Grab our RSS Feed

EPA Closer to Giving the Chevy Volt at Least a 100 mpg Rating

October 13th, 2008 | Posted in: Efficiency

Previously we heard that The California Air Resources Board (CARB) had reached a preliminary agreement with GM giving the Volt a unique classification with regard to fuel economy, but the EPA had not finalized a decision. An article from the Seattle Times indicates the EPA has moved closer.

Per GM Volt vehicle line director Tony Pozawatz, the EPA has now preliminarily agreed to a method for testing the Chevy Volt that would lead to at least a 100 mpg estimate.

Mike Douba, from the Argonne National Lab, who invented this method indicated that through its use, the Volt should get a rating anywhere from 120 to 200 mpg. To read more about Duoba’s method read this post.

GM has apparently also agreed to share real world Volt testing numbers with the EPA if they would agree to the certification method now.

Duoba also noted that a plug-in Prius with a 10 mile range would “have difficulty” getting a 100 mpg rating.

Another method suggested by Automotive X-Prize is to compute MPGe’s or miles per gallon equivalents. In this method, gas and electricity are both converted into a common energy unit. The total energy consumed per mile is then determined.

Source (Seattle Times)

The graphic above is a suggestion from GM-Volt.com reader Kubel.

Popularity: 2%

(5 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

Loading ...

Posted by: Lyle

77 Responses to “EPA Closer to Giving the Chevy Volt at Least a 100 mpg Rating”

Rashiid Amul Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 6:17 am

As long as it makes sense to stupid people such as me.
Gsned57 Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 6:21 am

reporting not only the MPG, but the miles per KWH is a smart thing to show. Obviously for the Volt there won’t be too much to compare to but as more EV’s show up it’ll be nice to see the diference.

Also, it’s important to show the highway mpkwh because for cars like the plug in prius (as we understand it now), you won’t be able to drive 65 in all electric mode. That is a major difference from the volt and I’d imagine it may just get an NA in that column.
Gsned57 Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 6:43 am

In the picture shown, highway miles say 2.5 miles per kwh. The volt only uses 8 kwh for driving and the other 8 to keep the battery in a safe operating range. If the volt got 2.5 miles per kwh then it would only drive 20 highway miles on a charge (8kwh X 2.5 miles/kwh). I’m sure this is just a fun graphic, but couldn’t let it go unnoticed.
pdt Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 6:51 am

I like Kubel’s “sticker”.
ysf Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:11 am

Sounds that GM is threatening government, give me 160 MPG or I will declare chapter 7 and 4,797,047 will lose job before election day!
THOM Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:24 am

Just make sure it is truely obtainable otherwise this could be the death of this project.

Lets say you buy a 40K volt expecting to get 100MPG. You drive it for a few weeks and with 1000 miles on the odometer, you notice you had to fill the tank 2X or used about 20 gallons of gas ( in real world driving you were getting about 50 MPG).

For me, I would have that back to the shop every 2 days…..and if after muliple attemps, they couldnt get me 100MPG, i would file lemon law. I would then plaster bad PR all over the internet until GM gave me my money back.

GM need to give a REALISTIC real world MPG figure to keep this project alive!
Joe Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:28 am

ysf Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:11 am

Sounds that GM is threatening government, give me 160 MPG or I will declare chapter 7 and 4,797,047 will lose job before election day!

***************************************************************

I don’t see how you came to that conclusion from this article, although I can see Toyota not liking it.
Van Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:29 am

The actual “mileage” of the Volt is about 72 miles per gallon. Your mileage may vary. But on average Americans drive 2/3 of the miles they drive in short, less than 40 mile jaunts. The other 1/3 of our miles is driven during longer trips. So for the average driver, his or her “mileage” would be a composite of “charge depletion mode” mileage where “equivant gallons” of electricity are “burned” and “charge sustaining mode, where actual gallons of gasoline are burned. Thus a reasonable calculation would include 67 miles in EV mode and 33 miles in charge sustaining mode. At 3.5 miles per KWh, the Volt would “burn” about 19 KWH to travel 67 miles. The cost at 13 cents per KWH would be about $2.47 cents. Assuming gasoline costs $3.50 per gallon, that amounts to .7 equivalent gallons of gas. Similarly, if the Volt got 50 MPG in charge sustaining mode, then it would burn about .7 gallons of gas to go 33 miles. The composite is 1.4 gallons to go 100 miles, or about 72 MPGe.
Morgan Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:34 am

6 THOM:

or you could adjust your driving habits and see if you get the mileage. MPG is as much about HOW you drive as the vehicle itself.

I drive like a maniac, quick stops, fast acceleration. I get way under EPA MPG. I recognize its because of how I drive though.
THOM Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:35 am

#3

also note 1 hp = 746 watts = .746KW

–> 10.7 HP for average driving??

Little optimistic, isnt it??
THOM Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:42 am

#9

If i get on the highway with a full charge, set the cruise @ 55 MPH , drove 250 miles and used 5 gallons of gas there would be a problem.

I could not adjust my driving enough to get that figure up to 100 MPG.

Actually my current car gets 100MPH….that is when i take my foot off the gas at 75 mph, press in the clutch and coast…but that is not real world or practical
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:45 am

It really doesn’t matter how the EPA rates the Volt. Assuming they don’t go under before the Volt is released GM will sell all the Volts they can make. This car is arm and a leg better for us than its next closest competitor the Plug-in Prius. They will have no trouble selling this car, its getting it to market that is the chalenge.
Take Care,
TED
Van Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:46 am

P.S. While might quibble with some of the numbers, the overall look and layout of the “sticker” is absolutely brilliant!
Joe Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:48 am

If a person uses the Volt 90% of the time for commuting, which is likely to happen, the gas mileage should be very high. Like many individuals who have already stated on this site in the past, they will rarely have to buy gas.

Another article of interest.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/10/12/could-future-volts-get-80-mile-batteries/
Van Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:56 am

One other thought on the topic of reducing our use of gasoline, car pooling. It never made sense with gas burners to me, but folks could drive in EV mode to a location and pile into one Volt to drive to work. They would get special parking with free electricity to plug into. Now we are cooking with… uh… juice.
Bearclaw Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 8:04 am

I also like the miles per kilowatt figure. If we start getting vans, jeeps and sports cars I would like to know how they compare.

It seems like people are making a lot of assumptions before we see the data. Is there any word when actual performance data will be released?

