t want that handle sticking out like that in some neighborhoods or charging at the store. I would prefer a low and idiot proof plug that will not draw unwanted attention.
It might also be a quick-charge port! Something for the future. Anyway, It will be a good point for me to tap into so I can bypass the attention drawing side handle thingamajig.
October 6th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Maybe also designed to resemble a gas pump nozzle? You know, to help transition people to EV’s by making the plug look like the familiar gas nozzle.
Or not. Sounds plausible at least.
Stew.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:10 am
5. Shaft
Re: ICE warming the batteries
I believe that was just another example of a “GM exec saying something stupid as he attempts to fill two+ years of time with nothing accurate or important to say.”
It is a plug-in hybrid… how did they manage to think of using electricity instead of gas to drive the car and not electricity instead of gas to warm the batteries? I know, the exec didn’t think of anything… the engineers did!
October 7th, 2008 at 12:18 am
The front is really where a plug like that should be.
If the power source is to the driver’s side of the car then you will be stepping over the cord when you walk to the front of the garage or having to walk all the way around the car. If the power source is to the front of the car then you will either have to drive over the cord or always “walk the cord” back to the front of the car (i.e. when driving away, first walk to the driver’s door, unplug the cord, walk the cord back to the front of the car, then walk back and get in the car).
Typical GM cost-cutting or lack of thought?
October 7th, 2008 at 12:45 am
@GTX
I disagree, the convenience and cord hopping depends entirely on each specific owner’s car parking situation. Some driveways are on the left of a house, some on the right. Some people back into their driveways, some pull forward. Some people park on the street, others in a parking lot.
For instance, someone with a driveway on the right side of their house who pulls in forward could have the cord running directly in front of the vehicle. They’d never have to step over it. For someone with a driveway on the left side of their house, they could simply approach the car from the rear, never having to walk over the cord.
I suspect one VERY big reason the socket is so large and placed where it is is to remind drivers to remove it prior to driving away. Even though GM will almost certainly provide an in-car alarm to alert drivers to a still plugged-in vehicle, there’s nothing better than being able to actually see the (admittedly large) plug from the driver’s seat.
Bottom line, no placement will be optimal for everyone. Other than keeping the socket as far as possible from fuel vapors, it’s largely a numbers game. I suspect they tested and focused grouped various positions, then found a majority of users preferred a driver-side arrangement.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:55 am
GXT #29 “It is a plug-in hybrid… how did they manage to think of using electricity instead of gas to drive the car and not electricity instead of gas to warm the batteries? ”
======================================================
I’m not sure it’s so simple. If the car is finished charging, and is sitting for hours in cold weather, the batteries could indeed be heated by electricity to keep them warm. But there must be a tradeoff where the cost of the electricity exceeds the cost of driving the car for a bit on the ICE, and using execss ICE heat to warm the batteries up to proper operating conditions. There will also be times when there is no plug handy, so the batteries will indeed get cold. Using battery energy to warm the batteries in cold weather might not be effective because battery efficiency drops in cold weather.
October 7th, 2008 at 1:09 am
>> There will also be times when there is no plug handy, so the batteries will indeed get cold.
60 days per year (12 business weeks) is a very realistic expectation for those of us in the north… sitting in a parking lot without a plug available while you work.
Efficiency estimates we’ve seen so far don’t take that into account, despite the fact that it is a rather large influencing factor.
October 7th, 2008 at 1:35 am
A proprietary plug offers absolutely no benefit to the consumer. The engineers should have came up with something that’s a little more standards compliant (like include 110V and 220V outlets built-in), so consumers can just run up to a local hardware store to pick up a cord.
If they are going to have this huge proprietary plug that users have to lug around with them (and worry about paying huge prices to replace when it frays after 3 months of use), why not just pull the charger from the car entirely and have it separate like the Roadster.
I hope Ford and Chrysler will have more thoughtful engineers working on their EREVs that aren’t rushed to throw together an expensive piece of crap.
October 7th, 2008 at 1:46 am
6.
DLO Says:
October 6th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Very cloak and dagger of GM to decline to comment on an obvious essential to the whole system, as if it were the Mr. Fusion or something.
7. Jeff Says:
October 6th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
While this could be considered interesting….I wonder if enough topics exist until the Volt is in the few showrooms in 2+years.
#6
I agree…maybe it has one or two flux capacitors in the black box.
___________________________________
Does this mean we all have to hook the cars up to the clock tower in the center of town every night and wait for bolts of lightning to charge up our Volts?
October 7th, 2008 at 3:47 am
Only one charge port. Bummer.
SInce my wife and I both pull forward into the garage, a charge port on both sides would have been more convenient. I could install a drop cord right down the middle and charge both cars off the same cord.
Oh well. It is not a show stopper, just inconvenient.
October 7th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Statik #10
I agree with Arch #12.
That special plug is there only to cost us more money. I hope a standard extension cord will work. It would suck to forget the special plug at home and then have to use gas to get back there.
October 7th, 2008 at 3:54 am
#34 Kubel says,
I hope Ford and Chrysler will have more thoughtful engineers working on their EREVs that aren’t rushed to throw together an expensive piece of crap.
————-
I doubt it is GM’s engineers that should be blamed.
It was probably some marketing type trying to figure out how to squeeze more money out of the consumer.
October 7th, 2008 at 4:00 am
I like the smart charging unit from a voltage perspective.
I can run 220 at home and use 110 at work.
I see this as convenient.
October 7th, 2008 at 4:02 am
I must say, I am very excited about this car.
And I hope GM builds the Chevy Orlando as an EREV AWD.
