AND 
Report: GM to Reveal New E-Flex Electric Cadillac Coupe at the Detroit Auto Show
We have been hearing for some time rumors that GM would be unveiling a surprise E-Flex electric car at the Detroit Auto Show later this week.
In fact I have heard from sources that the car would be an example of how far machine-driver interface could be taken, and that it would not be a four door Chevy.
Businessweek has now published more details about the car.
Sources have advised them it will be a brash new 2-door Cadillac Coupe, similar in styling to the upcoming CTS coupe (shown above). The car will be smaller and even bolder.
The design will be so striking that an unnamed GM executive has said it will make “people want it regardless of the energy source.”
The car is noted to be a concept, not necessarily production-intent, but will illustrate how additional vehicle designs could also achieve the 40 mile AER and utilize the E-Flex underpinning. Indeed Volt executive Frank Weber has previously told me that changing designs is the “easy part” relative to the complex undertaking of creating a perfect E-Flex drivetrain.
Source (Businessweek)
105 Responses to “Report: GM to Reveal New E-Flex Electric Cadillac Coupe at the Detroit Auto Show”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
- Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory November 18, 2009Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1038564_thnk-picks-indiana-for-u-s-factory) […]Jason M. Hendler
- FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010 November 18, 2009FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010: _Link_... […]Jason M. Hendler
- Any news about the NiMH battery? November 18, 2009Now that there are new owners of the patent, is there any indication that they will allow its use for electric cars? Like many others, I believe that... […]Desertstraw
- energy requirments of modern electric vehicles November 18, 2009does anyone know any credible sources of information concerning the electricity requirements of modern electric vehicles per mile of travel and the... […]crubkings
- 30% reduction November 18, 2009The Belgian governement decided that if you buy a car with less then 60g/km emmision you get a 15% tax reduction and you can write it off for 100% if... […]filiep
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
January 9th, 2009 at 10:06 am
I’m looking forward to getting more detail, even though it is only a concept car, and we know what that means.
==>
It’s good for the technology to be moving to Cadillac.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Guess they figured out they put the high end technology at the wrong end of the line.
Take Care
Arch
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Here we go again…unveil a design and produce something that looks entirely different from the concept. Word of advice: slip the eflex into current makes and models and SAVE MEGA-BUCKS and time.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Great! I think GM is getting back on the road like the good old days.
Not that I want to change the subject matter, but I found an interesting writeup on what’s going on with the GM lithium battery choice. Just read from the link below….for your information. Please continue with the Electric Cadillac topic.
http://carriesnation.blogspot.com/2009/01/lithium-ion-battery-companies.html
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Very good idea. Distinctive is good for new hi-tech green cars because the vast majority of people do want those properties displayed. You can see this in the relative success of the Prius with its distinctive design versus the relative lack of success of the hybrid Camry.
Consequently the more striking the design the better. With this introduction — people will want it regardless of power source — it should be fun to see. GM does seem to be making great strides in the design and quality areas, and maybe, just maybe, they’ll come up with a design that even satisfies statik! LOL
And yes, I think Arch is on to something with higher end tech first being introduced on the higher end cars.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:35 am
That CTS Coupe looks HOT!
E-Flex is so expensive, perhaps it belongs in a Cadillac.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:49 am
Stop already with the concepts and start building E-REV’s. The more you build the cheaper the batteries and the more people can afford them moving us of OIL.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:50 am
While at VoltNation last year, I went to the Cadillac section to see the CTS coupe. It is absolutely stunning!!
Myself and another observer considered it the best looking new car at the show. This car was scheduled for production by mid-2009.
If this elegant coupe is made with Volt technology, and is “impressive” to drive as mentioned by the NBC reporters, GM will have a true winner on its hands.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:54 am
From Lyle’s post:
“The design will be so striking that an unnamed GM executive has said it will make “people want it regardless of the energy source.””
Been there done that. Will people be swindled again? The wind tunnel doesn’t care how much the car is going to retail at and as best we know, the underpinnings of this concept will be the same as the Volt, so if they want to get their 40 miles, it’ll have to look more or less like the Volt/Prius/Insight in the end. I guess Tesla got them started down this road and now Fisker is directing them down the road. Should be an interesting show I hope.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:54 am
I’m with KUD. Just build the d*** things. Let’s go!
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:01 am
This makes so much more sense than the Volt.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Sounds promising.
As for all the pooh-poohers in regards to the concept-to-production styling changes, the Volt was the exception rather than the rule. The (soon to be) production Cadillac CTS coupe and Camaro are two cases in point–very similar to the concept cars.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:22 am
I would think that car above would look so much better if it was carved out of soap, and then spent some time in the shower lathering up with a beautiful person of your choice…
I personally do not like the hard edge look and prefer the worn “bar of soap” softer edge look. Which is incidentally more aerodynamic.