I like to drive the way I like to drive but I am willing to change to get a good range, save money and extend the life of my car. No more leadfoot and jackrabbit starts for me. Ok maybe once in a while.
Right-Winger Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 8:16 am

combining electric and gas would be a horrid idea (well it would be good for marketing lies). I travel a great deal in my vehicle, the picture above suits me perfectly as i know what I’ll get around town when i can plug in, but also when I’m going beyond the battery’s capacity what i’ll get. Perhaps average distance highway and city on full electric charge would be good for people not wanting to compute this in their heads.

I think the KEY here is to NOT pander to the volt. YES i like GM, but, 5-10 years after the volt comes out when there are a plethora of vehicles that use this sort of technology, i don’t want people playing silly tricks to get better numbers.

Imagine an SUV with better “mileage” than the volt!! HOW? well slap in a huge battery that makes it go 200 miles on battery and then slap in a 5mpg 800 hp v8. yup, better mileage if you combine them.

Now that i say that… wouldn’t that make a mighty nice car. Efficiency OR fun. perhaps with a different drivetrain you could have either or.
Tripwest Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 8:24 am

So I haven’t paid a penny for power at home for 7 years and am 2,000KWH ahead again this year, with my solar panes in San Diego. I was planning to add a dozen more panels to the roof when I get my Volt. At 3 m/KWH I and get 6,000 miles without changing.

Better than I expected!
Zach Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 8:40 am

The only thing I care about is how far the vehicle can get before it requires the combustion engine to kick on, and when it does kick on, what kinda MPG are we looking at.

While the combustion engine is providing power to the batteries, run the car in both the typical setups (city/hwy) to really get a real number that people can use.

If it was rated at “150MPG” and they only drove 60 miles… big difference than if they only drove 20 miles. Would they then rate it at 2,560MPG??? I’m just throwing numbers out there (too late/early to really do the math), but you get the point.
Guy Incognito Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 8:54 am

It should be specifically stated on that sticker that if your daily use is 40 miles a day or less, your petroleum use will be 0 gallons per year.
Although this is a very special situation since in an average years time its almost impossible for anyone to keep their daily mileage at 40 miles a day or less.
Still, this is a selling point and should be noted on the sticker.
Zach Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 8:56 am

Won’t the combustion engine still require oil for lubrication on the cylinders? What about anti-freeze and other lubricants?

With those reasons, I think they should just scrap the stupid combustion engine and put another 20-40 miles worth of batteries in the vehicle.

Losing the combustion engine will drop the weight of the vehicle and additional costs, then adding the additional batteries will increase the weight and cost and will likely result in a wash.

Since the idea is to not use any fuel at all, make the possibility easier. Maintenance sure just got a lot cheaper and easier too.

=D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eclectic Dan Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 8:59 am

THOM #6
According to your math, you’re never plugging in the Volt. That’s hardly fair and defeats the entire purpose of the car.
statik Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:05 am

GM has apparently also agreed to share real world Volt testing numbers with the EPA if they would agree to the certification method now.

———————————–

Just exactly what leverage does this statement give them?

Why the heck would the EPA give ‘one hoot’ about getting the Volt’s ‘real world’ testing numbers? Whats it to them…nothing.

Besides, the numbers would be meaningless. EPA would want a production Volt…how many of those does GM have lying around. The standard is there is get away from automakers misrepresenting their vehicles.
Dave G Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:05 am

Obviously, plug-ins will have to show electricity used, electric range, etc.. This will allow interested parties to estimate cost savings based on their particular driving habits. But for most people, the average MPG is more important, and will be the starting point for comparing many different types of vehicles.

Specifically, here’s my suggestion for EPA specs on plug-ins:
• Average combined mileage (MPG)
• Electric Range (miles city/hwy)
• Mileage During Electric Range (MPG city/hwy)
• Mileage After Electric Range (MPG city/hwy)
• Electric Energy Use (KWH/100miles city/hwy)

The Average combined mileage would be calculated by the EPA using a typical driving pattern for a year. Assuming a single charge per day (usually at night), the typical pattern might be:
• 30 days at 8 miles per day
• 50 days at 16 miles per day
• 240 days at 30 miles per day
• 30 days at 60 miles per day
• 3 days at 450 miles per day
The exact numbers may vary, but the point is that this type of driving pattern could be used by the EPA to estimate the average MPG of all plug-in vehicles on a level playing field.

I’ve created a quick spread sheet using the typical driving pattern example above in order to give a rough idea of what this might look like for the 4 plug-in cars coming out in 2010. Obviously, these are preliminary estimates which will change as these vehicles go into production, but it gives an idea of what I’m suggesting.

Saturn Vue plug-in
• Average combined mileage (MPG): 50
• Electric Range (miles city/hwy): 17/14
• Mileage During Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): 148/132
• Mileage After Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): 34/32
• Electric Energy Use (KWH/100miles city/hwy): 25/30

Toyota Prius plug-in
• Average combined mileage (MPG): 70
• Electric Range (miles city/hwy): 17/15
• Mileage During Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): 154/138
• Mileage After Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): 48/45
• Electric Energy Use (KWH/100miles city/hwy): 17/19

Chevy Volt
• Average combined mileage (MPG): 314
• Electric Range (miles city/hwy): 42/38
• Mileage During Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): ∞/∞ (All Electric)
• Mileage After Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): 52/48
• Electric Energy Use (KWH/100miles city/hwy): 18/22

Fiskar Karma
• Average combined mileage (MPG): 340
• Electric Range (miles city/hwy): 52/48
• Mileage During Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): ∞/∞ (All Electric)
• Mileage After Electric Range (MPG city/hwy): 46/43
• Electric Energy Use (KWH/100miles city/hwy): 18/22
Schanie Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:07 am

I agree that the end goal is to drop the whole combustion engine concept and go with a much simpler, lighter, longer range electric vehicle. However, GM and other big auto makers are deeply invested in their business model. They’re not only an auto manufacturer, but an engine manufacturer as well. Hopefully the plug-in hybrid concept is a stop-gap measure until quick electric-refueling stations are built up and people don’t worry about being restricted to a 100 mile range from home. Tesla’s third generation car, expected to be an all-electric sedan in the price range of the volt, might give some real motivation to the big car companies to get a move on with technology, but for now I’d love to have a Volt. My work commute is 10 miles so I’d rarely need fuel.
Rashiid Amul Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:09 am

Thom # 11 says,
If i get on the highway with a full charge, set the cruise @ 55 MPH , drove 250 miles and used 5 gallons of gas there would be a problem.