October 7th, 2008 at 4:48 am
Ok, I’m confused. Why would it be possible to charge faster with double voltage? I’m not sure thats right. In europe, they use 220V, but there’s less amps behind it (force of the electrical current). Furthermore, my laptop doesn’t charge any faster in Europe than it does in the US. It is good news that its a smart charger, because I’m planning on buying one and importing it to Germany (I don’t feel like waiting another year). However, don’t get your hopes up that you’ll somehow be able to cut the charge time to 3 hours. Either way, I am satisfied that it will work in Europe, as gas is way expensive here.
October 7th, 2008 at 5:10 am
The GEM daily driver I use at work has a regular 120v extention cord plug in. I drive the GEM for 1/2 hour, then plug it in for an hour. Then use it again, and plug it in again…so on.
The battery is usually charged somewhere between 20% and 90% without even trying. And the having to plug and unplug is not work…it’s fun. No gasoline what so ever.
=D~
October 7th, 2008 at 5:55 am
I would bet, that addition unidentified component is a maintenance access port, used when the vehicle is in the shop. It is properly used while the car is lift up on a rack, since the side access panel would be too high.
October 7th, 2008 at 5:56 am
Thanks Lyle! This is a great site!
October 7th, 2008 at 6:25 am
220, 221 whatever it takes…
Why not keep it simple… Incorporate the fancy charging handle into the car and make the charging port the male end of a standard plug that you can take an extension cord and plug into.
I have a diesel truck that has a block heater. The plug is behind the front bumper. Not glamorous but it works.
October 7th, 2008 at 6:28 am
Better yet… People can start stealing the special charging handles from cars charging at work and sell them on Ebay…
October 7th, 2008 at 6:31 am
I’m sure GM purposely designed that special charging cord connector to look similar to a gas pump nozzle.
Also, a standard AC connector would likely allow your hardware store “orange cord” to hang down close and touch the finish. Extension cords tend to attract abrasive sand and dirt.
October 7th, 2008 at 6:31 am
Thats what I thought it was. The body panels wouldnt support the lower “plug”.
October 7th, 2008 at 6:37 am
The post says
1) It is a ~1-1.5kW charger
2)..charging in 3 hours with 220V
==========================================
These two statements cannot both be true.
Doing the arithmetic, 8/1=8 hours and 8/1.5=5+ hours.
That is, if statement 1 is true the charger is the limiting factor in the charging time.
This is why people hate engineering and hate math, always telling you things you don’t want to know and don’t want to be true
October 7th, 2008 at 6:43 am
#46 Brad G says “Better yet… People can start stealing the special charging handles from cars charging at work and sell them on Ebay…”
================================
Well they will only cost $139 from the dealer, and they will have an 8 foot cord (?) and plug at the other end attached, making replacements a good profit generator for GM and your local “midnight acquisition company”.
Actually I have no idea what the plug and cord will cost, but everything from the dealer comes at a high price. What is perhaps a bigger nuisance is the short cord attached.
October 7th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Lyle, thanks for the new close-up picture of the plug cover as moved back, and the handle going into the car.
The slide-back cover is not going to make it through the first winter of daily use, as it will be frozen in place many days, requiring use of a screwdriver. There will be predictable consequences.
But for only $277.93 you can get it fixed at the local dealer
For the service department, the Volt is going to be the best car ever.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:00 am
#49 RB: They probably mean it pulls 1.0-1.5kW at 110v. That’s ~9-14A. Most likely it still pulls the same amperage at 220, so it’s charging at 2-3kW (oversimplification probably caused inaccuracy).
October 7th, 2008 at 7:03 am
RB #51,
Yup. I don’t see the slide standing up well to salt, sand, and ice.
I wouldn’t surprise me if it is one of the first failure points.
And if we can’t get it open, then what is the point of having a plug and an EREV?
October 7th, 2008 at 7:06 am
41 Ken Clymer…… You said, “Ok, I’m confused. Why would it be possible to charge faster with double voltage?….”
——————————————————————————————————————————–
Easily explained…. P = VA (Power= Volts x Amps), so fully charging the battery requires 8KWh of power. If the charger draws 12 amps….
So at 110V…….
P = 110V x 12A = 1.32KW; a full charge will take 8KWh/1.32KW = 6.06 HRS
And at 220V…….
P=220V X 12A = 2.64KW & a full charge will take 8KWh/2.64KW = 3.03 HRS
(These examples would apply for the US AND the 220V case for Europe or elsewere if 12A is available. If not, the time for a full charge will increase by 12A/ X Amps, where X is the current available.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:15 am
#52 fishmahn
#54 nasaman On why charging really is faster at 220V
============================================
What you say is true if it is the charging circuit that is the limitation, as we had previously thought.
In contrast, if we accept the statement in the post as correct, there is a 1 to 1.5kw limitation in the charger, perhaps reflecting heat dissipation requirements there. So, if the statement in the post is correct, there will not be faster charging with 220V. That is consistent with the fact that charging time for laptop computers similar on 110 and 220V.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:18 am
Hmmm…seems to be some concerns over that charging port door.
I’m hoping it will be motorized (wave your key near it and it opens).
And…. built out of hardened steel !
If it doesn’t detect the charging connector it closes in 5 seconds.
Then I could use it to crack walnuts ! Nyuk! Nyuk! Nyuk!
October 7th, 2008 at 7:20 am
#53 Rashiid Amul says “Yup. I don’t see the slide standing up well to salt, sand, and ice.
I wouldn’t surprise me if it is one of the first failure points.
And if we can’t get it open, then what is the point of having a plug and an EREV?”
===================================
Rashiid — We will get it open. That’s what screwdrivers are for.
Also works on trunk covers. Doesn’t leave too much of a scratch.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:20 am
From the article: “From what we also know, it is a smart charger that will automatically recognize AC input as being either 110 or 220V, charging in 3 hours with 220V. And at 220 V, the pack will be 50% charged in 1 hour.”