Red HHR (the bar of soap forties look)
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:28 am
I can understand the need for a “high-end” vehicle to use the Volt drive train. Cadillac is certainly high-end and the owners of the brand can afford the cost. It is a win-win situation for GM and the Volt technology. Let get it done.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:33 am
#13 Red HHR
Maybe the hard edges give it a stealthy, radar-avoidance capability.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:34 am
I would be surprised if the new Cadillac concept to be introduced will change as much when it is production intent designed as did the Volt. I think GM has learned some lessons with the concept Volt to production Volt transformation and will attempt to not repeat that “mistake”. Plus, with new battery technology probably coming on-line that will improve miles per charge, GM will be able to still give the Cadillac electric great mileage and great looks at the same time. IMO.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Since the article states the Cadillac concept will be smaller than the CTS to be produced this year I would assume it will be built on the same platform as the Volt and be about the same size as the Volt. We will have to wait to find out all of the details. It will be an interesting week next week.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:37 am
#15 ThombDbhomb
I suppose it does require a government contract to produce..
Red HHR (radar reflective)
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:45 am
I have mixed feelings on this car.
The fact that it’s a concept means no production plans anytime soon, so it’s probably just hype for now. Also, pushing the machine-driver interface implies a niche market, since most people want a standard interface.
But the good news is that GM may be starting to explore the new eco-chic market. Big SUVs become somewhat of a fashion statement, but that’s gone now, and nothing has replaced it. We need some kind of new status symbol that doesn’t give money to terrorists and doesn’t destroy the planet for our children.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:51 am
I think GM’s next rollout should be a small pickup, say….the Colorado, with EREV. Putting EREV in the Caddy line just puts the technology further out of the 80% bell curve of medium income households.
p
Of course I have to pedal my request for a bare bones model again.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:54 am
That’s neat! And hopefully this car can help build the economies of scale that will help us less-luxury-oriented buyers afford e-flex vehicles.
Any rumors about an e-flex pickup truck? I still have a Ford Ranger, and it’s bloody useful for hauling heavy objects.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Oh yeah, Toyoda announced production of the A-BAT small pickup. It looks more like it should be branded Scion though.
http://jalopnik.com/5052961/toyota-a+bat-gets-green-light-tundra-diesel-gets-black-flag
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:57 am
GM wont change much :- EFLEX , Blogs, Photos, News, Media ride, Now non production indent models – if they are non-production indent why they waste time and money ? When we will see real things happening ?
Apart from it looks hot ?? does it carry any value ?
i can understand it its a new non production indent technology but this is just another volt mule with cadi and its not expected to go to production.
and the worst part, selects only media people to have drive of volt and not even a person who is running followup of the technology and brand for 2 years and creating a good image for GM.
Waste of money ??.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 11:57 am
BillR
While at VoltNation last year, I went to the Cadillac section to see the CTS coupe. It is absolutely stunning!!
_________________________________________
Great news from someone who has seen it in person. The EREV will have to be smaller though, to use the Volt chassis. Saving a few billion in retooling costs is probably pretty important to GM about now. Stretching a chassis may be no big deal for a backyard hobbyist but to retool for mass manufacturing is stunningly expensive.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Hopefully the Caddy E-Rev will offer a convertible, what a ride.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
I have always thought they should have a HHR pickup, mild hybrid 50mpg+…
Red HHR (smelly things should go outside the cab)
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
GM’s continued development in ICE design other than EREV is I think a waste of the “Loan” granted to them. Anything other than an EREV is a waste of engineering $$$.
Are any of their plant up and running right now? If so, what are they building?
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
#9DaV8or Says:
Been there done that. Will people be swindled again? The wind tunnel doesn’t care how much the car is going to retail at and as best we know, the underpinnings of this concept will be the same as the Volt, so if they want to get their 40 miles, it’ll have to look more or less like the Volt/Prius/Insight in the end.
———-
Not necessarily. To get 40 miles they can just put a bigger battery in there, which will raise the cost, but people expect to pay more for Cadillac. When/If this car is produced, batteries may be smaller cheaper too.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
I much rather pay $50 or $60k for an E-rev Caddy, than $40k for a volt. If i’m going to drive an E-rev car, i want it to look exclusive and stylish, even if the electric range is only 35 miles.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
I think this is very good news as I strongly believe all of GM cars should be built this way.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
#9 DaV8or
#28 k-dawg
Speaking of UNPLANNED CHANGES,
I wonder if they have put what they will show in Detroit or something resembling it into the wind tunnel.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Think the K-car…
Chryslers recovery in the original bailout was based in one front wheel drive design, then different body styles were added.
It may take a few years, however we will see what we want.
Red HHR (wanting a pickup, convertible and a sleek two door businessman’s coupe)
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
I guess it makes sense to offer a 2 door Cadillac version of the Chevy Volt first, utilizing all the existing platform design. I was hoping they would be offering a cross-over from Cadillac first, but we will take what we can get.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Red HHR #26 – I have always thought they should have a HHR pickup, mild hybrid 50mpg+…
Really, that’s not all what I had you pegged for! Say…What color do you think would be nice
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
I guess if you had to cover one end of the bell curve distribution of consumers in the higher 20%, putting it in the Caddy should cover it.