I could not adjust my driving enough to get that figure up to 100 MPG.

Actually my current car gets 100MPH….that is when i take my foot off the gas at 75 mph, press in the clutch and coast…but that is not real world or practical

————–
Thom, I’m with you on this one. I drive until I’m just about empty.
My record is 551 miles from at 14.5 gallon tank.
If I’m on a trip with the volt, and it has a 6 gallon tank,
I will expect the first 40 to be on the charge, and the next 600 to be on the gas. Simple. Not a numbers game.
statik Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:12 am

This is a side note, but I thought interesting.

Chevy Camaro pricing:

Camaro LS (300hp/6cyl/6spd) $22,995
Camaro SS (422/6cyl/6spd) $30,995

GM is apparently looking to sell alot of these, so I guess no sense in defending the Corvette’s niche. Looks like a winner in that department (sales), I don’t know if they are making any money at this price point, but if they are, GM has done a great job here.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/10/13/ap5543211.html
Dan Petit Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:21 am

Saving vehicle weight (horsepower-to-weight ratio) with carbon-fiber body construction (several times stronger than steel as well) would go extremely far to allow the instantaneous torque of electric drive to get anyone a “whiplash” in the neck. Since a battery pack is the energy storage bank which makes available the power for a sudden need for acceleration, (since one is not presumably always “needing” to accelerate all the time), the Range-Extender-Generator setup can do both at exactly the same time.
(Although I hope all manufacturers allow for the licensed availability of all “Abuse Management” / “Racing Activity” datum (date/time/counts and everything else) to us independent techs, since it is
unadmitted abuse-damage which wastes enormous quantities of time in our shops by abusers for which time we usually cannot get paid for and occasionally get blamed for). (”My son would never do that”.) Yes, it is your car, but when it is our TIME. Please understand that abuse-damage wastes LOTS of our time when it is not disclosed. Normal service jobs/customers suffer from that when they have to wait a lot longer otherwise.)
Since a “steady-state” might be used in that a generator runs at the same rpm’s, and can always be at an optimal efficiency (for ICE) but more fuel/volumetric efficiency added as electrical demand increases, the only thing left behind is a need for a very large V-8 block. (And it will be left behind,both historically, and otherwise).
There ought to be plenty of big blocks around to anyone to tinker with, but for high performance interests, I’ll bet that “the very best of the best” “power” technicians will switch over to electric propulsion high performance in several more years.
I know, because I train ICE techs on advanced ICE computer management systems, and, the ones that will be acceptable to train are the ones whom are technically logical as well as strictly OPEN MINDED MOST OF ALL.
Dan Petit Austin, TX
Cautious Fan Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:24 am

Energy / mile makes the most sense. It allows for numerous different types of energy supplies (electricity, air, CNG, etc.) This allows consumers to compare between various types of cars more easily. Not really necesary now, but I believe this simplyfies future developments. I will require a more intelligent consumer but we’ll all have to adjust.

I remember from my days in engineering school, FOLLOW THE ENERGY. Meaning, as you solve problems, keep track of the energy flows. This works for fluids, dynamics, strucutral analysis, Physics, etc. At first, it seems harder but once you get used to it, this strategy simplifies things.
Dr.Science #11 on the list Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:27 am

The rating is exactly as I envisioned in my post 2 weeks ago.
2 ratings
1-Miles/ Kw hr
2-MPG
statik Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:28 am

As for the EPA and the mpg stuff. I still vote for the simple answer.

EV range: 40 miles (45/35 - 5m/kWh)
MPG gas: 50 MPG (46/55)

You can see how convuluted it gets in Dave G’s (#24) post. (I know you are trying to just work to out some kind of EPA standard testing Dave).

Bottom line is nothing is as concise and as easy to understand immediately as range/mpg like I have above. It makes no assumptions on driving patterns, just gives you the hard facts. Everyone knows how they drive, and seeing basic fact will let them immediately understand the costs associated with them driving the Volt.

This 100MPG thing is all scam. GM wants it solely for PR value, and it is a shady number, you need to put a asterisk after it…as in (*) your driving experience may vary significantly from this number and that is NOT what these standards are about.

The MPG, is MILES PER GALLON, not Miles per gallon after we factor in some fancy electrical portion math. I’m going to say it again MILES PER GALLON, period. As in, you go to the pumps and put gas in your car and then you drive. Not plug your car in all night, drive for 60 minutes, gas up, then calculate the number. Just keep it as it was intended and add the electric range as a seperate entity.

After how long we finally got a ratings system that works? Lets not mess it up.
cashen Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:34 am

#9

If i get on the highway with a full charge, set the cruise @ 55 MPH , drove 250 miles and used 5 gallons of gas there would be a problem.

I could not adjust my driving enough to get that figure up to 100 MPG.

Actually my current car gets 100MPH….that is when i take my foot off the gas at 75 mph, press in the clutch and coast…but that is not real world or>practical

/——————————————-/

If you did this with a prius you would get less than 30 mpg….

Also, if we want to get off of oil lets stop rating our vehicles by OIL!!! use cost, joules, or anything besides mpg of gas…. make it a graph with miles on the x axes for all i care. lets go back to the gold standard… 500 mpog (miles per ounce of gold)
statik Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:36 am

Random tidbit:
statik Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:37 am

Not sure what happened to the body of my post, lol.

That…was…weird. Repost
=============================================

80 mile Volt? Apparently they have access to GM (and GM gave them 500k to work on it)

————

CEDARVILLE — General Motors Corp.’s vision for its extended-range electric car: A Chevrolet that can travel 40 miles on a single charge to the automobile’s lithium ion battery.

Applied Sciences Inc.’s vision: Stretch that range to at least 80 miles with carbon nano-fibers, strands so tiny they’re invisible to the unaided eye.

Bolstered by investments of $1 million from the Ohio Third Frontier program as well as $500,000 from GM, Applied Sciences has worked on advanced electrode materials for the Volt’s battery for about two years. Already, Pyrograf Products, is the world’s third largest producer of the nanofiber materials in question, managers say

This little Greene County research and development firm is aiming to be a part of GM’s future in a big way.