————————————————————————————–
Once E-REVs and EVs catch on (and it’s looking more likely they will), then I think electric power utilities will take steps to discourage daytime charging as much as possible. Our current grid won’t support mass day-time charging.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:23 am
#11 dylan Says: “make big electric cars like an e-rev 3/4 ton suburban we need virsitilaty. stupid gm”
————————————————————————————–
GM has already said this type of vehicle is not possible without much better battery technology than we have today.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Maybe the mystery plug is an AC *output* so that the Volt can be used as a generator.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:28 am
#53 Rashiid — on the charger cover.
=====================================
Rashiid — after we get rid of the plastic thing, we can use duct tape.
Looks just as good, works better. Has to be cut neatly, though.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:28 am
Dave G #58 says,
Once E-REVs and EVs catch on (and it’s looking more likely they will), then I think electric power utilities will take steps to discourage daytime charging as much as possible. Our current grid won’t support mass day-time charging.
———–
There have been studies that have shown that it will take years if not decades for EVs to cause a problem on the grid. We have had a post here about it. Sorry, but I can’t find it just now.
Thankfully we don’t have to worry about it anytime soon.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:29 am
All this talk about the “plug”. It should be obvious - this is the sleek, futuristic looking “concept plug”. The production plug will be modified to allow for maximum performance and will be an orange cable with three prongs on the end.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:30 am
I heard Bob Lutz mention a solar blanket accessory which can be unfolded and connected to the Volt during outings such as picnics. Maybe it’s a usb port system.
=D~
October 7th, 2008 at 7:31 am
RB #61
Ah Duct tape. What would we do without the versatile stuff?
That stuff can be used anywhere. It wouldn’t surprise one bit if they carried it on the Space Shuttle.
And if your Volt is gray, the Duct tape will blend in nicely.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:35 am
This is a bit of a sidetrack, but I thought it was interesting.
GM bought the Renaissance Center (HQ) last May outright for 626 million dollars. Now today they are trying to sell it…well refinance it for 500 million. Sounds like someone’s situation is deteriorating fast.
But it gets better, they are not going to the bank, they are trying to goto Detroit’s pension funds, lol. They meet on Thursday this week, but it’s not looking good for them.
“We’re not going to do it because we don’t have that kind of money,” said George Orzech, police and fire pension board member. “There’s no interest that I know of, but stranger things have happened.” He said the pension board already has too much invested in downtown Detroit real estate.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081007/AUTO01/810070376
I’m not sure exacted why they have not gone to the bank. Perhaps they already have, word just didn’t get out. I’m guessing their credit score isn’t too high these days? (Triple C) Or it could be the real estate market is a little weak in Detroit?
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080813/METRO/808130360
October 7th, 2008 at 7:37 am
I agree that the sliding charge port panel could be easily damaged & hard to open. One easy fix would be to use a hidden hinge inside the door at the top so it will easily flip up (to open) & down (to close). We’ll get a clue when the Plug-in Saturn Vue hits dealer’s showrooms (expected several months before the Volt). I believe the Vue’s panel is currently hinged.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:41 am
While I’ll agree that is one fancy lookin plug… we must remember that it is in fact a PLUG that is attached to our mode of transportation…
Got Plug - Got Sale ….
I like the ability for it to automatically recognize the AC 110v or 220v… I’ll be trenching out a 220v line to my detached garage next summer!
I’ll just go ahead and assume that the cost of such a fancy plug would be included in the price of this vehicle….
Instead of “Batteries Included” which is a no-brainer here…
I’m going to assume “Fancy Plug Included”
October 7th, 2008 at 7:46 am
#15 fishmahn Says: “I’ll also guess that they’re using a ’special’ plug to give it safe disconnect ability when someone spaces out and drives away without unplugging it. At least that will be their public reason…”
————————————————————————————–
You don’t need a special plug for this. All you need to do is disable the car from moving when the charge port cover is open.
I also agree with others here that the fancy plug is a bad idea. The charge port slide cover also seems susceptible to issues with ice, snow, and road salt.
It would probably be better to have 2 layers of protection against the environment. In other words, have a regular door type cover like on your gas tank, and then another cover under that. Note that this is exactly how they do it today with the gas tank. They have a gas door cover and a filler cap - 2 layers of protection. Older cars just had the filler cap, but I’ll bet that caused problems with ice, snow, and road salt.
If you had 2 layers of protection, then the outer door could be designed to be closed when the car is plugged in. This would allow the use of a regular orange extension cord from Home Depot.
The special plug will end up being a hassle, especially if you need to plug-in away from home, or if you lose or damage the cord. By the way, what happens when you drive over the end of that cord with your front tire? I know I will. A regular orange cord costs $20 to replace:
http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10051&langId=-1&catalogId=10053&productId=100083560
October 7th, 2008 at 7:52 am
#65 Rashiid - Ah Duct tape. What would we do without the versatile stuff? … And if your Volt is gray, the Duct tape will blend in nicely.
No problem, Rashiid. Duct tape already comes in colors. I know I have seen Brown and White (although I can’t imagine someone wanting a Volt in that shade of brown). I’m sure your GM dealer can sell you Duct tape color matched to your Volt for only $39.95.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:52 am
#68 Murray
I’ll just go ahead and assume that the cost of such a fancy plug would be included in the price of this vehicle….