Build a small pickup truck using the same technology and price it really low and you’ll get the lower end of the spectrum. Me.
If there were a Volt and an EREV small pickup (Colorado), I’d buy the pickup. It’s more usefull to me as a “move crap here and there” than a taxi for the family.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
#31 Jeffhre Says:
January 9th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
#9 DaV8or
#28 k-dawg
Speaking of UNPLANNED CHANGES,
I wonder if they have put what they will show in Detroit or something resembling it into the wind tunnel.
——————-
I think that would depend on the principle/function of the concept car. If it is suppose to be a very energy efficient vehicle, they may (now). If its just a concept of how much HP you can jam into a compact car, then no.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
#35 CaptJackSparrow says,
Build a small pickup truck using the same technology and price it really low and you’ll get the lower end of the spectrum
———-
Agreed. I will take a small 4X4 please. I think Noel Park wants a small truck also.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
#30 Rashiid Amul
One more thing we find ourselves in agreement with.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
#23 unni
Look before you rant. Automakers have been floating concept cars since the 1950’s. They serve a purpose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_car
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
#34 Jeffhre
Yup, I would trade in the Colorado. Not a bad truck in its own right. Takes trash to the dump and can haul a 4×8 and the occasional snowmobile. You know the color
Wife and I like the color, the roof of the house is the same shade!
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
_____________________________________________________
I like it!
A Cadillac EV as above contemplated would be a major home run for GM and the Cadillac line.
But…I’m disappointed to hear GM is not further along the development path for this car. GM needs to find a way to have this car rolling off the production line by 2011. By being in the “concept” stage for this car, GM is allowing a huge opportunity to pass by. Ofther guys will be selling good luxury EREVs by 2011.
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
I want a small R-REV pickup also. I don’t see why this type of pickup truck would not sell very well. Most of us need to carry things and we don’t always want to do it in vans or large trucks. I own a 2000 Nissan Frontier Crew-Cab that I dearly love, but I could use an even smaller truck 99.9% of the time. The truck market is going to explode one of these days as pent-up demand sparks purchases. The auto makers realize this and they know we will have to purchase what they offer. If Toyota and Kia do come out with small pickups, it may force GM and Ford to do the same. The Toyota A-BAT is to be a Prius-type of hybrid driven truck, also. That should prove to be interesting if Toyota does decide to produce it.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Funny, They show us a picture of a Caddy and we want a small pickup. Must be the snow.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Sounds like this Caddie is going to be closer to the original Volt concept car. *lol*
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
#39 ThombDbhomb
Interesting link. Thanks. Quite a few “concepts” and some pretty weird when view from today.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
#41 CDAVIS
With the Cadillac concept using the Volt’s technology and platform the biggest slow down to production will be the additional software to accomplish the human to vehicle interface. Producing the new skin to go over the Volt drive train and platform should be able to be accomplished by 2011. IMO.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
#43 Red HHR
It just may be the snow. We do seem to have gotten onto a subject that is clearly close to many of our hearts – a small E-REV pickup truck. Maybe GM will finally take the hint.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
It’s unfortunate GM allowed Saturn to languish over the years. Now the Saturn cars are just US versions of GM’s European Opal division. This would be good as Opal makes GM’s best cars but unfortunate because if Saturn was allowed to continue their mandate of demonstrating GM had learned to make a quality small cars in America then Saturn could have become the “green” division with an all hybrid/plug-in/electric line up leading the way for all other GM divisions and the auto industry. Now GM just sort of hodge-podge their way of E-Flex here E-Flex there. In the long run it will all work out but a bit of a shame to see lost potential. It could have been the “hook” that could have insured Saturn’s future.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Just show me a concept that’s realistic. I only care about seeing production concepts, not concept concepts. Those never look anywhere near what actually makes it. The E-REV concept is now widely accepted so they can just refine that.
If it looks anything like that picture then it’s hot! Just keep the quality up there because the world is going to give American’s another chance with car 2.0. Let’s not blow it. Time to put in the overtime and 80 hours of love per week.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
The auto industry has a weird way of producing their concept.
Here’s what happens…
Someone designs a shell to be “Visually Stunning” that they have to work around the chassis.
When a design is approved it is published out as a “Concept”.
If the design is really good and they want to produce it then it goes into the wind tunnel for areodynamic testing.
Depending on the measured wind drag coefficient the design will most likely be required to be tweaked.
After that you get the “Production Intent” version hence the new version of the Volt. Of course other factors are considered but the bulk of the exterior design is around the wind drag coefficient.
You’d think they’d publish only the version that is tested after the wind tunnel but hey, that’s just me.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
@KentT 48
Yes, GM could’ve been the Green division. They opted not to introduce the Matiz 8s in the US. Look at the MPG. This little thing gets 54.3MPG, granted there are no guts, but for a College Student or just commuting, it’ll work.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/04/09/chevy-matiz-0-8s-features-reduced-emissions/
Just build my Volt DANGIT!