“It’s safe to say this is our No. 1 priority,” said David Burton, the company’s research and development manager.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/b/content/oh/story/business/2008/10/12/ddn101208applied.html
—————

This is also the problem with the ‘one MPG number’ what happens to the blended MPG number in this scenario?

How does a blended number add up with a 80 mile Volt, and does it make sense to put a number like that out to ‘Joe Public’? The number in DaveG’s scenario would be so ridiculously high it would just be disgarded.
Van Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 9:59 am

Just a little on power consumption. If you drive at 20 MPH and get 5 miles per KWH, your rate of power consumption is 4KW. If you drive 60 MPH and get 3 miles per KWH, your rate of power consumption is 20 KW. Thus at 20 MPH you could drive for 2 hours and go 40 miles on 8 KWH, or you could drive at 60 MPH and drive for 24 minutes and go 24 miles on 8 KWH.

When SCE did fleet testing of SUV and Van EV’s they got on average 2.5 miles per KWH or half what GM claims. 3.5 miles per KWH is a much more believable claim. Note the Prius uses 2 of its 2.6 KWH to claim 7miles AER or 3.5 miles per KWH.
Exp_EngTech Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:00 am

A GM News Tidbit…

GM announced this morning that they are closing the Janesville plant this December. They had previously stated it would be 2010.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jr1xpHkrhMavw9nyii_2_5Ga0GAgD93PLHJO0
Jeff Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:07 am

I like the graphic…the exact numbers are unimportant at this time…the can get them correct later. It would great if the “EPA sticker” clearly shows the difference between a Volt and Prius PHEV. The Prius design will probably be the same as the 3rd party addons…the ICE will potentially run before the battery reaches the “customer depletion point”.

I’m not saying which design is better. The point of the “EPA sticker” is to inform buyers.
statik Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:10 am

#36 Exp_EngTech

A GM News Tidbit…

GM announced this morning that they are closing the Janesville plant this December. They had previously stated it would be 2010.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jr1xpHkrhMavw9nyii_2_5Ga0GAgD93PLHJO0
——————————————–

So checking ‘ye olde tote board’ that leaves two of the original four that were scheduled to be shuttered by 2010.

Moraine, Ohio: 1 shift last week, rest Dec 23rd, 2008
Janesville, Wis.: Dec 23rd, 2008

Two yet to go..and biting their nails they also don’t get a lump of coal for Christmas from GM:
Oshawa, Ontario;
Toluca, Mexico
Shawn Marshall Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:20 am

I hate to agree with Statik but you have too when he’s correct as he obviously is in this instance.

Your nano wire battery info is really useful too. Beside the fact that many of us are pulling for GM’s survival, it seems a very different world will be coming to us shortly through the power density of new battery technology. If this stuff comes to pass, solar cell applications for home use should really take off dramatically. Freedom from OPEC cartels, freedom from utility monopolies, quiet, clean vehicles and Nuclear power to serve heavy commercial and industrial loads; it’s too much to anticipate.
N Riley Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:26 am

The mileage rating is going to be good no matter what the EPA finally agrees to. If Volt owners normally get 120 MPG and the EPA rating is only 50 MPG, the word will spread about the real world rating of 120. The Prius gets a real world rating of over 50 MPG highway now. I know many Prius owners who say the highway mileage is nearly always over 50 MPG. So, I see a bright future for the Volt, no matter what the EPA decides.
Van Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:26 am

Just a little on Volt - Prius comparison. The rumored Prius plug-in should be sold to fleet buyers in 2010, ditto for Volt. Toyota expects to mass produce the Plug in Prius in 2011, one year ahead of the limited production (10,000) currently rumored for the Volt.

The Volt will utilize just 8 of its 16 KWHs according to current plans. The Plug-in Prius will utilize 4 of its 5 KWH. The Volt range, using 3.5 miles per KWH is 28 miles, the Prius using the same mileage is 14 miles or one half of the Volt’s AER. The Volt will cost about $37,500 before the tax credit, the Prius about $27,500 before the tax credit.
dennis Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:41 am

The sticker above wasn’t clear to me how many miles I get per charge. The sticker should include the total number of KwH the Volt can hold. And for comparison also display the total number of gallons the Gas tank can hold.
The consumer for Volt is going to be slightly smarter than your average consumer so I’m assuming they can do some simple multiplication
kent beuchert Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:42 am

This is getting funny. I can easily demonstrate that a fleet of commuting Volt will achieve over 250 MPG, if by MPG you are referring to the amount of gasoline consumed, and not making it
a weird representation that attempts to include electricity - an
impossibilty in the general case - and totally confusing to consumers.
It’s clear that neither the EPA, CARB or GM has much of a clue as to how to estimate actual gasoline usage. Mileage test loops can only provide estimates of exactly how much electric driving range
can be expected and the MPG the Volt achieves while riunning on liquid fuel. It cannot otherwise provide any information that can be used for estimating Voltmileage. First off, any mileage estimate is in very large part dependent upon the driver’s distribution of trips between recharge points. We only have data of such distributions
for commuting trips. Assuming no workplace recharges, that data
estimates that a fleet of Volts will achieve over 250 MPG. Since ciommuting accounts for roughly half of all gasoline usage by the private transportation sector, and the Volt will get approximately 50 MPG on gasoline alone, we can confidently estimate that the Volt overall mileage would be over 168 MPG, EVEN IF ALL NON-COMMUTING TRIPS BY VOLT DRIVERS USED NO ELECTRICITY WHATSOEVER. You don’t “negotiate” a mileage estimate. And
providing a mileage estimate based on averages, where the individual cases will vary as wiildly as Volt drivers will, amounts to consumer fraud. The proper info for the consumer is to state that the Volt will achieve such and such average driving range from a completely charged battery pack, and then such and such MPG while operating off the range extender engine. THAT is the information that the consumer needs, not some bogus, indefensible CARB or EPA milage estimate based on “negotiations.” Nor does the consumer need to know how much gasoline will be used by the fleet of Volts. That’s totally irrelevant.
cashen Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 11:00 am

#40
The mileage rating is going to be good no matter what the EPA finally agrees to. If Volt owners normally get 120 MPG and the EPA rating is only 50 MPG, the word will spread about the real world rating of 120. The Prius gets a real world rating of over 50 MPG highway now. I know many Prius owners who say the highway mileage is nearly always over 50 MPG. So, I see a bright future for the Volt, no matter what the EPA decides.