Instead of “Batteries Included” which is a no-brainer here…
I’m going to assume “Fancy Plug Included”
————————————————-
Again, I think that only comes in the 1SB package with the air conditioning and power windows, cost? $7,500
Side note:
Overhead at GM, “Adrienne, good news, we put your profile up on corporate website as the Volt Battery Test Engineer, you made the big time! Your really moving up fast! Unfortunately your a woman, and in keeping with out policy of unbelievably awkward bio photos of women, we must post the highest resolution picture of your face possible…so you can be mocked at the next meeting.”
http://media.gm.com/volt/people/bios/billiau.html
October 7th, 2008 at 8:01 am
#66 Static
I wish you wouldn’t have brought that up Static. Now I’ll get an ulcer. Grrrrr. Let me get this straight, the folks who benefit from GM jobs aren’t willing to save the company. They want the other citizens to save GM. Another good reason why gov’t involvement here isn’t healthy. I’ve said for a long time, if GM provides such great jobs for suppliers and workers, let the suppliers and workers buy the bonds. Not me. They want the benefits, while I pay the costs, and the only way they can swing this is to get the federal gov’t to do it for them.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:10 am
So much for being transparent. But with all the fault finding over
the design of the charging port cover, you can see why GM seems to have programmed the revelations of design, rather than just answering our questions openly.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:14 am
#71 Statik…
Again, I think that only comes in the 1SB package with the air conditioning and power windows, cost? $7,500
—–
Funny…the 1SB package huh? I get it… at a reasonable price of $7,500 they can now officially even say its 100% tax refundable…
October 7th, 2008 at 8:15 am
#73 Van “But with all the fault finding over
the design of the charging port cover, you can see why GM seems to have programmed the revelations of design, rather than just answering our questions openly.”
=============================================
Whether there is or is not fault finding will not affect whether the cover freezes over in the winter.
What GM will do, if the smart people there have any influence, is make use of the comment and make a door for the production model that works in wintry weather (just as does the gas tank door). Then they can laugh at us dumb bloggers.
. Advance comments are much easier to handle than those that come up after production starts and people start complaining to NHTSA.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:25 am
All this whining about the plug. Don’t you think that if the Volt requires a ’special plug” to charge the car that it will be included in with the price of the vehicle? Think of it as an accessory that comes with the car. Certianly you aren’t going to have to purchase the plug seperatly!
And if you are worried about your kids playing with it… Keep it away from the kids!
October 7th, 2008 at 8:28 am
For some reason, GM thinks this “fancy” charging cord is needed. Why not just sell the adapter that plugs into the Volt and provide a standard electriclal connector on the other end of it?
Maybe, Lyle can get some detail info on this “fancy” cord?
October 7th, 2008 at 8:29 am
All this whining about the plug. Don’t you think that if the Volt requires a ’special plug” to charge the car that it will be included in with the price of the vehicle? Think of it as an accessory that comes with the car. Certianly you aren’t going to have to purchase the plug seperatly!
And if you are worried about your kids playing with it… Keep it away from the kids!
—————————————————–
I think we are worried about driving to work, and getting it ripped off there…or in the parking garage of our apartment. It isn’t so much the initial cost, I think we are all just kidding about having to buy the first one, it is the (potentially repeating) replacement cost.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:30 am
I would like the Volt and all E-Rev’s to have a override in the system software where the car won’t start with the plug in. Like many vehicles won’t start without your foot on the brake. I believe this will help prevent many ripped out plugs from the side of the vehicle etc…
Just build the damn things - the more styles the faster and with many battery capacities (40 mile all Electric, 30, 20 etc…) Get them out ASAP - from the sounds of the production I won’t be able to get a volt type car until 2012, that means I have to buy another gas POS
and this is getting frustrating -
October 7th, 2008 at 8:33 am
nasaman Says: @54
Easily explained…. P = VA (Power= Volts x Amps), so fully charging the battery requires 8KWh of power. If the charger draws 12 amps….
So at 110V…….
P = 110V x 12A = 1.32KW; a full charge will take 8KWh/1.32KW = 6.06 HRS
And at 220V…….
P=220V X 12A = 2.64KW & a full charge will take 8KWh/2.64KW = 3.03 HRS
(These examples would apply for the US AND the 220V case for Europe or elsewere if 12A is available. If not, the time for a full charge will increase by 12A/ X Amps, where X is the current available.
***********************************************************
A charger can charge just as fast with 120V but it would simply need twice the size of the wires and higher current components. That makes it less feasible for the Volt and the infrastructure of charging stations.
Let’s not make anything more complicated than what it is.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:38 am
The California Air Resources Board is considering a proposal that all plug-in vehicles be required to conform to SAE J1772 REV ?2009.
(The new standard is not finalized, therefore the question mark next to 2009.)
That picture looks like it could be the SAE J1772 Yazaki connector.
Sounds like GM is trying to be compliant.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:47 am
I have thought from the beginning to use solar or wind energy to charge my Volt (assuming I can get one). Would I be able to charge it directly or would I have to convert it from DC to AC so the car can convert it back to DC, Or can I go directly from DC to DC?
October 7th, 2008 at 8:50 am
#71 statik
Adrienne might read this blog. Please let her know that she looks fine.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:52 am
I want to see what the other end of that fancy wire looks like; the end that can somehow plug into either 110 or 220.
More Duct Tape Colors: Black, Red
October 7th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Does anyone think that GM will now keep the sticker price under 40,000 dollars?
What coupe for GM. They got a subsidy from you and I, and never had to reveal any meaningful information to the public about why the vehicle needs a subsidy.
Not a chance. Not. a. chance.
At this point, all I’m hoping for is to guess correctly which battery-maker(s) will supply the car market, and retire downtown so I don’t need a vehicle.
October 7th, 2008 at 9:02 am
#65 Rashiid and #70 Michael — on matching the color of the duct tape with the color of the Volt.
======================================
Great job guys ! We’ve got the problem solved.
October 7th, 2008 at 9:02 am
#77
If the EREV takes off, with anything like a standardized plug, I’ll be very surprized if you won’t be able to walk into a Wal-Mart and pick up that adaptor for less than $10
#86
What a good question. I expect a lot of folks are thinking this way. Unfortunately, you would need some form of DC to DC conversion to match the 300V battery voltage (and exposed DC connectors have a tendancy to corrode, especially on a car which might run through road salt or in humid envirornments). At the end of the day, it might be easier/cheaper to make AC (which you would need to do anyway to power anything in your home).