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
GM (In England) is having a good year….
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/01/09/small-car-sales-give-chevy-its-best-year-ever-in-england/
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
I would love an E-Flex small SUV with 4×4 capability. I have a GMC Jimmy right now, and it’s perfect but only gets about 15mpg
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
At this point in time, GM probably wishes that they would of made the Volt a Cadillac. The high initial pricing for the battery would be more excepted by the Cadillac buyer. Good strategy would be to release the Chevy Volt but then get a Cadillac E-FLEX right after. Expect greater sales for the Cadillac E-FLEX. Then the technology and volume can mature and increase to the point that they can price the Chevy Volt within $20K’s and then really hit the big time.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
I don’t care what it is, GM, just get something out! quit stalling
NO PLUG NO SALE, LJGTVWOTR, DBNGCMEMEV, (my house)=D~~~(my volt)
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
#50 CaptJackSparrow
Not all concepts are about the exterior. Sometimes, the exterior is a fanciful flourish, but not the main point. I think the main point of the Volt concept was the power plant.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
@ThombDbhomb 56
True, but when it comes to high efficiency of Electric or Hybrid types, this is a big deal so wind drag is highly considered in the design of the shell. Just look at the EV1, Peeus, Infright. The only one I can think of that does not fit this bill is the RAV4 EV.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
#57 CaptJackSparrow
Yeah, GM went for the “muscle” look instead of the futuristic “aero” look. I guess they could have thought that out better. You can still do an impractically impressive aero body.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
I want an E-REV jet ski!!!!
It does not matter what GM does, there are always those that are not happy…..
Forget talking about a truck.
I want to know more about – “how far machine-driver interface could be taken”
Are we talking voice actived everything, drive by joystick, HAL-9000 driving for me??? This could really be interesting!
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
We have a phrase in Special Education that seems to be a pretty good fit:
“Little steps for little feet” There are soooo many unknowns in the Volt’s development and yet,
The Volt has to be SPOT ON! Don’t waste a single engineering brain cell wondering how to fit a huge golf bag in that Caddy.
Let’s just get the VOLT’S wheels on the road!!! No plug, No sale. (and very possibly: No sale, No GM)
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
#7 KUD, #10 Steve, #20 CaptJackSparrow, #37 Rashiid Amul, #42 N Riley:
I’m with you.
#60 Tagamet:
Amen!
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
I also would be interested in a small pickup EREV. For a place that gets 6 months of winter, a truck is almost needed here. And even with a small box on the back, there should be lots of room to put a batterie. You could still do the T shape, under the rear seat and then flatten the longer portion and slide it under the box.
Not sure how they would get the 4×4 part of it, but it can’t be that hard to put in two smaller electric motors. Then when you don’t need your 4×4 you just turn one off.
Oh the fun they would have calculating that. “All electric range, 100 miles in 2×4 econo mode, 50 miles in 4×4 econo mode, 70 miles in 2×4 sport mode, 35 miles in 4×4 sport mode (do you need a 4×4 sport mode??)
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
I’m for the concept, whatever it is. The post does say “E-Flex” not “E-REV”. In the context of this announcement, what should we understand the difference to be?
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
This platform (e-flex) is build to be able to house different variations, cost effectively. On that basis, I think this is a good idea. I would suggest that the ‘Cadillac’ version be no more than 10K more than the Chevy…but only because of the environment we find ourselves in.
Some people clamor to have the ‘non-entry’ level brand and will pay extra for that merit on its own…but can no longer afford to spring 60K+ for it. Put that extra few thousand into making it look like something special (ala the CTS, which I think is a great looking/handling car for what you are spending).
…and don’t give us anymore ‘driving brick’ analogies on why you are cheapening out. Spend a extra 2K and drop a 20kWh pack in there if you have to for goodness sake…and save your designers from having another coronary.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
#59 Jim I
That machine-driver interface thing sounds cool. How about some kind of neural interface? Maybe GM has Lyle working on that.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
I’m as eager as everyone else for the Volt, but just because engineers at GM are working on different projects is by no means “stalling” or “holding up” the Volt design/test. Only so many chef’s can bake a cake at the same time. They have a lot of engineers, working on a lot of different things, all the time. Putting everyone on the Volt wont produce it any faster. That’s like saying, if i keep adding monitors to your desk, you will consequently produce more work.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
#66 k-dawg
I have two monitors now.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
#67 Thomb – as most people do, or 3. But if i give you 20 monitors, will you do 10 times the workload?
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
#68 k-dawg
Yes, so send me 20 monitors.
/goofing off until next post from Lyle
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
#60 Tagamet Says: “…Don’t waste a single engineering brain cell wondering how to fit a huge golf bag in that Caddy. Let’s just get the VOLT’S wheels on the road!!! ”
————————————————————————————–
Your point is that GM’s engineers should concentrate on getting the Volt perfect before they even think about another EREV design.