——————–

NO IT CAN NOT. The prius can not get 50 mpg on the highway in the “real world”. Stop telling people it can, this is why toyota has a halo above its head.

Get in your prius with a full tank of GAS, drive 65 mph until it’s empty and tell me how far you got. 33 mpg MAX!
Casey Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 11:34 am

Stop all this madness, we DON’T need an EPA sticker, STOP buying gas cars, if you don’t buy them they won’t make them.

NO PLUG, NO SALE, NO WAY =D—–$00.00—- (Nobama)
NoMorSmoke Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 11:38 am

#31 Statik I agree.
If GM is trying to improve their reputation with this car they should post it with an honest mileage figure. You start with a full charge and 8 gallon tank of gas and you go 40 + (8 * 50) or 440 miles. People want to be able to use these figures to make honest real world comparisons about how far they can go in one of these vehicles.

By the way, if you want to buy a Volt for $10K let me suggest that you take that money today and buy GM stock, because if GM stock is still around $6 a share in November of 2010 instead of closer to its 52 week high of $43.20 the Volt will likely only be available as a small die cast model. It was easy to signup on Lyle’s list. So fellow Volties of great dedication are you up for it? A cutting edge plug-in range extended car that seats 4 with all the expected comfort and performance of a normal car for only $10,000. Sounds too good to be true! It all depends on how much faith you have in GM and Wall Street!
canehdian Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 11:45 am

”

#40
The mileage rating is going to be good no matter what the EPA finally agrees to. If Volt owners normally get 120 MPG and the EPA rating is only 50 MPG, the word will spread about the real world rating of 120. The Prius gets a real world rating of over 50 MPG highway now. I know many Prius owners who say the highway mileage is nearly always over 50 MPG. So, I see a bright future for the Volt, no matter what the EPA decides.

——————–

NO IT CAN NOT. The prius can not get 50 mpg on the highway in the “real world”. Stop telling people it can, this is why toyota has a halo above its head.

Get in your prius with a full tank of GAS, drive 65 mph until it’s empty and tell me how far you got. 33 mpg MAX!”

Whether it gets that or not, I have to agree with N Riley. It’s better to have a lower number and people exceed it than the other way around (which is the case with many, many cars today.. you only reach the top number once in a blue moon - though, they’ve revamped their tests/numbers to reflect that and make it more realistic.)

Also, I think there should be laws against them advertising the highest number attained. (This car gets over 40 MPG!!!!!!!* …*when driving at 90km/h without fluctuating accelerator and with a hurricane-force tailwind :p)
They should only be able to advertise the lowest number. That would give them incentive to increase it to make their image better.
Jim in PA Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:07 pm

#47 canehdian - If the Prius does only get 33 mpg on all-highway driving, then that is side-splittingly hilarious to me. I just rented a 2008 Cobalt for a 3-day trip that was hundreds of miles of all highway (75-80 mph), and the digital fuel use display indicated that I averaged 35.7 mpg over the trip. Now that’s damn impressive to me.

And here is a little message to all you Toyota-Heads who insist that the Volt must (MUST!) provide financial payback to justify the higher sticker price: A Cobalt costs $8,000 - 10,000 less than a Prius. Therefore, a Prius is economically indefensible by your logic. (ok, right about now is when you start admitting that there is more to a car purchase than how much money you can save on gas…)
Grizzly Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:09 pm

I would agree that the EPA figures don’t matter. ANYONE who uses this car for short trips and charges it diligently will use no fuel at all. It doesn’t take a genius to understand that running in RE mode you’ll get 50mpg and that any combo of driving is a complex measurement because it depends on the combo and a host of other factors.
Rashiid Amul Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:09 pm

I know for a fact that I would rather have a straight estimate, than a convoluted one.

The chart above makes sense. One for MPC and one for MPG.
But the MPG cannot, cannot include any of the MPC information.
Period. 100 MPG is bull and very misleading if it includes any of the battery charge in its calculations.

Most people distrust the domestic car makers anyway. Why would GM go out of its way to convince even more people that they are dishonest? Cut the bull, and be as accurate and honest as possible with the numbers.
Gsned57 Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:12 pm

#44 cashen,

I’ve got a 2005 Prius that I bought new and has 46,000 miles on it. When I bought the car it had a sticker of 60 miles city and I think 52 highway (I may be wrong).

I drive with a lead foot (constant 75mph highway) and usually accelerate hard at traffic lights.

I can consistently get 45 MPG on long drives (40 MPG in the dead of winter on very hilly roads).

My commute is about 7 miles each way and since the car has to run the ice to warm up, my MPG for the commute sucks (almost all highway). I get approx 40 mpg doing a 7 mile each way commute for the week with no other driving.

My best driving is on secondary roads for long trips. I got about 55 mpg (100 mile trip) this weekend driving 40 - 60 mph on slightly hilly roads in southern PA on a beautiful 70 degree day.

I have never seen 33 MPG over a tank of gas even driving through the mountains in November in Montana at about 85 MPH (closer to 38MPG)

I’m looking for a volt (or van with volt tech) to replace my 86 Vanagon. The prius has been a great car even for a 6′1″ guy, but I need something that can do my commute and then some with no gas. I got the prius because of the technology, and my next new car will have a plug (and won’t be a plug in prius unless it can do 40 miles All electric before the engine kicks in) For me from now on it’s NPNS.

I have no loyalty to Toyota and want to buy American, but the Pirus has been a great car. I wish I got the 60 MPG advertised by the sticker but I knew going into it I never would.
noel park Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

#31 Statik:

I think that the EPA rating is at least as much about CAFE as it is about PR.

GM, Mr. Lutz, et al, continue to grizzle that the most recent CAFE requirements are not doable. I’m sure that 100+ mpg for the Volt would give them a bit of room to make a few more Suburbans or Hummers, assuming that any plants are still open to build them.

Personally, I believe that any atuo company which cannot meet the relatively modest CAFE requirements coming into effect will perish at the hands of the marketplace, but what do I know?
fishmahn Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:43 pm

There’s one very important point I think everyone is forgetting. GM is not forgetting it. It’s at the crux of their whole discussion with EPA.

Corporate Average Fuel Economy.