October 7th, 2008 at 9:04 am
#
nasaman Says:@24
October 6th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Thanks for getting the (very plausible) answers on this, Lyle! [Since we only had an overhead view, and the mystery item appears to be well outside & below the "underhood" components, it was tempting to think it might be a junction box for an optional electromagnetically-coupled charger input that could be coupled to a garage-floor-mounted charger input device.]
***********************************************************
I’ve been in the electrical business all my life and I’ve never seen or heard of anything that could induce a current of that magnitude to another receiving object of that distance. It does not make sense. Transformers can accomplish that task but the physical dimensions are much closer.
October 7th, 2008 at 9:08 am
A few thoughts onthe special plug.
1- It will make people comfortable about it as it imitates a gas pump (without the debt indicator)
2- Keeps the cord away from the body
3- Likely electronically Keyed to the car to prevent theft
4- Likely a breakaway design in case you accidently forget to unplug (also difficult to ignore so forgeting is more unlikely) I mean if you have a regular cord, and drive away and it rips a 3″ hole in your door and costs $700.00 to fix because it is also the charging port..you would scream about the poor design.
5 looks like a flush mounting so no pins to corrode
6- a regular extension cord is more versatile for average joe so more likely to be stolen IMO
I do not think it is likely to be stolen. It is too easy to electronically key it to the car (like stereos these days with a theft deterent chip), and with a breakaway connection, no damages, and it keeps the cord from the body.
I really think all you people that cry its a money maker, would be the first to complain that :
“the regular plug type extension cord is scuffing the body.”
That if you had dual charging ports and you use the passenger side and forget would be like “…if it was only on the drivers side I could never forget,”
and the damages you would also scream that “…it should have been a special breakaway…”
and of course because of those design flaws, GM should foot the bill because they should have thought of these thing.
I think it is a great idea they way it is..the 2 pennies I have
Mitch
October 7th, 2008 at 9:08 am
#71 statik, on GM’s Battery Person, Adrienne.
=========================================
I take your remark as tongue in cheek.
She’s highly qualified as well as quite attractive.
Even GM’s limited capability on personal pictures can’t hide that.
Thanks for the link. It brightens up the day.
October 7th, 2008 at 9:19 am
#81 - Gorden Green
You nailed it - GM isn’t making this stuff up - there are SAE standards involved here - SAE J1772 has been around for a while, and is currently be revised - there is WAY MORE than just a 110 or 220V wire - So it’s NOT going to be something you just “hack together” from Lowes or Home Depots (at least not for a few more years, anyways).. It’s not GM just trying to make money (although I sure the fancy volt logo model will cost extra), they are trying to following existing SAE standards in this realm..
Some great links (from a few quick searches are below):
http://evtransportal.com/staffpaper.pdf - About the need for standard charging infrastructures
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/hevtest/071608evchargingreq.pdf
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/hevtest/071608phevwrkshp.pdf - See Pages 44-60 for the
http://books.google.com/books?id=mxP_c_KsxnIC - A great EV book in general - Some folks on this board should buy this!
http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/other/rav_reliability_report.pdf - Shows some pictures of chargers, and shows the RAV4 on page 22 with a Yazaki charger plugged in.
October 7th, 2008 at 9:22 am
I strongly recommend that anyone thinking of charging their Volt at home run a new separate single 220v line or 110v to their garage or outside carport. The expected current load on an existing 110v plug may make it questionable for people with older houses and older wiring. Most houses in North America are wired with 14 gauge for 110v and 12 gauge for 220v (electric heaters). I’d hate to see a house fire started from overheated faulty wiring. It will be interesting to see if GM publishes the ampere rating for charging at the 110 and 220.
I’m thinking a 10 gauge wire line would be enough to make me feel safe. 10/3 220v is standard for a common electric household clothes dryer. The larger wire (smaller the guage) lessens the chance of the wire heating from the current load. Junction boxes, nics and kinks in the wire can cause overheating points. Running a new line will ensure you have a good clean line direct to the car from your power distribution box (fuse or breaker box).
Check with your local electrical codes and get a qualified electrician to install the line. It may cost you a couple hundred $ but you’ll be able to sleep at night while your Volt is charging!
October 7th, 2008 at 9:29 am
DonC & Static
DARPA is advancing portable power supplies with a competition (see link). They paid 1.75 million dollars and got 170 teams and 20 reasonable entires, and some really cool tech that reduces battery weight by 80%. This is a perfect example of what the gov’t should be doing. If it went through congress, we’d end up with a 100 million dollar subsidy to Energizer.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/07/pentagon_portable_power_prize/
October 7th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Plug placement right in front of the drivers door is pretty obvious, isn’t it? It’s so you see it when you get in. Unless you climb in from the back seat, or over the console, it’s hard to miss there.
October 7th, 2008 at 9:37 am
Some may have commented already, if so, sorry as I did not have time to read all posts. About the charge cord and socket/plug:
I believe the person who stated it was a new SAE standard is correct. The location and special nature of the cord/socket makes good sense to me. If indeed the setup is standardized then “charging stations” can be setup at hotels, rest stops, etc. and every manufacturer’s electrical car (think future here) uses the same pug and thus compatibility.
Also, I read here that the plug/socket must withstand thousands of insertions and still maintain good contact with minimized wear. A standard three prong socket will not hold up to say the 10,000 cycles over the life of the vehicle.
And for the placement, makes perfect sense. You can hardly miss the cord sticking out of the side of the car when you enter the drivers door. If it were on the passenger side, it would be easy to forget and try to drive off with out disconnecting. Which brings me to my final point…I am sure the connector/car will be “smart” enough to know that the cord is plugged in and NOT allow the car to be switched on/started or driven off.