This sounds good, but keep in mind that with big engineering projects like this, design flows like a pipeline. Engineers tend to be specialized for one aspect of design, test, or manufacturing engineering. By the time you get to testing 2nd or 3rd generation mules, many of the people that were involved in the earlier design phases are pretty much done. Unless a problem shows up in test, these engineers will be moving onto something else.
So the real question is: Would rather have these early design engineers:
a) wondering how to fit a huge golf bag in that EREV Caddy,
b) playing video games, or
c) working on non-EREV cars?
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
This sounds very familiar. Bring out a concept car that everyone falls in love with, wants one today, then the old bait and switch to some god awful production car that looks like every other car. Has no style, co character, and eventually no sales. Then GM will wonder why. They will probably conclude that people really don’t electric cars. If only they would make the cars they show us, they wouldn’t be able to produce them fast enough.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
#62 Canada Man Says: “Not sure how they would get the 4×4 part of it, but it can’t be that hard to put in two smaller electric motors. Then when you don’t need your 4×4 you just turn one off.”
————————————————————————————–
EREV 4×4 pickup here:
http://www.hipadrive.com/sema.html
I used to think wheel motors added too much weight below the suspension, but this company has solved most of those issues. Very lightweight powerful wheel motors with integrated controllers.
PML wheel motor features:
• Instant torque right where you need it – at the wheel
• Power to each wheel is controlled independently
• Regenerative braking is much more effective
• No transmission or reducing gears
• 2000 RPM at the wheel is around 160 MPH
Detailed specs here:
http://home.deds.nl/~daihard/electroCar/Hi%20Pa%20Drive.pdf
I hope the next version of the Volt uses these …
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Just get the Volt out, concentrate on getting the VOLT WHEELS ON THE ROAD, Put all attention in getting the Volt out to us then go after everything else.
JGTVWOTR
NO PLUG NO SALE, LJGTVWOTR, DBNGCMEMEV, (my house)=D~~~(my volt)
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Michelin’s Active Wheel for Affordable Electric Cars:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11/active-wheel-affordable-electric-car.php
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
#4 Joe — Thank you for the link to the article on batteries for electric cars, which ones and for whom. It is an excellent and informative link.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Dave G@70 said in part:
“…This sounds good, but keep in mind that with big engineering projects like this, design flows like a pipeline. Engineers tend to be specialized for one aspect of design, test, or manufacturing engineering. By the time you get to testing 2nd or 3rd generation mules, many of the people that were involved in the earlier design phases are pretty much done. Unless a problem shows up in test, these engineers will be moving onto something else.
So the real question is: Would rather have these early design engineers:
a) wondering how to fit a huge golf bag in that EREV Caddy,
b) playing video games, or
c) working on non-EREV cars?
*****************************************************************************
d) None of the above
GM’s propag…., er, mouth noise, uh no, publicity (I’m starting to sound like Statik) has said all along that they’re working “outside the box” by having their engineers work on the Volt in parallel not sequentially. If as Nasaman has suggested all along that they worked on system redundancies to help INSURE that the Volt is SPOT ON, so be it. It might uncover problems in V 1.0 WHILE they are working on Volt V1.9 or 2.0. IMHO, it’s just that important that Volt 1.0 is as bulletproof as possible (or they will have wasted their time – and our money- on the Caddy).
Be well,
Tag
PS There’s no way anyone needs 20 monitors, Send me 10 of them (g)
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
I can see this high torque system being very useful in a small truck. Offering 4WD with a normal “low” mode of 82HP and up to 164HP in performance “high” mode. I also like the idea of being able to function if one or more ‘wheel units’ fail. The front hood (former engine compartment) area being used for clean storage with the area just behind the bed being the battery base.
This push toward electric powered street and off-road vehicles is exciting.
=D~
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
#76 Tagamet Says: “GM’s propag…., er, mouth noise, uh no, publicity (I’m starting to sound like Statik) has said all along that they’re working “outside the box” by having their engineers work on the Volt in parallel not sequentially. ”
————————————————————————————–
LOL
As I understand it, the parallel part of the Volt development has to do with them designing all the other parts of the car before they even knew if the battery worked in all situations. They also wrote software to control subsystems that weren’t built yet. That’s parallel development.
But there’s only so much work that can be done in parallel. When you get to the testing phase, a lot of the design work is done. Stress testing your own design is a bad idea, so there are different people for design and test. If a problem is uncovered during test, the design engineer gives their full attention, with many long hours. But in my experience, once the initial test issues are worked out, the design engineers end up either surfing the internet all day, or they start moving on to another project.
The notable exception here is software. I’ll bet the Volt software design engineers will work in parallel right up to the end.
But a design engineer that figures out how to fit an over sized golf bag in the back, that person would probably be finished working on their part of the Volt by now.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
A small EREV pickup would be nice…….has anyone mentioned that yet?
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
Well without that pesky rear seat, they can fill it up with batteries and make it nice and powerful!