Edit: (D’oh! Noel Park beat me to it lol)

If GM can get the EPA to give Volt a 150mpg (+/-) economy rating, then it may not have to downsize the engines in their other vehicles to get the required CAFE. Yes, the marketing advantage of “150MPG!” (flashing neon sign with fireworks going off) is good, but CAFE is at least as important - good marketing can sell around any number EPA decides to give.

The combined calculation should take into account a standard year’s driving patterns - like Dave G’s suggestion.

In my opinion, a sticker showing the EV power usage (the left section of the one pictured above) with the EV range city/highway immediately below it, and the gasoline mpg city/hwy as shown on the right, then the EPA combined numbers centered at the bottom. Leave out the estimated annual cost. For a water heater or refrigerator that works fine because it’s on 24/7 and doesn’t fluctuate all that much with use or lack of use, but for drivers it is totally useless - my wife works 3 miles from the house, I work 27 miles away… Its a useless number.
Shaft Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

Statik, #31
EV range: 40 miles (45/35 - 5m/kWh)
MPG gas: 50 MPG (46/55)
==============================================
I agree in general, but this, I think, is better parallel construction and more consistent:
EV range: 36 miles (40.8/33.6)
M/kWh battery: 4.5M/kWh (5.1/4.2)
MPG gas: 50 MPG (46/55)

or
Useful kWh: 8
M/kWh battery: 4.5M/kWh (5.1/4.2)
MPG gas: 50 MPG (46/55)
cashen Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:48 pm

#51 Gsned57

please tell me you do not use the digital MPG on the dash….

set your trip on a full tank of gas. next time you fill up, divide your miles by how many gallons you just put in. If you do this consistently you get the real mpg.

Side Note:
I think its kind of a little odd people care so much about the environment but little for human rights. I guess if you save gas who cares who suffers to build it! must be a lot of Prius’s in the parking lots of walmart… I think the real irony is the people that do drive a prius tend not to shop at walmarts for the human right issues….. now that’s funny..
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3796/the_dark_side_of_the_toyota_prius/
Grizzly Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:51 pm

noel park #52

“GM, Mr. Lutz, et al, continue to grizzle that the most recent CAFE requirements are not doable. I’m sure that 100+ mpg for the Volt would give them a bit of room to make a few more Suburbans or Hummers, assuming that any plants are still open to build them.”

*** *** ***

Basically the entire auto industry has revolted against the 35mpg CAFE requirements. Even if your entire lineup included only cobalts you’d have a difficult time meeting this standard. What car company would/could sustain itself on solely sales of vehicles this small? I believe the bar was set this high to encourage the production of EVs and alternate fuel vehicles. This is why I’d like to see the lowest EPA figure given to GM or any other manufacturer. This will mean they’ll have to produce more of these to meet the requirements for corporate average.
GXT Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 12:55 pm

23. Statik,
“Besides, the numbers would be meaningless. EPA would want a production Volt…how many of those does GM have lying around.”

Perhaps this is like when GM did the hybrid bus trials with King’s County. King’s County found in the trials that the buses did very well. Later it was announced that the buses that King’s County had been testing with were using an engine that wasn’t going to be legal in a short time. When the real engine was used the fuel economy dropped way down.

I have to assume that there is something about the current methodology that favours the Volt and there is a reasonable chance that it should/would be changed and GM wants to lock things in place now before that happens.
fishmahn Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 1:23 pm

#56 Grizzly
Basically the entire auto industry has revolted against the 35mpg CAFE requirements. Even if your entire lineup included only cobalts you’d have a difficult time meeting this standard.
=====================================================
One of the late additions to the 35mpg CAFE standards law was that the mfgs get to use the old MPG method to meet the CAFE standard. So, the Cobalt with 34mpg new method gets 38-40 old method, making it a CAFE enabler.
Gsned57 Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 1:36 pm

#55 cashen

I always run my own numbers when I fill up my prius to see what I actually got for the miles driven and it never deviates more than 1 - 2 mpg in either direction (different gas pumps will fill your car up to different levels).

The only way I can see you pulling out a 33mpg number is if you count the miles a prius can go to when the gas warning light comes on (Mine comes on around 400 miles) and then look in the manual and see that you have an 11.9 gallon tank then do the math based on that.

I have NEVER been able to fill my gas tank more than 10.5 gallons and I like to wait till I’m on fumes (actually ran out of gas doing this once). I asked toyota why I can’t fill it 11.9 gallons and they told me there is a bladder in the tank that can restrict the actual # of gallons held.

I’m not trying to sell prius’ here and I’d gladly trade mine in for a volt, but it’s a pretty good car and I’m happy with the MPG especially with my driving style.

As for your walmart human rights thing, I guess I kinda lost you there. If you are suggesting I’m a bad person for buying a prius because a car company hires illegals and pays them half of a Japanese worker, you need to check out who’s making your stuff even if it has a made in the USA sticker on it (we have some 12 Million illegals here, many of whom get less than the minimum wage). Honestly, that doesn’t bother me from a human rights standpoint anyway (from a national security and job security standpoint it pisses me off but they are getting paid well compared to where they come from and aren’t working in sweatshop conditions).

FYI the new prius plant is going to be built in Tupelo Mississippi and built by American’s (and probably plenty of our illegals too). I’d still rather support an American company, but GM didn’t come out with the prius plain and simple. When they come out with the Volt and other EREV’s I’ll buy one of them because they’ll be the best cars on the market but untill then I see no sense in bashing a good car. It just makes you sound a bit like a troll
fred Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

So my commute is 20 miles(about half highway) and will take the full 8kw to do it. Then I charge at work for 8 hours and drive home and charge again. 8kw times .22 cents per kw =$1.76, times 2 =$3.52 per day to commute. Sound right?
fishmahn Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 2:44 pm

#60 Fred.

The way I read it is your 20 mile morning commute will use half the 8kw, the trip home will use the other half if you don’t charge at work. I don’t know the power consumption difference for city/hwy travel, so I don’t know if you’ll get 38 highway and 43 city miles on battery or what…

So, halve your cost since you’re only charging 4kW each time.

The details: The battery is a 16kw battery. 50% of the charge (8kw) is available for propulsion. GM says you will travel 40 miles on that 50%.
BillR Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 3:00 pm

GM has stated that they want the EPA sticker to include:

Miles per kWh, City/Highway, Electric Range
Miles per gallon, City/Highway, Total Range

This provides, I believe, the basic information needed by the consumer to determine his/her energy consumption and costs.