And then for those who worry about tripping over the cord. Well, if you have a garage, simply hang it from the ceiling in the appropriate location. You can even get on of those reels that retract the cord when not in use…
October 7th, 2008 at 9:48 am
#95 DavidF says “.. Well, if you have a garage, simply hang it from the ceiling in the appropriate location. You can even get on of those reels that retract the cord when not in use…”
===========================================
And for those of us who don’t have a garage …. not to worry, the special GM cord is not long enough for us to be able to plug in anyway
October 7th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I’m curious on the 110 vs 220 charging options…
I know much of the testing and design has been around not abusing the battery so it maintains a long life.
Is there any difference in how these batteries would last given the different rates of charge? I mean if one were to only charge at 110 volts and thus charge at a slower rate would this lower the ‘abuse’ of the battery and give it a longer life vs charging at 220v?
October 7th, 2008 at 9:51 am
All this talk about electricity started me thinking… Having just experienced my first extended power outage during the aftermath of Hurricane Ike, wouldn’t it be great if there was an output port and you could power your house with that wonderful 53kW generator sitting in our driveway? Believe me, it’s way easier to fill up a car every now and then than to fill up gas cans and dump them repeatedly into the top of a portable generator…that will only run a refrigerator, a few lights and a TV…while you sweat it out in the heat.
Just a thought…
October 7th, 2008 at 9:58 am
#98 - GLV
It’s been talked about for about 10 years - See references on V2G
http://www.udel.edu/V2G/
Sadly, per GM on the Gen1 volt will NOT support power output - I definitely think this is a worthy idea - I just think they are too busy trying to get G1 out the door and control costs at this point.. Maybe on the later generations?? We can always hope its a later option (or 3rd party aftermarket solution?), and it would definitely be a bit hit/seller in FL and along the coasts…
GFA
October 7th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Some of you are sure quick to make it a conspiracy…………..
Between tring to keep OSHA, and every other government agency happy, then meeting the ANSI standards, as well as worrying about every attorney waiting for somebody to get “hurt” plugging in their car in the pouring rain while standing nude in a six inch puddle of water at midnight, I am surprised the connector is as small as it is!!!!
October 7th, 2008 at 10:09 am
#58 Dave G, they already got it covered, it is called Smart Meters, when it cost you more to charge your car by charging during the day than to buy gas & run the ICE the market will control the grid demand.
As for custom plug it keeps the cheap creeps from buying a 10 AMP walmart extension cord & burning down their house when the garage catches fire due to excess current through the cord. Having a custom cord insures the wiring is properly rated for the current load.
October 7th, 2008 at 10:14 am
NDTNS
no duct tape = no sale
October 7th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Speaking of plugging in: Read this:
Source: “http://www.japanautostore.com/electric-cars-in-emissions-shock”
Auto news; Electric cars in emissions shock
Auto Express investigation reveals hidden eco impact, with plug-in models’ reliance on power stations to blame
Electric cars can be more polluting than their petrol-powered equivalents, according to an Auto Express investigation.
We looked at the source of energy used for charging, and found a plug-in vehicle can do greater harm to the environment than a conventional model. Our calculations show that NICE Car’s five-door Ze-O has an equivalent CO2 output of 112.1g/km. That’s more than the Ford Fiesta 1.4 TDCi. And, in electric-only mode, Chevrolet’s new Volt clocks up 124.2g/km - more than a BMW 118d!
We checked the amount of energy used every kilometre by eight electric cars. Then, using Government figures for the amount of CO2 power stations emit per unit of energy, we calculated the g/km rating. The results speak for themselves.
AA president Edmund King said: “Some electric car drivers have a smug attitude. But these findings show electric cars are not the cleanest and greenest.”
October 7th, 2008 at 10:29 am
#83 ThombDbhomb
#71 statik: Adrienne might read this blog. Please let her know that she looks fine.
——–
#90 RB
I take your remark as tongue in cheek.
She’s highly qualified as well as quite attractive.
Even GM’s limited capability on personal pictures can’t hide that.
Thanks for the link. It brightens up the day.
—————————————
Hehe, yes.
Just tongue and cheek reference about how seemingly all of GM’s female pictures are unnecessarily huge, Adrienne is a fine looking female. No disrespect was intended. All the ‘Volt team members’ are quite fetching actually.
If she happens to read this, I have some single friends that…nevermind.
October 7th, 2008 at 10:44 am
I did not see in the above posts the thought that the plug contains a circuit breaker the will turn on the power after a secure connection has been made and turn the power off before disconnection. Somewhere in the cord they will have to have this feature otherwise the contacts in the plug will get burned by the spark on each connection and disconnection.
I believe the mechanical connection at the car should be solidly secured and any breakaway capability be in the cord itself or in the plug end away from the end containing the contacts. Being an owner of a 5th wheel RV trailer I know the problems created by forcing the plug to be pulled out of the socket when you pull away with out unplugging the cord. I would not think it to be the case but maybe the plug is close enough that you cannot open the driver door with the plug in place. Too much chance of damage. I can guarantee you that if there is not a good interlock between the charging cord being in place and starting the car you will need a breakaway feature.
October 7th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Thinking about this logically, wouldn’t one prefer a charging port in the nose of the car? I pull all three of my cars straight into the garage. There are wall outlets on the wall in front of each stall so as not to have extension cords running on the garage floor to trip on I would think it would be smarter to put the charging port somewhere in front of the car????
October 7th, 2008 at 10:46 am
#103
I wonder how this study accounted for the following…
- Cost (emissions etc) for refining / transporting the gas / diesel
- The ability of electric vehicles to charge in off peak times when there is excess output
- The ability to instead of sending money for gas/diesel to foreign countries we keep it locally where it can (hopefully) be used to upgrade the grid with greener alternatives.
October 7th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Rashid Amul (#103):
The questions of electricity for cars and electricity from “green” sources are two separate ones. If you don’t convert from the internal combustion engine for transportation, it will mosl likely always be dependent on petroleum (and to a much lesser extent, specific biofuels).
Electricty replacing the ICE as the primary means of moving a car means that many more energy options become available; including a worst-case scenario for coal with no carbon sequestration — and a best-case for solar, or nuclear. It can only be considered a step (although a huge one) down the road to (pick one or both):
1) Energy independence
2) Carbon neutrality
…which would never be attained, otherwise.
October 7th, 2008 at 10:53 am
One thing about the charger is that it’s connected directly and solidly to the chassis of the vehicle. Looks like there’s no question about its grounding.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:04 am
#107 and 108.
I don’t really think the study was presented well in that article.
It doesn’t matter if EVs add more pollution. The pollution is coming from one place, the power station. It is much easier to control the pollution there than in the individual cars. In the end, EVs will contribute much less pollution because of the pollution controls at the power stations. IMO.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:07 am
The end of the cable that plugs into the car looks like a Star Trek phaser, but the other end may have a Y-cord. So you can plug in a 120V extension cord, or a 220V cable. Either that, or you get 2 cables with your Volt. I think they’d make it a 10-15′ cable, that you could lengthen by plugging your own cable into it, if needed.
#103 Rashiid
What if my power comes from sources other than coal, you know, the ones that produce no CO2?
October 7th, 2008 at 11:19 am
#65 Rashiid Amul:
Actually, if you go to a good race shop, duct tape is available in lots of colors now. We carry yellow, white, gray and black in our race boxes now. If we ever get our 1917 Chevy done I guess that we will need to get a roll of blue. You never know. In the Pegasus catalog they also offer red, silver, blue, green, orange, purple and clear. Maybe Chevy could just throw in a roll with each new Volt!
On the issue of the charging plug, I saw the one at the Santa Monica event which was plugged into something. It had one or more flashing lights on the handle and a light whigh illuminated the receptacle on the car, I guess for plugging in in the dark. Maybe the flashing lights indicated the state of charge, as on a power tool battery charger? Or maybe on was just a warning not to bump into it or drive away with it plugged in. I think that there was an extensive thread recently where people expressed interest in such things. So maybe they are responding to our concerns (LOL?) Maybe some sort of heating element for those icy mornings? Built in propane torch?
I agree, two years is going to be tough to fill.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Off-topic
Article on silver-zinc batteries. Sounds like they’ll start coming out next year in laptops. Given that car environments are more demanding (cost, life-span, etc), I think laptops tech will be a good predictor of what comes next in automotive. Given that, Volt 2.0 should have an AER of 55 miles if all else is held constant.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/10/07/zpower_major_laptop_design_win/
October 7th, 2008 at 11:22 am
It is my understanding that the batteries generate a lot of heat while discharging, so why would they need to be heated externally,also the excess heat can be used to warm the car interior in winter,NOT?
October 7th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Late edit:
Heat gun!
October 7th, 2008 at 11:35 am
#10 Statik
“Seriously, it is good question. There is no reason to have a plug like that. I want to use the orange hardware store special. It’s what is in use in the Prius Plug-In concept, the SMART ed fleet and production ready iMiev…so whats the issue here?”
————————————————–
If GM has to have something built into the end of that plug then why not build that component into the car and allow the owner to just plug in a standard 3-prong electrical cord? I have asked myself this question every time I have seen that special plug shown. It just does not make sense to require a plug that is going to be costly and one that will be “ripped-off” of cars parked outside and re-sold on the “black-market”. I suspect that special plug is going to cost about $250.00 to replace. It just does not make any sense. Come on, GM, build every thing required into the car and let us use a simple extension cord.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Lyle,
Can you find out about the plug’s cord? Why this type of connector cord? Why not a simple extension cord?
October 7th, 2008 at 11:47 am
#111 kdawg ask,
What if my power comes from sources other than coal, you know, the ones that produce no CO2?
—-
Even better. But if it is coal, it can still be controlled at the source, which will be better than controlling it in all the vehicles.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:50 am
#112 noel park Says: Actually, if you go to a good race shop, duct tape is available in lots of colors now. We carry yellow, white, gray and black in our race boxes now.”
————————————————————————————–
Forget duct tape - use gaffers tape - the stuff they use on movie sets, like this:
http://www.filmtools.com/2blacwhitgre.html
Comes in white, gray, black, yellow, blue, green, red, brown.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:50 am
#114 randy says,
It is my understanding that the batteries generate a lot of heat while discharging, so why would they need to be heated externally,also the excess heat can be used to warm the car interior in winter,NOT?
—————
Not from a cold weather climate, are you? The problem comes when the car sits in the parking lot for 8 hours and the temperature is below zero. Something will be needed to warm the battery.
October 7th, 2008 at 11:52 am
#55 RB:
In contrast, if we accept the statement in the post as correct, there is a 1 to 1.5kw limitation in the charger, perhaps reflecting heat dissipation requirements there. So, if the statement in the post is correct, there will not be faster charging with 220V. That is consistent with the fact that charging time for laptop computers similar on 110 and 220V. =====================================================
That was a quote from someone outside of GM who doesn’t know precisely what it is. GM’s own reports say it is 6 hrs with 110v, 3 hrs with 220v. While your suggestion is possible, the evidence points a different direction.
The limited number of cells on a laptop computer (6 usually) limit the charge rate to a much lower number (60-80watts max). Therefore they limit the power in the adapters accordingly. Since there are a large number of cells in the Volt’s battery pack, the maximum charge rate is much, much higher and it can take the higher rate of charge with ease. It wouldn’t be feasible to require everyone with 110 only to install a 30amp circuit just to charge their car, but if you have 220v, you can get that much power with only a 15amp circuit.
#97 Kirk
Is there any difference in how these batteries would last given the different rates of charge?
=====================================================
Since there are a very large number of cells in the volt’s battery pack to give you a 16kW ‘battery’ (even the largest laptop battery is likely to be under 100W - note the lack of a ‘k’), each individual cell has a limitation on safe charge current, but when you’re charging them all at once, 100 cells (it probably has more than that - maybe 3x more) can take a lot of current at once. I would think (without getting out textbooks and doing the math) that charging at 110v would be almost a ‘trickle charge’ to a battery of that size, and even at 220 you’re still well under the maximum recommended charge rate - there will probably be a negligible difference in ‘abuse level’ between the 2.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
#116 N Riley
If GM has to have something built into the end of that plug then why not build that component into the car and allow the owner to just plug in a standard 3-prong electrical cord? I have asked myself this question every time I have seen that special plug shown. It just does not make sense to require a plug that is going to be costly and one that will be “ripped-off” of cars parked outside and re-sold on the “black-market”. I suspect that special plug is going to cost about $250.00 to replace. It just does not make any sense. Come on, GM, build every thing required into the car and let us use a simple extension cord.
=============================
If what we are led to believe is true and they are conforming to a standard SAE J1772 cord, then it shouldn’t be as large a issue.
I’ve been poking around the interwebs, and here is the press ditty from SAE on it from last month:
http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/POWER/NEWS
(they have a stupid site, hit the ‘Charging Connector’ ditty about halfway down beside the main article.
It’s not ‘old orange’ at $14.99 (#69 DaveG, HD actually has them on sale right now from $19.99, lol). But costing is in the $60 range, which I’m sure is about $339.99 cheaper than GM’s plug…and it looks like it will be very unattractive. (w00h00!)
The ditty from SAE if that link above scared you:
“Yazaki has teamed with the SAE J1772 Working Group to define a standard connector interface for charging batteries in the next generation of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) with standard electrical power. The group selected Yazaki’s charge coupler design proposal to develop the standard for PHEVs, which depend on electricity sourced from the utility grid to replace gasoline for improved economy and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Design features of the coupler include a compact size and crush-proof design; support of up to 70 A charge rate; and safe, touch-proof contacts. The connector was designed for more than 10,000 insertion cycles”
Side note: I’m still pulling for a little crappy conversion socket I can jam in there and still plug ‘old orange’ into.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
kirk: Is there any difference in how these batteries would last given the different rates of charge?
——————————-
I have a similar question. If I planned to drive 5 miles a day for a week, would it be less stressful to the battery were I to charge it once at the end of the week rather than plug it in every night?
I suppose this question belongs somewhere in the forum, but not everyone plows through the forums.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
#116 N Riley
I think that there are several things that can be done..See my post #89,
I work in manufacturing and am in contact with user daily..you canno timagine the number of issues that I describe in the thought process behind special plugs.
We use wire harnesses..why? it is checper to use a wire and spade connectors, but you cannot miswire our harness. We use different coloured wire..one colour is cheaper..again no errors, easier for troubleshooting, and STANDARDS.
From a manufacturing standpoint the list of things you must comply with is staggering at times..
I posted #89 with some of the nmore obvious ones in mind…and the examples are real world (albeit modified to fit a car).
October 7th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
I already have a dedicated 220V outlet in my garage on the left hand side - SWEEEEET!!!! I am ready to go.
And the connection to the plug should sense when there is a cord there and prevent the car from “starting” until the cord is removed - voila - no driving off with the cord still attached!
October 7th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Oh yeah! Nice to hear.. here in Europe we have 220V!
October 7th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
RB
“And for those of us who don’t have a garage …. not to worry, the special GM cord is not long enough for us to be able to plug in anyway”
So either design & patent one, or just keep crying about it……..
October 7th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
#103 Rashiid Amul Says: “Speaking of plugging in: Read this:
Source: “http://www.japanautostore.com/electric-cars-in-emissions-shock”
————————————————————————————-
This article contradicts all other inforamtion I’ve heard. For example, on the recently aired program “Nova: Car of the Future”:
NARRATOR: Skeptics say that all plug-ins do is shift the pollution source from the tailpipe to the smokestack, but studies show that powering cars with electricity from today’s mix of power plants could reduce greenhouse emissions by about 40 percent. Further reductions are possible if electric power gets cleaner.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ht/tm/3507.html?site=22&pl=wmp&rate=hi&ch=5
October 7th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Thank you, Dave G #128
That was what I was trying to say in #110.
But what I didn’t know was that even without doing anything extra at the power stations, we will reduce greenhouse emissions by 40 percent. I like that very much.
October 7th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
#129 Rashiid
The other rather obvious but overlooked point is that PHEV’s aren’t increasing the amount of electricity generated, they’re simply using excess capacity. Basically the electricity will be generated, and it either gets used in a PHEV or it goes to waste. Since the pollution has already been created, plugging in the car doesn’t lead to more electricity being produced and therefore can’t lead to ANY additional pollution.
October 7th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
#130 DonC
“The other rather obvious but overlooked point is that PHEV’s aren’t increasing the amount of electricity generated, they’re simply using excess capacity. Basically the electricity will be generated, and it either gets used in a PHEV or it goes to waste. Since the pollution has already been created, plugging in the car doesn’t lead to more electricity being produced and therefore can’t lead to ANY additional pollution.”
You beat me to it. Until there are so many EV’s on the road that our grid capacity needs to be increased the useage is mute from a co2 standpoint. Plus that article assumes all electricity will come from coal fired electric plants. I guess solar panels on your garage, or a wind turbine in your backyard, or nuclear plants don’t fit into that articles “theory”.
I would love to find out where the funding for that “study” came from………
October 7th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Makes me glad that I have 220 ports all over my garage walls next to the 110 plugs. Hello 3 hour charge times!
October 7th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
#130, 131 “Since the pollution has already been created, plugging in the car doesn’t lead to more electricity being produced and therefore can’t lead to ANY additional pollution.”
Not true. If the electrical demand goes down, then coal fired stations are the first to lower their output, burning less coal in the process, and vice versa if the electrical demand