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
“The car is noted to be a concept, not necessarily production-intent”
kind of a waste of time dragging concepts to shows when everyone knows the production unit will be totally different. I don’t see the point.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
#79 Spin Says: “A small EREV pickup would be nice…….has anyone mentioned that yet?”
————————————————————————————–
posts #62 & 72
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
#81 Ed M Says: “kind of a waste of time dragging concepts to shows when everyone knows the production unit will be totally different. I don’t see the point.”
————————————————————————————–
The purpose of a concept car is to gauge potential market response.
The Volt started as a concept car. GM had no production plans for the Volt when they designed the concept. After an overwhelming response to the Volt concept , GM started production plans, and the rest is history (in the making).
So concept cars do serve a purpose. Without concept cars, there would be no Volt.
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
GM,
Minimize the BS
Maximize the production
We are waiting……………………………………………………….
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Dave G@78 said in part:
“…But a design engineer that figures out how to fit an over sized golf bag in the back, that person would probably be finished working on their part of the Volt by now.”
Hmmmm, I know that I only saw the Concept Volt in person, and only pictures of the production Volt, but if they ever HAD an engineer working on how to fit a huge golf bag in the Volt, I hope he knows how to work on smaller projects, like the glove box.
Maybe miniature golf clubs?
I’m pretty sure that I’m not alone in carrying a worry or even two that something could kill the Volt in it’s infancy. We can thank Lyle for getting the Volt from concept(ion) to birth.
Be well,
Tag
LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS
(Quote)
January 9th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
I wonder how difficult it is to put an E-flex powertrain into a current vehicle chassis. I wonder if GM thought about that and realized it was too much of a pain and it would be better just to design the car from scratch.
That said, I would love it if they found a way to offer a strong hybrid version of every vehicle in their lineup and later an E-Flex version of everything. And then finally all of them can become pure EVs (although this will take a while).
——————
Nuclear power + wind + natural gas + some solar + EREV cars with range extenders running on waste product-based ethanol = the end of petroleum dominance… OK, I can dream can’t I?
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 12:41 am
#86 ccombs Says: “Nuclear power + wind + natural gas + some solar + EREV cars with range extenders running on waste product-based ethanol = the end of petroleum dominance… OK, I can dream can’t I?”
————————————————————————————–
Yeah, I like that dream!
And it may not be that much of a stretch. When you count on one “silver bullet” solution to solve all of our energy problems, then you’re bound to be disappointed. But when you look at a combination of solutions like you describe above, the chances get a lot better…
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 12:49 am
Lyle,
Could you ask GM to provide more details on the generator? Is it a permanent magnet generator, or an induction generator?
Thx
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 1:11 am
Dave G #83
Good job Dave, you changed my mind
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 1:16 am
Agreed, Concepts carry a value. But not sure for GM at this stage.
Wondering a production indent Flextreme will be there ?
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 8:18 am
“The design will be so striking that an unnamed GM executive has said it will make “people want it regardless of the energy source.”
——————————————————————————-
This is a car for the mAsses?
This is what your spending my handout money on?
This is a concept?
This is supposed to pull GM out of the depths of this recession?
So now that GM has that wheelbarrow full of cash, they are going to develop a vehicle that only about 10% of the population can afford?
I think I see where GM is taking the EREV now. They are really not interested in saving fuel, the environment, or reduce our dependency on OPEC. They are going to take the EREV design, and put it in a over priced car, not for mileage improvement, but for performance improvement. GM understands that a electric car can provide incredible off-the-line coolness, that those with lots of money will pay for. The vehicle will get improved mileage, like from 12/15 to 20/25mpg, oh wow!
I would not be suprised if GM gets this vehicle out sooner than the Volt (if ever the Volt makes production).
I really am feeling pessimistic this morning….(where is the Grump this morning? I think I will take his place today)
I WANT MY HANDOUT MONEY BACK!
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 8:37 am
I want the money back from the banks. So far all I’ve seen are parties and bonuses from the banks, at least GM is producing something.
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 8:38 am
#70 DaveG
“So the real question is: Would rather have these early design engineers:
a) wondering how to fit a huge golf bag in that EREV Caddy,
b) playing video games, or
c) working on non-EREV cars?”
================================================
GM is supposed to be in cash saving mode. If they really have engineers sitting around doing nothing, then GM should do what is required to survive, and layoff unnecessary engineers. This is what companies do to survive.
So, if my money is being used to pay engineers to develop some overpriced vehicle for the wealthy, then I say start the layoffs, and cut back on your expenses. We got all over GM about the union workers and the need to eliminate them if they had nothing to do, so the same goes for the office dudes/dudettes (I am one of these engineer dudes, and I understand a companies need to layoff when time are tough. I do not like it, but I understand)
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 8:39 am
92 Len
I Agree. I want my money back from the banks also, but I also want my money back from the auto makers.
Since they apparently will not send me my check, and I have no understanding how the banking system works regarding the bailout, I cannot comment on what the banks are doing with my money, but I do understand what the auto makers are doing.