Now comes the tricky part, defining the CAFE standard. I believe the EPA takes 55% of a car’s city mpg and 45% of its highway mpg rating to determine an average mpg. How will this be done for the Volt? Will the electricity component be included, or will it be “free”. These are the factors we don’t know yet.

If it’s free, go 40 miles AER, 40 miles at 50 mpg, and the average is 100 mpg (no accounting for electric energy).

Now let’s try the method where electricity is given a gasoline equivalent (1 gallon = 36 kWh). So we go 40 miles on 8 kwh, and let’s assume 60 mpg in charge sustaining mode. So with two equal 40 mile cycles, we get 80 miles on 8+(40/60)*36 = 32 kWh. With a gallon gas at 36 kWh, this equates to an equivalent 90 mpg. Not quite 100.

If Bob Lutz is correct from the VoltNation event where he stated 50 miles AER when new, and mpg in charge sustaining mode is increased to 75 mpg, we now get 100 miles on 8+(50/75)*36 = 32 kWh. This equates to an equivalent 112.5 mpg.
cashen Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 3:26 pm

Gsned57

I still do not believe you can get 45 mpg on the highway. At highway speeds a prius is nothing but a normal car, correct? And if it did have some assist from a battery, that battery has to run out at some point. Which at this point would actually need charging somehow.

So, if the prius can get your numbes on the highway, why is the yaris only 35?

If the EPA schedule was actually a highway schedule their numbers would be much lower. my example would be your highway sticker said 52, yet you only get 45.

Don’t get me wrong, i think the prius a good vehicle, but people that say they get amazing numbers are giving people bad info. i hope this doesn’t happen with the Volts sticker.
Herm Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 3:28 pm

The Volt should be tested the same way all cars are tested.. start the test with the battery charged and the tank full, if the Volt never starts its generator for the duration then it got INFINITE mileage.. that would get people’s attention and then they would educate themselves.. and it would mean a flood of EV coming from other manufacturers eager to meet the CAFE standards. More choices for us and everybody wins.

Is a normal car tested with its 12vdc battery discharged?.. no.. after all it takes gasoline to recharge that battery.. why should the Volt be tested different?.. It is discrimination. Is a Prius tested in a different way?.. no

Obviously there should be an additional sticker on the window, similar to what it is used in electric appliances with an estimated annual cost and all the other esoterica that techno geeks want (including myself).

The complex stickers you guys are proposing will just make the average person’s eye just glaze over. We want these cars bought by everybody.

On a side note, if it did get INFINITE mileage then it would really mess up the fleet average used for CAFE calculations , so we dont want that.. lets say the maximun gas mileage it could get would be 999, with an asterisk. This should be what the negotation centers around. It would also get peoples attention since I doubt most people know what the infinity symbol is.
Jim I Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

This is like the tenth time this has been discussed, and I still do not understand why it is so complicated.

The Volt is a unique vehicle, therefore you can’t just assign a single number to it. Look at some of the responses from above. Trying to apply lemon law???

As far as the battery pack, what difference does it make to me the size of the pack? I could care less. All I need to know on a sticker is:

All Electric Range Estimate: 40/City - 30 Highway
Gasoline Mode: 35 City - 50 Highway

This would work for every new car made.

Examples:

Tesla AER Range 120 / 100 Gas Mode 0 / 0

Cobalt AER Range 0 / 0 Gas Mode 22 / 30

Prius AER Range 7 / 0 Gas Mode 40 / 50

And before everyone starts screaming that my numbers are all wrong, I admit that I just made them up as examples to show how it could work. I have no real idea what the mileage is for those vehicles.

If the EPA needs a single digit number to apply to CAFE standards, go ahead and do some convoluted calculation, but it means nothing to the real world driving of us “common folk”, so why waste our time with it?

Do any of you really spend this much time calculating the KWh of your toaster? No. All you want is the toast……

NPNS
john1701a Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 5:28 pm

NO IT CAN NOT. The prius can not get 50 mpg on the highway in the “real world”. Stop telling people it can, this is why toyota has a halo above its head.

Get in your prius with a full tank of GAS, drive 65 mph until it’s empty and tell me how far you got. 33 mpg MAX!

___________________________________________________

2 weeks ago I took a trip up north with the car stuffed (2 adults, stuffed with cargo inside, 2 bikes on the outside) traveling 70 MPH then slowing down to 65 MPH about half way using E10. The result was 38 MPG… great for such extreme conditions and well above that claim above.

My lifetime average (which includes every situation imaginable over the past 5 years) at 106,058 miles is 48.0 MPG… making the expectation of 50 MPG for the next model extremely realistic.

Stick to real-world data when it comes to Prius. You’ll undoubtedly want the same for Volt.
tom harwick Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 5:47 pm

Although this is a very special situation since in an average years time its almost impossible for anyone to keep their daily mileage at 40 miles a day or less.
———————————————————————————-

A family with two cars might keep the daily travel of the second car under 40 miles 99-100% of the days of the year. It is rare for both my wife and I to go on separate trips, both over 40 miles, on the same day. If the first large market segment to Volt penetrated was second cars in two car families, there is potential for probably 50 million cars.
tom harwick Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 5:58 pm

People do not generally log on to this site because they are marketing oriented. They are technically oriented, so the more numbers you give them on a sticker, the happy they are.

I agree that GM should publish all of the numbers requested in all of the posts.

But the reality is, the Volt uses only half the energy to get around as the Prius. The EPA has a responsibility to help the non-technical consumer understand this, at a glance, by looking at one number, without doing calculations, and without building a histogrammatic model of their own driving habits.

So the bottom line is, one number, in large bold font, showing MPGe (that would be 100MPGe for the Volt) . All other numbers, clearly visible, in small font.

The proof point: 90% of Americans could put 5 gal in the tank, and following their normal driving pattern, travel 500 miles.
tom harwick Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 6:08 pm

GM has stated that they want the EPA sticker to include:

Miles per kWh, City/Highway, Electric Range
Miles per gallon, City/Highway, Total Range

This provides, I believe, the basic information needed by the consumer to determine his/her energy consumption and costs.
—————————————————————————-
This is my last rant on this topic for a while, I promise.

First of all, I agree with publishing all requested specs.

But the sentence immediately above the —line is absolutely incorrect.

A better way to phrase it would be, the above information, plus the cost of electricity per kilowatt hour, would enable a select set of technically oriented consumers to determine energy consumption and costs.