Someone with financial prowess, can comment on bankds (hint…Statik…nudge…nudge), it’s not my bag of tricks.
NBA!
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 8:41 am
General Motors Achieves Record Sales in Asia Pacific in 2008
Shanghai – General Motors Corp. announced today that it set a new company record for vehicle sales in Asia Pacific in 2008. Its sales in the region rose 2.7 percent from the previous year to 1,475,093 units. A further 766,400 vehicles and 599,080 complete knockdown (CKD) vehicle sets were exported from the region to other parts of the world.
“GM once again outperformed the Asia Pacific market as a whole despite the global economic downturn and credit shortage, which affected most country markets and major automakers in the second half of 2008,” said Nick Reilly, GM Group Vice President and President of GM Asia Pacific. “We benefited from rising demand for our products in the region’s key emerging markets.”
In China, domestic sales of GM and its joint ventures rose 6.1 percent to a record 1,094,561 units. GM was led by increasing demand for products from the Chevrolet and Wuling brands, which registered sales growth of 15.7 percent to 199,155 units and 17.4 percent to 606,499 units , respectively. The Wuling Sunshine minivan from GM’s SAIC-GM-Wuling joint venture became the first vehicle in China to surpass 400,000 units in sales in a single calendar year.
GM sales in India increased 9.4 percent to 65,702 units in 2008, a new record for the automaker. GM was once again led by the Chevrolet Spark mini-car, which accounted for approximately 48 percent of sales. It also was helped by the start of regular production at GM’s second vehicle manufacturing facility in India, the 140,000-unit Talegaon plant, in September.
GM enjoyed growth in several members of the ASEAN sub-region as well. GM registered modest sales growth in Indonesia and the Philippines to 2,610 units and 2,400 units, respectively. In Vietnam, GM sales jumped 45.6 percent to 11,037 units, a new sales record for GM in the country.
In South Korea, GM and its GM Daewoo subsidiary sold 117,374 units. GM Daewoo remained a leading source of vehicles for other GM units worldwide. It exported 1,788,568 vehicles and CKD sets in 2008 to other countries in Asia Pacific and the rest of the world, setting a new GM Daewoo record.
In Australia, GM sold 132,555 vehicles in 2008. The Holden Commodore was Australia’s best-selling passenger car for the 13 th consecutive year. GM Holden, GM’s Australian unit, announced plans in December to build an all-new small car alongside the Commodore range at its Elizabeth manufacturing facility in South Australia.
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewpressreldetail.do?domain=2&docid=51194
=D~
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 9:16 am
#93 JEC said:
So now that GM has that wheelbarrow full of cash, they are going to develop a vehicle that only about 10% of the population can afford?
====================
They are already doing that…it is called the Volt.
I would call this, a car that only half of ‘the Volt’ people can afford.
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 9:17 am
Got this in my email…for the NAIAS show on sunday:
Dear Statik:
Thank you for signing up to receive updates on the Chrysler ENVI program. To thank you for your interest, we’d like to plug you into the world of this progressive new vision of environmentally responsible, no-compromise Electric Vehicles with a special opportunity.
Please join us online for the live reveal from the North American International Auto Show. At noon on Sunday, January 11, get a first look and the most up-to-date information. Just visit http://www.chryslergoeselectric.com
If you can’t be online for the unveiling, check back any time for videos, pictures and other news.
We hope to see you online.
Sincerely,
The ENVI Team at Chrysler LLC
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 9:30 am
#86 ccombs said “I wonder how difficult it is to put an E-flex powertrain into a current vehicle chassis. I wonder if GM thought about that and realized it was too much of a pain and it would be better just to design the car from scratch.”
————————————————————————
That is a fascinating question. No doubt a big issue is where to put the batteries. They are bulky so they use a lot of room. They are heavy, so they change the dynamics. And they have big electrical cables, which have to be routed. Positively, if the batteries can be located in a good place in an existing vehicle, maybe it can be done.
On the other side, once one begins to make major changes in an existing vehicle, maybe it is really faster and cheaper to start over. That also gives an opportunity to address otherwise awkward features, such as a back seat filled with something unnatural.
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Lets face it..the so called “volt” is a publlic relation stunt.
Now GM is making a concept vehicle based on another concept vehicle. Think about it.
This whole thing is a joke. I want to see a group of people such as consumer reports be able to evaluate the “volt”. No where has anyone been able to verify range, battery type, or any other design parameter. As far as anyone knows, this could be an extended cushman golf cart with a car body on it!
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 9:46 am
96 Statik
“They are already doing that…it is called the Volt.”
————————————————————–
Yes, your right, but the Volt platform is based on a “common mans” vehicle. Even though it will be out of reach, financially, for most people, I believe it represents the most viable solution. I see no way, at this time to develop an EREV cheaply due to simple economics of the situation. You cannot add all these components (battery, generator, motors, generators, electronics, software) and expect a $20,000 car. (PS: This leads into my argument of justification of a true BEV, but lets leave that for another day)
As I said many times before, the Volt is out of my price range, but I hold out hope that the basic EREV platform will be successful and eventually the price will drop down into an “affordable” vehicle.
When I see GM pushing the EREV into an even more unaffordable auto, and using my money to do it, I get very frustrated.
I do not care if a company develops products that I cannot afford, or that are not environmentally smart, but GM touts the Volt as the savior and part of the bailout justification, then they “find” extra money to spend on these luxuries. The Cadillac EREV should be shelved while using “my” money to develop a real solution.
The time for GM to pony up and get the Volt done has come.
PS: I saw that GM commercial last nite, where they show the evolution of the car, and end it with the Volt (the gas station disappears in background). They commercial still says 2010, so how long before GM changes this commercial?
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 9:51 am
99 Thom said “I want to see a group of people such as consumer reports be able to evaluate the “volt”. ”
———————————————————————–
Of course, no Volts have been built so far, just various half-finished mules and prototypes. That means there is as of now no car for consumer or anyone else to evaluate. Maybe later this year
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 9:59 am
#100 JEC says “When I see GM pushing the EREV into an even more unaffordable auto, and using my money to do it, I get very frustrated.”
————————————————————–
So not having been in favor of any of the bailouts, I share your frustration. At the same time, I think pushing EREV up into more expensive vehicles is a good thing. Less expensive automobiles are made possible by automating the production of a vehicle after details have been worked out to a very fine level. Starting EREV as a Chevrolet was too ambitious, so now we have all this awkwardness in the collision between Chevy prices and realistic Volt prices.
For the Volt (or any other car that is really different) to get to the point of high volume and low cost production, there has to be some years of development. That development can be self-sustaining in a lower volume but higher cost vehicle. Sometimes Corvette has been used for development of innovative components. Ultimately development at the upper end brings benefits up and down the line. EREV needs Cadillac, because Cadillac customers can and will pay the extra dollars needed to pay for EREV while it is not yet perfected or inexpensive.
As for the bailout, it is just frustrating.
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 10:02 am
Thanks Statik #97
I’ll watch perhaps with a little delay. i hope to see something really new.
Regards,
JC
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 10:07 am
______________________________________________________
#74 ThombDbhomb Says:
Michelin’s Active Wheel for Affordable Electric Cars:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11/active-wheel-affordable-electric-car.php
—-
Thanks ThombDbhomb for that interesting link find. Michelin getting behind EV related development of this nature is significant reinforcement that the EV wave that is building is real; a Tsunami. It will be interesting to see which car builders ride the wave and which ones get crushed by it.
_____________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
_____________________________________________________
(Quote)
January 10th, 2009 at 10:48 am
#100 JEC said:
Yes, your right, but the Volt platform is based on a “common mans” vehicle. Even though it will be out of reach, financially, for most people, I believe it represents the most viable solution. I see no way, at this time to develop an EREV cheaply due to simple economics of the situation. You cannot add all these components (battery, generator, motors, generators, electronics, software) and expect a $20,000 car. (PS: This leads into my argument of justification of a true BEV, but lets leave that for another day)
As I said many times before, the Volt is out of my price range, but I hold out hope that the basic EREV platform will be successful and eventually the price will drop down into an “affordable” vehicle.
When I see GM pushing the EREV into an even more unaffordable auto, and using my money to do it, I get very frustrated.
======================
I do agree with you right across the board on this one. I totally agree.
I think this (costing) is a major conundrum at the moment. We have the technology, it is viable and ready to go…and you could make a much stronger argument for it only 7-8 months ago… when the economy was ‘ok’ and crude oil prices were hovering north of 120.
Now we find ourselves in the largest and longest recession since WWII…maybe the 30s. Unemployment soaring. Home equity/housing dropping rapidly. Unprecedented credit freezing…and the monstor roadblock –$40 gas again.
The gas is a huge number just by itself, because people have already been abandoning their ‘guzzlers’ for smaller more efficient cars…and those cars are a lot more efficient still from their historical peers in the same class. We are now asking consumers to switch from efficient cars or ‘cheap cars’ to the Volt…with low gas prices.
Basically, ‘Joe Public’ ditched his ‘05 Blazer for a slightly used Malibu, because times are tough and gas was high. Today he finds himself plunking down $18 bucks at the pumps…where only a frew months ago he was dropping $65.
In ‘Joe’s’ mind, his car situation is great, he has dropped his payment from $450/month on the Blazer he bought new 4 years ago to $200 on slightly used sedan…and his gas has moved from $65 a fill every 5 days to $18 a fill every week. He went from $800 to $275. “Huzzah! I can make that readjusted mortgage house payment now!”
Through a strange set of economic circumstances, just trying to keep his transportation costs in line, he has inadvertantly taken $500 out of his transportation costs a month due to this new gas reality. Just try to get him to ‘re-saddle’ himself with high transportation costs now in a Volt now in this environment…or any PEV, E-REV for that matter.
(Quote)