The average consumer would get no benefit at all from this info, because they are unable/unwilling to do the calculations. Given that info, the average consumer would be totally clueless as to whether the Volt is a better or worse deal for him than a Prius, Cobalt, or Civic.

To popularize the Volt beyond a few geeks like us who enjoy math, the biggest number on the sticker has to be 100MPGe
Shaft Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 6:44 pm

Shaft #54
=================
OK, now I prefer this:
EV range (after 3650 charge cycles): 36 miles combined (40.8 city/33.6 highway)
M/kWh battery: 4.5M/kWh combined (5.1 city/4.2 highway)
MPG gas: 50 MPG combined (46 city/55 highway)

Yah, I know it’s more complex, but it says what you need to know in clear fashion.
statik Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 7:16 pm

EDIT: sorry wrong thread…move along nothing to see
js1219 Says:
October 13th, 2008 at 10:46 pm

Great!

Give me a generation II VOLT. I much rather have a pure EV, but if the cost is less than $50K with an 80 MPC E-REV, well, I guess I might as well forget the pure EV.
stas peterson Says:
October 14th, 2008 at 12:22 am

There is certainly an important element to what #53. #53 et al, have posted. Of course the hate America, hold their feet to the fire after they are already dying mentality is at work and visible in #56 post.

The synthetic way the CAFE number is computed for all hybrids and plugins, will effect the companies by billions of dollars, WITHOUT changing a thing in the real world.

But I do wish that the peoplel would get it straight in their heads. The EPA sticker on the window has NOTHING to do with CAFE mileage rating that the car companies must meet by force of Law.

NHTSA does CAFE; EPA “guesstimates” the window sticker mileage and changes it at a whim. Look at the differences between EPA 2007 and 2008 model year window stickers for the exact same car, with no changes. Some idiot bureaucrat just decided one day that he felt that one number was “better” then another.

But CAFE is measured and the measuring stick can’t be arbitrarily changed. It is the same as in 1975, just so we can compare cars from different eras. At the same time the car companies have a firm target that doesn’t change. The wild ass EPA “guess” of the mileage of a car differs from the CAFE measure by a large amount.

For those people who think that conservation and efficiency have never been tried, that is the reality. The auto industry has come a long way already. Not that anybody green gives then any credit.

The average CAFE of the US auto fleet for the 2007 model year before gas prices cratered truck and SUV sales was 30.5 mpg by the CAFE measuring stick. I am sure its climbed dramatically since then. Back in the 1975 it was difficult to achieve the mandated 14 mpg as an average for the model year. now its difficult to find a single model that is that poor in fuel usage.

Did you know that the thirstiest SUV or truck sold inn America get over 22.5 mpg combined on CAFE? Take your biggest Suburban or pimp-mobile Escalade and load it up with the biggest engine. CAFE will still rate it accurately as 40% BETTER than a 1970s Beetle or Accord or Corolla.

But how to synthetically account for hybrid CAFE is critical to the companies and the jobs of several million people. The CAFE measuring stick has a vehicle cover a prescribed copy of a real auto route, inside a climate controlled lab driving on a dynamometer duplicating speeds and with some combination of city and hiway travel. But I don’t remember how far that test was route is. If its under 40 miles, ther Volt has infinite CAFE mileage, If it covers 80 miles the rating would be much less. Who knows the cycle?
Steveland Harris Says:
October 14th, 2008 at 8:05 am

What’s the deal with the posted graphic above? It has 2.5 and 3.1 which if multiplied by 16kWh gives us a 40 miles of all electric range (AER), but we all know that the Volt will use only 8kWh of its whole 16kWh. So the Volt is really more efficient than this chart implies, or am I getting worked up over a chart that’s no remotely based on reality? The way I see it: when the we have E-Flex with a Volt body driving on real streets then we will know what the fuel/battery economy are.
Arty Says:
October 14th, 2008 at 2:57 pm

People buying the Volt will do so because they value the AER. That means they understand that to “fill” the battery with 8kWh of energy at an average of $.14/kWh = $1.12 for 40 miles range. Compare that to something around $5 for 40 miles with an average gas engine and it begins to sink in. While overall vehicle cost is higher than a plain ICE - the Volt will cost you 80% less than driving a typical gasoline powered vehicle. The EPA figures are a measurement of the past.

Of course if you’re like the guy in San Diego with PV on the roof and no electric bills for the last seven years - energy costs for your Volt is zero. Or if you live in the Northwest and pay around $.07/kWh - your 40 miles costs you $.56 cents. Sounds damned attractive.
statik Says:
October 14th, 2008 at 4:04 pm

Ok, this thread is a little long in the tooth, but autoblog has a update on it…thought I’d pass it along:

“Update: GM Spokesman Rob Peterson has just let us know that the Seattle Times report is based on an earlier erroneous, Bloomberg report. GM is still talking to the EPA and nothing has changed in the last two weeks.”

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/10/14/has-epa-approved-test-procedure-that-would-give-volt-100-mpg-rat/
Randy B. Says:
October 14th, 2008 at 9:22 pm

A standard unit of measure for energy input is needed to make a comparison understandable to the public. The energy content (btu) of various fuels is confusing to most:
diesel-as much as 140,000 per gal.(is that U.S. or Imperial?)
gasoline- maybe 120,000 per gal.?
propane-91,500 gal. or 2500 per cu. ft. at 11″ w.c. pressure.
natural gas- 1050 or so per cu. ft. at 7″ w.c. .
hydrogen- I don’t have a clue.
electric- 3413 per kW (could be off on this one)

If there was a comparison of how many miles a certain vehicle got under a standard set of conditions with an input of (lets say) 100,000 btu (one THERM), the comparative efficiency of a particular vehicle would become clear, and the operational expense would be easier to compute for different regions of the world. A hybrid would show some type of sliding scale so that a person could see what the mileage would be for the planned volt; electric only, on board generator running full time (you started trip with 30% charge), or a mix of the two (lets say a 200 mile trip started with a full charge).

A “therm” is a unit of measure equal to 100,000 btu. I believe natural gas is usually sold in this unit of measure.

EPA Closer to Giving the Chevy Volt at Least a 100 mpg Rating

77 Responses to “EPA Closer to Giving the Chevy Volt at Least a 100 mpg Rating”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts