Sorry for the play on words.
The Cadillac Converj concept GM just unveiled is clearly a striking design. GM vice chair Lutz said it shows how “luxury meets electric.” I had the chance to soak in and review and photogrpah the vehicle with members of the interior and exterior design team and some of the engineers responsible for the car’s functional modelling.
The vehicle was actually designed in England and not primarily by the same volt design studio that designed the Volt. It has also not been put the the wind tunnel yet but was designed with all of the learning GM acquired in building the Volt aerodynamically. The lead designer Simon Cox told Autocar that the team was charged with designing the car just in July.
Cox said “We wanted an aerodynamic profile and the cab-forward design is a very different look for Cadillac. Fuel-efficient cars don’t have to look boring and undynamic.” And “This is a very real concept in terms of the look and feasibility of it” he said. “The interior is very believable and that was intentional.”
The front grille once again uses the new closed design that the production Volt has. It is not actuating. The headlamps are pure LEDs and can change colors so that they can in part act as turn signals, which is the same for the tail lights that can turn white to indicate the vehilce is going in reverse. They are housed in special laser-etched acrylic. It is a two door coupe style and although not designed with a four door variant could theoretically be implemented as such I am told, if the demand is there. The rear spoiler is actuating and activates a higher speeds.
Instead of using standard rear view mirrors, there are small rear-view cameras, which improves aerodynamic drag.
The roof is shown to have solar panels which would be used to help power the A/C compressor for ambient cabin cooling. The concept uses 20 inch wheels in front and 21 inch in back, which would be somewhat large for production. Although the car is a concept, it is being displayed to see public reaction as it could indeed make it to production, something Bob Lutz told me he would like to see happen.
Like the Volt, it continues to use the same Voltec drivetrain, with the same 16 kwh pack and 40 mile electric driving range. It has a 120 kw peak electric motor, and the powertrain is tweaked with new learning stemming from the Volt development program to give it more performance than the Volt with a 8 second 0 to 60 time. It will also have to “dig a bit deeper” into the battery to do so as one engineer said.
The interior is extremely remarkable and striking too. High-end materials including a suede dashboard top, leather seats, and engineered wood inserts appear. There are above-dash displays showing the side view camera stream in a bilateral panaromic configuration, which gives the driver a far better image than a rear view mirror ever could.
The center stack is entirely a massive touch screen surface and uses OLED displays which are crisp and high definition. If the Volt’s center stack is an iPod, the Converj’s is an iPod touch.
The design manager told me all the components for the interior are actually production capable.
Overall this car is truly impressive aside from its drivetrain, and most likely represents the most beautiful electric car concepts ever shown.
Lets hope Mr. Lutz gets his way and this does go to production. More on this soon when I publish my exclusive 1 to 1 video interview with Mr. Lutz
Enjoy my gallery below.
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:53 am)First again!
We have the Caddy and the Chevy, hopefully the Buick E-Rev will be a convertible with a 200 KW motor.
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:58 am)Wow, looks great. If GM can continue pipeline these prototypes and have them transition to production, we could have a nice line of EREV’s coming up… Volt in 2010, Converj in 2011…. Elecrta in 2012??
Can’t wait to see what the next decade has to bring!
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:06 am)I didn’t even notice that there were no rear view mirrors from the last set of pictures. This is certainly a younger Cadillac.
Doesn’t sound like they are really adding much cost to the Converj aside from electronics and LCD’s. If the Volt is to sell at a break even point, they won’t need to mark this up too much to get a proffit.
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:13 am)Beautiful car. I’ll be interested to see how it is priced. GM may have a tough tightrope to walk when it comes to pricing. Too low, and it will hurt Volt sales. Too high, and they will be directly competing with Fiskar, and maybe even Tesla if/when they start making an electric under $100K. Then we would be talking about side-by-side comparisons: range, power, styling, and the pure ego satisfaction of a niche car.
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:19 am)Lyle, Does the Converj concept car actually have a Voltec system inside, or just a small NMH pack?
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:25 am)Sounds like a good ‘merj’ of Volt technology to me.
…see I can do it too Lyle. (=
——————–
Heres the parts that interest me:
“It has also not been put the the wind tunnel yet…”
“…the same 16 kwh pack and 40 mile electric driving range”
“…with a 8 second 0 to 60 time. It will also have to ‘dig a bit deeper’ into the battery to do so”
“…cars don’t have to look boring and undynamic”
“…uses 20 inch wheels in front and 21 inch in back”
/all too familiar, no way this car hits anywhere near the benchmarks they are setting out as is
…but is still really ‘cool’
Much like the original Volt, I’d be happy to sacrifice some AER for the unique concept design…and GM can keep its jelly beans. Preferably, how about just adding 4 kWh? I’m sure the Caddy buyers can handle an extra 3K of pack charge
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:27 am)These cars are exciting to look at and read about, but at these price tags, GM’s going to have a really hard time competing with Honda’s Insight (or even the Prius)…especially in a recession. Think about it: at 18.5K, I could buy 2 Insights for the price of one Volt. Don’t get me wrong, I agree the Volt is the right direction to go, and I love the way it looks (especially the production model), but GM is going to struggle in the near term. GM needs a dedicated mild hybrid at a sub 20K price. Like the Insight and Prius, it must be a dedicated hybrid model, otherwise they would have the same problem Honda has with the Civic hybrid.
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:28 am)Good effort, but too much bling for my taste. The Chevrolet Volt is still on the top of my short list of electrics.
What I would have named the Cadillac Converj:
1. Cadillac Carolina
2. Cadillac Greendale
3. Cadillac Silencio
Perhaps Wags will drive this beauty to the next DC BBQ.
=D~
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:30 am)From our experience watching the Volt segue from concept to production vehicle, I woudl venture that in a production vehicle:
- the 20-inch rims will be scaled down.
- the multi-color LEDs will give way to something more conventional.
- the touch-screen will be replaced by something more tangible lest drivers have to take their eyes off the road too long.
RE: Aerodynamics, the Volt-like shape is apparent if you ignore the Converj’s prominant beltline. Which makes me wonder what the Fisker folks are going to do when they put their models in the wind-tunnel.They’re touting 50 miles all electric before the genset kicks in. We’ll see…..:
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:30 am)Regarding production, sure, I hope GM decides to move forward with the Converj, but I cannot understand why the Voltec hardware isn’t installed in current models which are light and aerodynamic. I mean if EVs are going to go mainstream, I’d like to see choices like we have with hybrids. You have the CHOICE of a Civic hybrid or a Civic 4-banger. Why doesn’t GM offer the same with the Voltec?
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:31 am)This car is truly stunning. I honestly hope they don’t change the looks if they go to production. I don’t like the name though, but this is very subjective.
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:36 am)How can this car perform better than the Volt when it has the same guts, but its bigger and less aerodynamic? I thought they were going to put a bigger battery in it. But now it seems its the same battery, but they will dig deeper into it. Hmmmm
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:38 am)“Although the car is a concept, it is being displayed to see public reaction ….”
Deja vu. The Volt was not really intended to be produced when the concept was unveiled. Read between the lines, and it’s clear that GM threw it out there in 2007 as a PR stunt, then found they had to follow through when the public went ga-ga for it.
But this time, GM is not starting with a design that they will find to be untterly impractical in terms of meeting their goals.
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:42 am)Wow! I wonder if the 20/21 inch wheels will survive to the production model. Looks great though.
I will stick with the Volt though because I would prefer a four door since I will be using the car for my real estate business…and I have two small children.
Thanks for the report!
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:42 am)Too bad everyone will be out of work and will not be able to afford it.
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:44 am)Only time will tell how close this stunning concept is to what they will produce…
I’m officially going to wait for it…
I still want to test drive the Volt but this hottie will be something I’ll be thinking about all the while….WOW
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:57 am)“Instead of using standard rear view mirrors, there are small rear-view cameras, which improves aerodynamic drag.” . . . “There are above-dash displays showing the side view camera stream in a bilateral panaromic configuration, which gives the driver a far better image than a rear view mirror ever could.”
This is something discussed awhile back on this forum. Is there any chance cameras and displays could still make it into the Volt?
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:00 am)Argghhh!!! A concept that they have spent thousands of man hours building, and even more time doing PR crap for, and they haven’t even found time to put it in a wind tunnel? I mean, why bother with something as unimportant aerodynamics. This is another symptom of the stupidity that has become the cultural norm at GM.
I blame it on the MBA culture of modern american business, the engineers don’t get nearly as much input as the beancounters and the PR flacks.
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:06 am)very cool cadi.
how come the Spark isn’t an EREV? I would think GM would want a compact to compete with the MinI-E
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:14 am)A stunning design, out of my price bracket, but I’m sure buyers would not mind a 35 mile range if they can keep the concept shape.
Hell, with the exchange rate here, I’m looking at ~NZD70k if the Volt comes out at USD40k.
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:36 am)#13 FME III
This is the major difference between the concept Volt and the Concept Converj. The concept Volt was basically just that – a concept. Major hardware and components did not exist.
With the Converj, we are looking at the next logical step from the Volt. We still utilize the same battery pack, ICE, drivetrain uprated from 111 to 120 kW, and many of the same electrical systems (AC, power steering, wipers, etc,). Given the basic look of the car, the removal of rearview mirrors, a full belly pan, and special wheels to minimize air flow, I believe this car will have an “adequate” aerodynamic profile.
Since many on this site have complained about the Volt’s styling (versus the concept), the smaller wheels, and the desire for more performance, GM has listened and this is their response.
I don’t know what the pricing might be for this, but I am truly impressed by this vehicle!
I expect it will make its way to production, perhaps on an assembly line next to the Volt (since they will likely share many of the same components).
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:54 am)No doubt, this is a beautiful car. I agree with Lyle. This is probably the most beautiful electric car ever conceived in concept form. I still do not like the name, Converj. It just seem so… UnAmerican, somehow. Doesn’t quite sound like the kind of car the “average” Joe would ever aspire to own. Sounds to snobbish. too aloof, to European, maybe. Just not a name I could settle into. But, that is just my opinion. But, still, a beautiful car. Sounds like a price between $80,000 and $100,000. Hey, we got to pay for the Volt technology somehow, don’t we?
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:58 am)Take me off the volt list put me on the Converj List – If its priced around 60K – I will take it!!
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:04 am)#7 Yoshi
I find myself agreeing with you about GM having a “mild” hybrid car under $20,000. I have been saying for months they need to develop a Prius-like car as Honda has done. GM has the technology and the skills to do so. They have gone off on the two-mode hybrid road and I can’t see where it is going to help them in the small hybrid market. The market where a hybrid car gets over 5 MPG. My opinion is that GM will sell plenty of Volts and Converjs, but will lose many sales to Toyota and Honda. The Volt will have many competitors that will split the Volt-type vehicle market. The Converj may not have any immediate competitors, but they will come soon. GM needs to learn to compete with Toyota and Honda at the level where they are eating GM’s lunch. And it is not in the Volt-type vehicle market. IMO.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:11 am)It’s a beautiful car. Just the one for people who kan’t spell kadalak but are rich.
Doesn’t matter ==> it’s only a GM concept, and we all know what that means.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:15 am)#25 RB
Put me in the group of people who says, yes, this is a concept car, but one based on the Volt. Being that, it should be very close to a production design. The wind tunnel may very likely tweak the design some, but not too much variation. I believe it is very close to what it will look like when it hits the showrooms in 2011 or 2012. The sooner the better. I say bring the Volt out in April 2010 and the Converj out in September or October 2010.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:15 am)#18 ziv said
“…and they haven’t even found time to put it in a wind tunnel?”
————————————————————————–
Wind tunnel is closed due to failure to pay the electric bill
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:28 am)What is with the “J”? No explanation on the name? Where did it come from? Get them to pass on the “J”.
Red HHR (Oh I do like the car, and will like it even more after it is “tweaked”)
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:32 am)When I win the lottery…
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:34 am)I can do it too…
I’ve got an urj to splurj on the Converj, but the final price might make me regurj.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:44 am)Nice concept…but one thing I am tired of seeing is cameras instead of rear view mirrors.
Nice to look at, but the best camera in the world doesn’t have the resolution of a flat piece of glass.
And more importantly, the glass can project a 3 dimensional image…the camera cannot.
The glass can change the field of view by shifting your head to the left or right, camera cannot.
And finally the glass is much more tolerant of off nominal lighting conditions, the camera is not.
There is a reason we still use mirrors instead of cameras, despite all the concept vehicles that are trying to use them.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:44 am)The unfortunate thing is that even if this car (and the Volt) are built..They are going to be priced out of the average person’s price range..
GM is not going to survive on luxury and expensive “electric” cars when Toyota and Honda and yes even Ford are already getting out of the gate with their hybrids and selling them for 1/2 of what GM is looking to sell these hybrids for..
“Electrify” the Cobalt, Cruse, the “S10″ type trucks and the other $15 – 20 K vehicles.. add say $5 k to the base price…and you have unlimited sales potential.. With all the bail outs and such… If GM still cannot see the light… They should close the doors… I want my Volt .. have deposit in hand… but if it is so overpriced compared to say the new Ford Fusion, or the Prius or the Honda…I am going to go for the best Value for MY Dollar.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:46 am)GM said it wasn’t put in the wind tunnel yet! We all know what that means. This fantastic looking car will go the same way as the Volt Concept car went, from exciting to boring. GM continues to excite us with concept cars they know they will never biuld and we keep falling for it. How many times, how many times?
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:52 am)Can car headlights really be LED’s? I know LED’s can be very bright to look directly at (I own a Samsung LED back-lit LCD TV at it is bright) but I did not think even the current brightest LED’s cast out enough light to project a beam sufficient for car headlights.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:56 am)Great car. This is a car I’d like to have — seats four and a better level of finish. If they go to production I’ll lease a Volt for three years and then get this. I’d also like as much performance as possible, not that you need it but just to dispel the notion that an EV are downgraded Prius. Lutz has said that there is room for more battery. Price? I’d say it would have to be in the mid 50′s. Otherwise you’re getting to the Fisker Karma range and that has to be a lot to contend with.
I also love the cameras replacing the rear view mirrors. That should measurably reduce aero drag and give you much better views. The use of the LEDs is inspired. Overall the most exciting concept. When you compare this to the Toyota in-town concept you’re looking at a technological and an aesthetic chasm.
One interesting point of note is that cars are increasingly being purchased on the basis of the interface and features. Chrysler iterated and reiterated this point during its press conference and it’s quite valid. Cars are of such good quality today that everyone expects great performance and reliability, so the differentiating factors are increasingly about the electronic offerings — NAS, mp3 players, and connectivity.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:59 am)#34 BobS says
“..but I did not think even the current brightest LED’s cast out enough light to project a beam sufficient for car headlights.”
———————————————————
In concept they do
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:02 am)#36 RB says “In concept they do”.
I’m not exactly sure what you mean but I interpret it as “in the fantasy world of concept vehicles LED headlights work.”
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:05 am)#32 Ray says
“The unfortunate thing is that even if this car (and the Volt) are built..They are going to be priced out of the average person’s price range..”
——————————————————————
Maybe it is just a matter of time, for a new technology. After some more development takes place in the more expensive range, perhaps costs will be driven down to a mujch lower level and there will be relatively inexpensive Voltecj cars.
/just putting in random js for the fun of it
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:08 am)Nice car. I’d like to have one.
The whole world in on the Verj as these details emerj on the Converj.
Go GMj !
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:11 am)#31 scott1000
I agree. I think a video monitor is “cool”, and i’m sure it helps the aerodynamics, but its not a true replacement to a mirror. Now if they put infrared cameras in there so u can see at night, it would actually be an advantage, but i doubt they did that.
I’m also skeptical about LED headlights. I have some very powerful LED flashlights.. that shoot a stong beam of light, but that beam is very narrow. It is not like an incandescent or halogen light that spreads more light around. Its more like a laser. This worries me.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:17 am)10-88
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:26 am)Fisker?
And where would you buy one of those?
It’s the Orlando that needs to go Voltec next.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:28 am)#41 noel park
10-88? I don’t get it.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:35 am)Nevermind, I got it.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:36 am)Goal: blow Tesla awayyyyyy?
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:41 am)I can’t afford to buy a Cadillac NOW. What makes Lutz think I’ll be buying one when it’s electric?
– # 287 on the list.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:42 am)Though the interior is a little bit like the Enterprise (but still good looking), I would be shocked if this car hit production anything like this. What happened to the Volt should remind us that GM is still GM.
Some of the new photos show angles that make me think more of a Lamborghahi than Caddy.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:55 am)A little out of the Caddy topic but if can make big cars, you ought to be able to build small ones, an excerpt of the LA Times, source :
http://www.latimes.com/classified/automotive/highway1/la-fi-autoshow12-2009jan12,0,4008125.story
“”We’ve been thinking about dipping our toe into this market for a while now,” said Troy Clarke, GM’s president of North America. He predicts that the Spark, which will go on sale in Europe next year prior to coming stateside in 2011, could be a big success.
“It could be a 90,000 or more volume vehicle,” he said, adding that the company could consider an electric version.”
Well a “big” Volt for the well doing, a medium one for the upper middle class and a small one for the general public ? Your bets.
Regards , NPNS
JC
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:58 am)Hi BobS,
LED’s are getting brighter all the time. The brightest commercially available are about 5 watts. A low beam head light is about 50 watts. An array of ten LED’s would easily do duty as a headlight. The only real hold back as of right now is cost. As with the “Voltec” they a working to bring the cost down. Also the LED is more efficient, less energy is used to produce unnecessary wavelengths.
Red HHR
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:07 pm)This is a pretty tight a$$ car. I can’t afford one though. The Volt is more in my price range as well as it’s more for my family. Good going for GM on this one however, show me something AFTER the wind tunnel test & Tweak because I hate the Bait & Switch.
Actually, if GM can move the tech to a “Luxury” type they can move it to the other end of the financial feasability spectrum for broke Trailer Park folks like me. Give me a bare bones E-REV pickup truck for $22K and I’ll be happy as a Pirate with a bottle of Rum!
Just build my Volt DANGIT!
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:12 pm)Luxury meets electric huh Lutz? Did he copy that phrase directly from Fisker? Once again GM is trying to play catch up, but missed the boat. And Fiskers will be rolling down the road at the end of this year, not 2014.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:18 pm)That car is “Elegant” if I ever saw an Elegant car that one fits the description to a ” T ” , Converj , is a meaningless series of letters and doesn’t mean anything to anybody in American English. Even the first three letters of Elegant are part of electric.
I have to say that this design as is , could possibly be the nicest designed car ever . Assemble them in Shanghai GM factory and ship them to America by the boat load (costs less than $1000. per car) , GM would make a lot of people happy and they could turn a nice profit on every one that they can build.
Make a beautiful four door Buick version called the “Electra” and GM would have a hard time making enough of them to meet the Chinese market as the Chinese with money like two cars very much , one is called the Buick and the other is called a Cadillac ( they also like Audi ,BMW , and Benz as they call the Mercedes)
I like the idea and the technology of the Volt , but the look leaves me cold as it is too plain Jane and common for this technology , but I hate silver , gray , and charcoal so maybe I am a bit prejudiced anyway. The Cadillac concept is exciting and expected , where as the Volt is not exciting looking even if the technology is world class.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:24 pm)I still like the “Coupe de Volt” name.
Lyle, when will you start a wait list for it?
It’s way too rich for my blood. Sign me up. Max out your credit cards for America! If you don’t, the Federal Government will!
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:27 pm)You guys are killing me with the dropped-in js throughout your comments. I can’t help but wonder if we are seeing the age of the j-car being ushered in. Just keep it up and I will keep laughing.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:39 pm)I’m for as many applications of “Voltec” as possible. But since the Converj basically uses the same “guts” as the Volt, I’m curious as to whether a software or firmware upgrade will be available for the Volt that will give it better acceleration. My commute is short enough were I’d be willing to give up some range for a little peppier acceleration. Better yet, like the photos of the concept show, have several modes available: Eco, Normal, and Power.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:43 pm)I forgot to mention the OLED’s in the interior. Those have a history of failing (esp if the get moisture on them). Add that to the worry list.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:44 pm)Wow! This car looks fantastic! @ $60K put me on the waiting list. Although I think $60-70K is more realistic.
From certain angles, it reminds me of the VOLT prototype. Hopefully this model will make it to market without too many styling changes.
NPNS, GO EV for Volt in 2011, Converj in 2012 (in quantity)!
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:48 pm)Yes, The design is very striking, and it will get a lot of attention based on looks alone, but with a 0-60 time of 8 seconds it won’t live up to the demands of luxury sports car buyers.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:55 pm)#54 N Riley
One more…
Concept cars are not real, they are a miraj.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:55 pm)Apparently none of you have priced any currently produced Cadillacs lately. The last time I did several months ago the price at the dealer was over $50,000. Based on that, I believe this new J-car is going to be closer to $75,000 than $50,000. Cadillac owners are used to paying premium prices and I don’t thing GM will let this opportunity slip past them to charge a premium price for this dandy looking car. The Cadillac market will just eat them up.
Jan 13th, 2009 (12:56 pm)Thanks, ThombDbhomb. That’s another good one.
Jan 13th, 2009 (1:22 pm)I worry about the OLED as well k-dawg. That is still very new tech for consumer markets and you wonder about lifecycle issues. An 11″ OLED Sony TV was over $1000 so this isn’t a Chevy option to say the least.
The car is doable, but something you would expect out of Italy not GM.
Jan 13th, 2009 (1:26 pm)I was smelling volt look in that design ( i think if you change the grill part its mostly volt on the curves ).
May for this they may put 150kw generator and 150 kw engine so that it does not suffer the “never ending hill ” syndrome.
Cadi looks great but my pocket ?? no worries, I took my lotto 649
Jan 13th, 2009 (1:38 pm)LED’s are more reliable. Incandescent bulbs have a filament that “Floats” between two electrodes. Bumps or sudden jarring can cause the filament to shake/sway under the intense heat on normal operation. It also has an inherent flaw on when you first turn it on. That’s the worst thing you can do to any incandescent because it essentially floods/blasts the filament with electrons when it’s cold. The inital shock is where most failures occur.
Relative to the operating temp of an incandescent, LED’s run and starts cooler. Also, the diode itself is “Die Attached” to a substrate instead of “Floating”. This makes it far less suseptable to shaking/jarring. Don’t get me werong, it still get warm. Just not scorching hot.
It’s flaw….the price tag.
Personally I would prefer LED’s because of it’s reliability.
Jan 13th, 2009 (1:43 pm)I fear all this electric car stuff is not far removed from the flying car promises we got in the 50′s. Others have said it here, and I’ll say it too: I’m ready to buy an electirc car. I just want a plug because that’s what I want. But there are many things in this world I can’t afford.
I am not convinced there is any car manufacturer serious about actually producing an electric car. Yes, you can buy a Tesla. You can also buy a Bronco converted with lead acid cells. Both are essentially hobbyist items, not production automobiles. GM is touting their “green” attitude with commercials about the Volt. I’m not convinced it isn’t BS, and that deep down, they have no intention of producing this car in numbers.
I have $5k cash for a deposit today. Show me a Volt w/ a sub $30k price tag, and I’ll buy right now, Mr. Lutz. Betcha you can’t deliver.
Jan 13th, 2009 (2:22 pm)#43 ThomDbhomb:
It’s a faux play on the old two-way radio “10 code”, 10-4, 10-7, 10-9, 10-20, etc, etc. 10-88 = “You must be mistaking me for someone who gives a s**t.”
I cannot believe that GM, with the wolf at the door, is fiddling around with something like this. When I see Bob Lutz pontificating at the auto show, I just reach for the remote.
#48 Jean-Charles Jacquemin:
GM is thinking about “dipping its toe” in this market? After how many Fits, Yarises and Versas have been sold? Ay, yay, yay!
To answer your question, I would buy an electric or hybrid Spark in a heartbeat. Smaller and lighter is better, as I have said from the beginning. But when, oh when, might it be available? And BTW, I wonder where it would be built.
I am as die hard a Chevy supporter anyone here, but sometimes I just have to grind my teeth and wring my hands. Where will it all end??
Jan 13th, 2009 (2:35 pm)Ok people -
1) I can’t understand why everyone is posting about mild hybrids and saying GM is stupid not to build more. Mild hybrids are not worth it! They are not the way of the future. They may currently be cheaper, but completely electrically driven E-Flex is far superior from an engineering (and environmental/operating cost) standpoint to the Rube Goldberg machine that is a parallel hybrid. When GM drives the cost down, no-one will be making parallel hybrids anymore.
2) Looking at the Converj, I think it will change far less than the Volt from concept to production. The primary reason for this is that the drivetrain is already accommodated by the body and won’t change, and the body already looks sufficiently aerodynamic. They’ll certainly hit the 40 AER range because they can use lessons learned from the Volt and also can spend more money on lighter materials/etc. They won’t settle for less than 40 AER in my opinion, since that is the Voltec trademark range.
my dos centavos
Jan 13th, 2009 (2:42 pm)Bruce Springsteen wants to know if it comes in pink.
Jan 13th, 2009 (2:43 pm)GM should just make a 60 mile range Spark BEV or a small Pickup. Price it at $18K. This would make the first viable BEV in the US for the GP, The Tesla is not viable for the GP nor is anything over $35K.
They need to get back to basics on their products. Sell it with no standard features. Everything else would be an upgrade from the dealer.
No Power Windows
No Power Door Locks
No Power Sunroof (Or No sunroof at all)
No Power adjusting Seats
No Seat Warmers
No Power Side mirrors
No Power Trunk latch
No Radio (Get an iPod)
For those like myself that have a small budget, this car would be ideal. I’m tired of donating to the OPEC Foundation.
I just need a commuter BEV car.
Jan 13th, 2009 (2:47 pm)#66 noel park says “When I see Bob Lutz pontificating at the auto show, I just reach for the remote.”
I’m completely the opposite. I think the guy is brilliant and knows exactly how all the pieces fit together. He’s said that the Volt will not save GM, and that GM needs to get its product line sorted. If you look at what has happened since he’s gotten to GM, GM has a good lineup of cars if you count the announced cars like the Cruze and the Spark.
Fit and finish it up. Design is far better. Reliability is better. So what GM is producing is good. But that’s not enough. What has to happen is that consumer understand that, and the only way they’ll understand that is if they come into a showroom and see the vehicles. For that you need a halo vehicle. The Converj is just that — a halo vehicle that leverages Voltec platform to drive traffic. Most people will probably not spend the money on a Volt or a Converj, but they might come away with a Malibu or a CTS. Very astute marketing actually.
#68 ccombs – yeah, what you (said I’ll ditto).
Jan 13th, 2009 (2:49 pm)#66 noel park
Hang in there. The Converj might not be the car you want, but it might make GM some money and facilitate the propagation of other E-REVs. Relatively speaking, it probably didn’t take a lot of resources to put the Converj concept together. Let the technology blossom where it finds a favorable environment. The small car E-REV/BEV market might be a more difficult competition.
Jan 13th, 2009 (2:57 pm)#66 noel park says
“I cannot believe that GM, with the wolf at the door, is fiddling around with something like this. ”
————————————————————————
I feel much the same way, but thinking about the situation I wonder if what you said is right but in the opposite order. Namely, because the wolf is at the door GM has to fiddle around with cars like this, keeping in mind that the expensive car/truck market is the (only) market where GM has been profitable in recent years.
Maybe with time GM can successfully reach down again and be profitable at the less expensive end of the market, but as Mr. Wagoner noted yesterday, negotiations with creditors and the UAW have not gone as rapidly as might have been hoped. Until then, GM is trying to get some income where it can, perhaps.
Other news reports today say that GM/Wagoner has shifted to supporting higher gas taxes, in the hope that so doing will motivate customers to pay more for the less expensive cars, so that they can sell them profitably. But, that has not happened yet.
Jan 13th, 2009 (3:03 pm)63 UNNI
You smell Volt in the design?
Well, they both have four wheels and a windshield..
I think you need a new set of glasses on your nose…
I LOVE the look – too bad $60-70,000 is out of my price range…
More lottery tickets needed…
Jan 13th, 2009 (3:14 pm)I’m sure we will see a great variety in types and sizes before many years pass by.
Some of us need to haul “stuff” and need room like pickups, mini vans and others capable of hauling 4X 8 sheets of building material and 2X4 etc. Yet, without burning petroleum anymore than absolutely necessary.
I think it would bother me to have to tie plywood and lumber to the roof of my new Converj. At least when it was brand new.
Maybe after a month or so when the newness is gone………………….
Jan 13th, 2009 (3:33 pm)#69 CaptJackSparrow
—-
If you want a no frills, all electric, commuter car, go buy a Kurrent. They make them right in Wixom Michigan (about 30 minutes from Detroit)
$9800
http://www.getkurrent.com
Jan 13th, 2009 (3:38 pm)If GM does create a production version of this car as a standalone model (let’s call it the ETC for Electric Touring Coupe), how would it stack up against Cadillac’s rumored ATS range? The ATS range is supposed to compete with BMW’s 3 Series and MB’s C-Class. If this is the future design language of Cadillac, won’t the ATS range look completely like the ETC (which would be a production version of the Converj)? Then that’ll make the ETC not stand out. It’ll look like an ATS coupe or something. Am I making any sense?
I want them to produce the Converj, but I’m trying to see how it would fit in the lineup I guess.
Jan 13th, 2009 (3:48 pm)Definitely a cool car. But with the cab-forward design, it looks like a car that does 0-60 in about 5-6 seconds, not 8. If it sells well, I don’t care what electronics are inside. But if I were going to buy it, it would have to be a lot faster than a Volt. A sports car doesn’t need a back seat or a huge trunk (though either or both would be nice)…maybe they can cram a bigger battery pack in there, and a bigger motor.
Jan 13th, 2009 (3:52 pm)@k-dawg
Sorry, I forgot to mention need to get on the freeway. The Kurrent is an NEV….
Jan 13th, 2009 (4:13 pm)#77 Jake,
I think 5-6 sec for 0 to 60 seems appropriate.
Maybe this is where a good ultra-capacitor could help.
Jan 13th, 2009 (4:48 pm)#78 CaptJackSparrow
———
Then buy one of these.. i think they are like $10K. I sat on one at the store.. not bad.
http://www.vectrix.com/
Jan 13th, 2009 (5:11 pm)LEDs as headlights are already on the road — for people who would pick up a Converj as a car for the kids:
http://www.ledsmagazine.com/news/3/10/23
I’m surprised that no one has mentioned LEDs as a more efficient alternative for an electric car. They use something like 1/10th the electricity for a given amount of light than incandescent.
All this “j-dropping” is about to verj on the absurd.
Jan 13th, 2009 (5:12 pm)@k-dawg 80
Gonna be difficult putting the kids on that on the way to work….
But that looks pretty fun to ride just for the heIIofit.
Thanks for the link. I’ll put it in my favs, just in case…..lol.
Jan 13th, 2009 (5:28 pm)I think GM’s engineers ought to shoot for under 7 seconds for the 0-60 mph time. The Converj will be competing against cars like the Tesla Roadster, the Fisker Karma, and probably a couple other ones that haven’t been announced yet. It needs to have pretty good acceleration. 0-60 in 7-8 seconds is “adequate” I guess. 0-60 in 5-7 seconds would definitely get people’s attention.
I bet they can program the software so it has 2 or 3 different driving modes … like Economy, Mountain, Performance, etc. Program it so the driver can have the best of both worlds. Excellent performance if you want to drive your friend around to impress them with the acceleration and torque. Economy mode if you’re fighting the traffic to get home from work or using your cruise control on the highway.
GM should bring in OUTSIDE people to give their feedback during the Converj development. People like the ones who do the road tests at the car magazines, JD Power, Consumer Reports, etc. This Converj needs to really be high quality and reliable. Not just the powertrain … the WHOLE CAR, the driving experience, etc. This car will probably be a “flagship” or “halo” car for Cadillac like the Volt will for Chevy.
Jan 13th, 2009 (5:41 pm)Let me say again to GM….again because I e mailed you many times over the years and left my personal ell number…telling you to build the beautiful concept cars you always show and in the end…”all show and no go”.
Build this car on the same line as the Volt. Price issue SOLVED!
This will revive your company!
I hope you understand how important a design like this truly is.
Get my e mail from Lyle if you need an eye for great design. I’m not joking. Many bright people on this site can really help GM.
Seriously Bob this is like the response you got when you created the Viper with Shelby. Do it man!
Keep the people that did the AZTEK away from all of it. In fact make Rick hang out with them as a reminder of what NOT to do. And to #81 poster above….LED have been out for many many years. We all know the difference years ago, that’s why no one brings it up.
Jan 13th, 2009 (5:45 pm)I love this car except for the rear.
Jan 13th, 2009 (6:14 pm)As for the LED headlights…. Yes LEDs can be as bright as Halogen bulbs, but they are different. We are developing LED lights at NASA that are every bit as bright as the halogen lights.
Red HHR – You can’t compare watts of two lights of different technology. The LED is going to use less than 1/4 of the power of the halogen bulb to produce the same light.
But the catch is that although you can put a lens and diffuser on the LED most people are going to mistake it’s pure light for harshness, and complain about the deep shadows it creates.
I don’t know the legality of using them, but the energy savings on an electric vehicle make it worth pursuing.
Jan 13th, 2009 (6:30 pm)Dodj
sabotaj
bilj
jeneral motors
hoj poj
Jan 13th, 2009 (6:48 pm)Bill #21
“With the Converj, we are looking at the next logical step from the Volt. We still utilize the same battery pack, ICE, drivetrain uprated from 111 to 120 kW, and many of the same electrical systems (AC, power steering, wipers, etc,). Given the basic look of the car, the removal of rearview mirrors, a full belly pan, and special wheels to minimize air flow, I believe this car will have an “adequate” aerodynamic profile.
I agree except that the Volt would have been the next logical step to follow the Converj. I have always felt a Caddy would have been the better choice for the first (most expensive) EREV. That’s all water under the bridge now and for it to be done backward than not at all. I think the basic shape can be kept except for perhaps some smoothing of the creases in the front corners. The other production changes will be:
-Side and rear view mirrors, unless the highway regulations have been changed to allow cameras in place of mirrors
-smaller wheels (more likely 18″-19″)
-LED deadlights to HID (multicolor LED tail lights may be able to stay if regulations permit. These are acutally most likely done with 2 LEDs very close together)
-Some buttons with smaller screen or at least tactile bumps if screens stay this large
Notice they have made it a four seater out of the gate and are using the Volt Voltec powertrain. I believe the Volt was a wish from Lutz and some others in GM but was mearly a true concept without the needed real production intention and support from the rest of the top brass. The Converj appears to be something that has full support and that GM wants to build but they are needing a public nod.
They can add 1 or 2KWh to keep the range similar to the Volt or let the range slip a couple of miles. Either way, the price won’t change that much and demand should be similar.
Jan 13th, 2009 (6:54 pm)Just as FYI, they announced the winner for the “Best Concept Vehicle in the EyesOn Design Awards” for the NAIAS.
Converj won.
Propaganda picture:
http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/EyesOnDesignConverj02.jpg?download=050163
Converj Design Team Leader Simon Cox (left) holds the trophy with Executive Director of Advanced Design David Rand. The Converj concept design team members are (l to r) Jeff Perkins, Robin Kreig, Brian Smith, David Leary, James Gasparotto and Ben Walsh.
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:20 pm)Since the discussion of LEDs is prevalent here, I’ll weigh in a little more since I can be halfway unintelligible on this subject.
True there aren’t single LEDs available yet that are capable of producing enough light while lasting an acceptable amount of time. They can be made in arrays that will do the job. The biggest issue for these type of high output applications is still price. HID has good efficiency and they have a price advantage. If this car gets put into prodcution design soon, they will probably use HID for the headlights. If the design doesn’t get done for another year or two, LEDs may be used. LEDs have heat issues that are different from halogen and HID. The LED output goes down as the junction heats up. So, the price has to come down and the heat has to be managed properly or the headlights will put out significantly more light in the winter than in the summer. This can be controlled by cooling the junction and varying the power to the LED.
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:20 pm)Someday … I want to get me a Cadillac Converj that has a “hybrid battery/ultracapacitor unit” on board.
That way you get the bursts of speed and quick charge capability from the ultracapacitor as well as the greater storage capacity from the latest lithium ion battery technologies. The ultracapacitor will be a bit like the fast RAM on your computer and the lithium ion battery will be like your hard drive.
Who knows, we might even be able to get rid of the damn “range extender” IC engine sooner than people think. Especially if new technologies like EEStor’s ultracaps and these graphene based ultracapacitors become the huge breakthrough we’d all like to see. Graphene is considered “the new silicon” in the semiconductor industry. A new “wonder material”. It could be even bigger in the auto industry.
http://earth2tech.com/2009/01/13/quercus-trusts-latest-power-storage-play-graphene-energy/#more-19991
http://earth2tech.com/2008/02/04/the-rise-of-the-ultracapacitor/
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10601407
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:26 pm)Statik #89
Why does the lead designer always where a turtle-neck (usually black)?
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:36 pm)RePost:
_____________________________________________________
Bob Lutz above says:
“It clearly shows what a Cadillac electric vehicle could look like, and clearly indicates that global luxury customers can have a car that has both strong design and electric propulsion with a total range of hundreds of anxiety-free miles.”
—
…”could look like”?
How about a “will look like”?
Fisker will beat GM/Cadillac to the “will” with the 2010 available Fisker Karma http://www.fiskerautomotive.com . Fisker will be using a GM ICE for the range extender therefore GM is somewhat participating in a 2010 EREV luxury car launch.
I have become a big fan of the GM Volt Program (except for the taxpayer bailout/loan part). I very much desire to see GM succeed with both the GM Chevy Volt and the Volt EREV technology being extended to other GM lines such as the above “concept” Cadillac Converj. I give GM credit for all it has accomplished thus far with the Volt Program. The Volt Program has also given much needed inspiration to other automakers. But I’m concerned about GM’s ability to compete with smaller upstarts that are demonstrating their ability to develop quicker than GM. GM needs to keep in mind that small CA technology related upstarts have a deep history of growing large and becoming serious competitors. A Tesla Motors producing 150 EVs in 2008, 800 EVs in 2009 (projected), may prove to be capable of producing 10,000 EVs in 2011, 20,000 EVs in 2012, etc…
EVs will be evaluated by consumers more along the lines of an electric appliance (like a computer) and therefore the market will not support the slower “concept”/”could look like” long development life cycles that the traditional larger automakers are more familiar with.
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:46 pm)Maan … these graphene based ultracapacitors sound like they might actually be making it out of the lab and into the cars before long. Maybe by 2013 or so. Who knows?
Battery/ultracap energy storage units would be perfect for the more expensive cars like the Cadillac Emerj and Fisker Karma. GM, Tesla and Fisker could go into a joint venture and share parts. Why not?
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/ultracapacitors-an-inevitable-component-inside-electric-cars-5517.html
“The ideal configuration, he said, might be for a car to have two-thirds of its electrical storage dedicated to batteries and one-third dedicated to ultracapacitors.”
“The company’s prototypes can store two to three times the performance of standard, existing ultracapacitors and the company hopes to scale that up to seven times as much, said Anthony.”
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:47 pm)I get the feeling that GM will be known for making concept cars rather than the real thing.
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:55 pm)I think the government needs to give the electric auto future a positive shock by taxing fossil fuel and decreasing the same amount from income tax. Perkins is right, we can’t continue to send $700 billion to foreign govts for oil. That way anyone can drive any size vehicle they want and also at the same time decide how much tax they want to pay.
Jan 13th, 2009 (7:57 pm)Did anyone see the huge puff piece on Fisker in the current AW (the magazine formerly known as Autoweek). Outsource all the parts and have it assembled by Valmet in Finland, LOL.
They are accelerating their release by taking their suppliers’ word that their stuff will function as advertised, thus getting around the laborious and time consuming testing done by the large manufacturers. I am not making this up. Read it for yourself.
Quote from the Great Man himself, page 31:
“Skipping validation is risky – the kind of risk that mass-manufacturers can’t take, ‘There’s a certain calculated risk, but it saves an amazing amount of time. Hopefully, there is no problem,’ says Fisker. ‘If one comes up, we’ll solve it as fast as we can.’”
My take away from that? Don’t buy a 2010.
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:09 pm)As the Senior Resident Optimista here, I’ll throw out a couple of borderline-reasonable thoughts.
IF GM’s foray into the battery production and education area is successful, and IF GM then reaches economies of scale and/or technological advances in that area which lowers the battery price per KWh, GM should have an enormous number of combinations and permutations of practically any size, price, speed, range, etc vehicle imaginable (and I’ve got quite the imagination)(g). Getting the initial Volt’s wheels on the ground will, in many respects, be the greatest hurtle! Add to that the potential, er, grasp of the cutting edge battery technology (aka Jewels), GM has the potential of regaining the high ground and keeping it.
So the 7/4/2010 release of the Volt -our Independence Day, may be what we talk to our kids about, as they feed us our gruel in the Old Folks Home in 2015 (2025 for Statik).
Be well,
Tag
LJGT V WOTR!! NPNS
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:17 pm)If this thing actually made it to production, it might just mean that Cadillac has one of the most exciting and sought-after luxury cars in the world.
How long has it been since that has been true?
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:43 pm)#93 CDAVIS Says: “Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!”
————————————————————————————–
The United States imports roughly 2/3 of the oil that we consume. Oil consumption breaks down roughly as follows:
• 44% gasoline (mostly for passenger vehicles)
• 17% diesel (mostly for heavy duty long distance travel)
• 5% jet fuel
• 15% fuel oil (home heating and industrial)
• 19% other (petro-chemical, plastics, fertilizer, etc.)
Let’s say EREV cars got to 80% market penetration. That would be really good! 80% of the gasoline for those cars would be converted to electricity. The total amount of oil consumed by the U.S. would be 28% less (80% * 80% * 44%). While this is a big deal, it’s less than half the amount of oil we currently import.
So it’s obvious to me that we need other solutions in addition to plug-ins. These would probably include:
• Ethanol from non-food sources ( http://www.coskata.com )
• Bio-diesel from algae ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxNeBQCRv1c)
• More domestic oil production (stripper wells, oil shale, tar sands, offshore drilling)
• Conservation
Jan 13th, 2009 (8:58 pm)Great! Put me down for two (one for the little lady). Since shorting the petroleum futures market we got us a pile a dough in need of disbursement. This here electrified Caddy is just the ticket for boomers with portfolios and GM should sell huge numbers. Very hot design.
BTW, OLED technology has been around for twenty years and is used across a wide range of consumer electronics devices. It is far superior to LCD. Stop in at a Sony Style store and check out their 9″ DVD player to see how truly brilliant these displays can be.
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:04 pm)DaveG@100
You kinda make importing half as much oil seem small thing. Although I agree that we need to have alternatives, $150 Billion a year would be a pretty good start. No?
Be well,
Tag
LJGT V WOTR!! NPNS
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:09 pm)#98 Tagamet Says: “… IF GM then reaches economies of scale and/or technological advances in that area which lowers the battery price per KWh, GM should have an enormous number of combinations and permutations of practically any size, price, speed, range, etc vehicle imaginable …”
————————————————————————————–
It’s not just cost. There is also the issue of energy density (KWh per pound). If the cost goes down, then many small and some mediums sized cars at all price points can go EREV. But in order to get larger heavier cars to go EREV, they will need much better energy density specs for the battery.
By the way, I like cinnamon with my gruel…
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:19 pm)#103 Dave G says “But in order to get larger heavier cars to go EREV, they will need much better energy density specs for the battery.”
———————————————————-
That’s not necessarily a problem, in that a larger heavier car can have a bigger battery. The unpleasant side effect is on the charging time, which then goes from long to longer
So maybe it is the latter that is more of a limit than the former.
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:19 pm)Dave!103 re “not just price”
That’s what I meant by “combinations and permutations of practically any size, price, speed, range, etc”
Be well,
Tag
PS Cinnamon sounds good.
LJGT V WOTR!! NPNS
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:20 pm)In the post Cox says “Fuel-efficient cars don’t have to look boring and undynamic.”
———————————————————-
How unkind. I trust he is not talking about any vehicles we know about.
Jan 13th, 2009 (9:25 pm)#102 Tagamet Says: “You kinda make importing half as much oil seem small thing. Although I agree that we need to have alternatives, $150 Billion a year would be a pretty good start. No?”
————————————————————————————–
It would be a fantastic start. A big deal.
I was just pointing out that it’s not the end-all solution that some people posintg here would imply. We need to be looking at other solutions besides plug-ins.
Jan 13th, 2009 (10:24 pm)Jackson
jscott1000
Koz
What about the OLED’s on the interior. I’ve heard a lot of bad press on those, and had some bad experience myself with them. I know they dont like moisture. How will they hold up in FL, or when Jr. spills his coke on them?
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:16 pm)kdawg #108
I can’t speak for OLEDs yet. They are very new and undergoing rapid development. Not much commercial usage yet. I did read something good about them recently but don’t remember the details.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:19 pm)RB #104
“That’s not necessarily a problem, in that a larger heavier car can have a bigger battery. The unpleasant side effect is on the charging time, which then goes from long to longer So maybe it is the latter that is more of a limit than the former.”
Larger battery just means more people will want to make a 240V outlet available or perhaps they will have to up the 8 amp charger.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:26 pm)Dave G #103
“It’s not just cost. There is also the issue of energy density (KWh per pound). If the cost goes down, then many small and some mediums sized cars at all price points can go EREV. But in order to get larger heavier cars to go EREV, they will need much better energy density specs for the battery.”
Gosh, all this technical Volt (EREV) discussion is making me forget what a TARP is. The larger vehicles can afford larger batteries and they also offer more opportunities to cut weight from other areas. Another problem is the RE needs to be more powerful too but there are lighter weight possibilities for the ICE. I certainly believe cost is coming down and energy density is going up for batteries so this may be a mute point. I think reducing battery cost is most important but energy density improvement are helpful too, just not essential.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:27 pm)KOZ@110
I’m looking forward to using the 240 power supply that used to power a hot tub here (Daughter was a division I Soccer Goalie – lots of bruises, concussions, an occasional Life Flight to the trauma center, etc). The tub has been empty for years, but that power supply should be sweet.
Be well,
Tag
LJGT V WOTR!! NPNS
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:32 pm)Tagamet #98
“So the 7/4/2010 release of the Volt -our Independence Day, may be what we talk to our kids about”
Agreed and that is why I have always felt that if they are able to release a BEV version sooner (which we all know they could) they should. The sooner the Volt wheels hit the road, the sooner major car production gets on the path we need it to be on and the sooner we will wean ourselves off of foreign oil.
NPNS! LJGTVWOTR!
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:38 pm)What GM ought to do, since Fisker Automotive is using GM’s engine as a range-extender, is try and borrow the Fisker Karma’s 300kwh (406hp) electric motor to put in the Converj. That should bring about 0-60 times in under 5 seconds and about 950 ft-lb of torque. Now THAT sounds like an Cadillac luxury performance coupe. And that’ll bring the Converj up to par with competition.
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:43 pm)KOZ@113
My thinking has kind of paralleled yours in that I think that a “good enough” plugin could have been released years ago. And I think we share the ” we’ve GOT to get off oil asap motive, BUT Gm has, shall we say, “a history” that they are swimming upstream against. NOW they need a bullet proof vehicle without the range anxiety (and baggage) that a BEV involves. Maybe Chrysler will release that snazzy tangerine sports car…..
Be well,
Tag
LJGT V WOTR!! NPNS
Jan 13th, 2009 (11:52 pm)GM Volt Fan #94
“Battery/ultracap energy storage units would be perfect for the more expensive cars like the Cadillac Emerj and Fisker Karma. GM, Tesla and Fisker could go into a joint venture and share parts. Why not?”
I’ve believed for a while now that the ultimate (at least near term) solution will be some form of hybrid energy storage solution. I don’t know if that will pan out for low range EREVs since today’s generation of batteries can supply power and energy density and life pretty effectively. With all of the battery research going on, I’m hoping somebody is looking for energy density improvement with cost reductions even if it is at the expense of life cycles and power density. Since the tradoff tends to be power/life for energy density, it is likely this can be achieved. The hybrid approach will have a long life high power repository combined with an inexpensive energy dense device. This is what AFS/Trinity and others are doing with the capacitor/battery solutions they are developing. Perhaps this will be the answer or it could be a combination of a small AltAir battery with a large higher energy A123 battery. There are plenty of other potential technologies but I do believe combining two will have a better chance than developing one cure all (at least in the near term).
Jan 14th, 2009 (12:02 am)Tag; Regarding good enough. I’ve been meaning to look at this idea for a while now. Good enough is a little different in mass marketing than in specialty vehicles.
I’ll set up a made up hypothetical to show what I mean. If a Ferrari driver blows a clutch and it costs more than a Chevy Chevette to fix it, the Ferrari driver will say, see that’s one more reason a Ferrari driver is special and the cars are definitely not for everyone! If a chevette driver breaks a 4 dollar window crank he’ll say, see this is the worst car ever made and recommend to everyone he knows. “Never ever buy a Chevy”.
Moreover a Tesla roadster can have huge body panel seams and everyone says That’s the nature of a new, high performance low volume carbon fiber electric sports car. But let the lowest priced Aveo (which is miracle of low priced mass production, that gets you to the same places as a Viper only more comfortably) offered have the same body gaps, and the public will scream, what a horrible failure, no wonder GM is heading toward imminent unstoppable death.
Jan 14th, 2009 (12:03 am)Tagamet #115,
I agree completely. I had given up on GM as dead years ago when they could have done something marketable (not EV1 as desgined) but chose not to. The Volt has reinvigorated some confidence in me in their ability to make good long term decisions. Perhaps I’m just giving a blind squirrel to much credit for finding a nut here but they are doing other things too. I would like to expand my earlier thought about the BEV version of the Volt. I understand your trepidation but done right I don’t see too much risk. I know the EREV will have a much wider audience and is the version that would mean the most. They would still release the EREV version as soon as they could but it might just take 6 months or so more to get it out. The BEV’s would be a less marketed, controlled release. This is all “post” speculation now anyway because they are past the point where this could be done. I just think it could have been done and would have been a slightly improved approach. It’s not a big deal though. The biggie is definitely getting the Volt EREV wheels on the road NEXT YEAR!!!
Jan 14th, 2009 (12:15 am)What if a Volt version or derivative was sold with a tiny little battery, say the size of today’s strong hybrids or Toyota’s Synergy system. Wouldn’t that allow GM to offer the price and performance of a strong Hybrid system and leapfrog both the current technology and added development costs? A lot of posts say GM is missing out by not having strong hybrids. Couldn’t this be a built in home grown solution that takes advantage of regenerative braking and already has a plug attached? Curious…
Jan 14th, 2009 (12:28 am)Koz.#116. I think the technologies potential is awesome…for something.
But I keep asking what problem does adding a low energy density, space hogging extreme voltage fluctuating device to an advanced Li Ion battery system solve.
Most people are having trouble getting usable amps for a 220 Volt system, unless something like Project Better Place explodes into fruition fast, how does any faster charging than what we have now ever occur. Is that why people like ultra-caps, fast charging?
Jan 14th, 2009 (12:37 am)Jeffhre #117: You have hit it exactly! The first E-REV’s have to be technological marvels and completely tested and well equipped. This will help get rid of the public perception of “cheap-a$$” GM vehicles.
If GM built a car like Capt Jack back at post #69 is asking for, it would be completely destroyed by the press. I can just imagine what would be said: For $18K, I don’t even get power windows? Is GM out of their minds? For about $6K more, I could get a Prius with all the added extras…..
And I can’t figure out how everyone thinks a GM BEV should be priced at $18K right now, when currently the price ranges for the currently available highway capable “economy” BEV’s are in the high $20K and up range. Maybe after GM has an assembly plant producing a million battery packs a year, the economies of scale will allow that, but today? It would be nice to see the Volts come off the assembly line first, don’t you think?
JMHO
Jan 14th, 2009 (12:51 am)Jeffhre
#119: Don’t forget that the Volt has no ICE to power the wheels directly, like the Prius hybrid, and that the ICE powered generator alone would not fully power the Volt. The battery pack is needed to assist in going up long inclines, etc. So a small pack would not work.
#120: Why do you think most people would have “trouble getting usable amps for a 220 Volt system”? I am lost on that one. And yes, the idea of the ultra-caps would be to reduce charging time, and also to allow the re-gen braking to re-capture more energy. In some previous discussion, it was said that the batteries would have difficulty taking the quick charge from re-gen while decending down a mountain, but the ultra-caps could store it, and then slowly pass it to the battery pack. At least that is how I recall it….
Jan 14th, 2009 (12:56 am)Tag: At what age do I have to start the gruel diet? I was hoping my teeth would last until 80 or so, and if the mind holds out, I would still remember what steak and lasagne taste like…..
So that gives me 25 more years before I have to give up my dreams of a Volt or a Converj!
But just in case, do they make lasagne flavored gruel???
Jan 14th, 2009 (1:28 am)Jim I; Oh yes energy from regen. I wonder how much of a difference that would make overall for most owners though.
Have you looked at your available, legal capacity to add a 220 amp circuit and how many amps you would have available. I think for most people it’s going to be difficult to charge faster than a Li Ion storage system can accept.
A small pack works for hybrids. They’re not exactly designed to be sports cars though. Tweaks would be needed but not like a new eflex chassis or anything. Just a few thoughts on approaching a problem with Voltec tech…
Jan 14th, 2009 (1:48 am)Jim I
Economies of scale, learning curves, any and everything else involved in the incredibly complex task of mass production will be required and more for this to work the way GM needs it to. Then the prices could hopefully be driven down. The work can go down scale in the future, but as you said they’ve got to get it right now, to enjoy that future.
Good night all, sleep sounds really good right now.
Jan 14th, 2009 (1:58 am)Converj…
An upscale eatery in DC that caters to Senators?
Jan 14th, 2009 (2:02 am)#104 RB,
#111 koz,
I also thought the same as you, but then GM said larger EREV vehicles would require significant advances in battery technology. The interview was right here on gm-volt.com. I think the article was around 4 or 5 months ago, but I’m not sure.
Jan 14th, 2009 (2:23 am)For everyone suggesting avoiding competing with Fisher Kharma or the Tesla;
Why?
Even a wounded GM would dominate the market. Those startups would be hard pressed to build 1000 units a year; GM could easily do that in a month.
Not to mention, why on earth would you just surrender that market segment?
Jan 14th, 2009 (2:40 am)WRT fast charging…
IIRC, the Li/Ion battery in the Volt is capable of being fully recharged in as little as 30 minutes.
What limits the plug-in charging rate is the charger itself – by design. The charger limits the current to around 11 amps. This is about what common outdoor extension cables are rated for. If you do the math, 11 amps at 110v will charge 8KWh in about 6.5 hours.
Remember that the Volt is supposed to be a car for the masses, not electrical engineers. If the charger had a mode that allows 30 amps of current, you just know that a lot of people will try to use that mode with a regular household circuit and cheap extension cable. In the best case, GM would get a ton of calls about issues with circuit breakers. In the worst case, GM would get sued for house fires that kill home owners.
Besides, I think fast charging is a bad idea in general. It’s much better for the electrical grid to charge at night. Fast charging doesn’t offer any advantage for night time charging. Fast charging during the day will cause more black-outs. When the 6-o’clock news blames EREVs for black-outs, this won’t help EREV sales.
In my mind, the goal is to get as many EREVs on the road as possible. I see fast charging as potentially harmful towards this goal.
Jan 14th, 2009 (5:45 am)hi Dave G #129,
“…the Li/Ion battery in the Volt is capable of being fully recharged in as little as 30 minutes.”
________________________________
I have 3 chargers for my RC airplanes. One is a “peak” charger that blasts my NiMh battery back to full in 30 minutes using my car battery as a power source. The other two are 110v home chargers. One will recharge in an hour. The other in 4 hours.
I feel the RC world has a little to do with the electric car craze. The gains we have seen in the RC battery world this last ten years are remarkable. 10 times the battery power at 1/4 the weight. Some flyers use lipo’s which are as small as cell phone batteries yet provide the power of what a cigarette pack size battery provided just a few years ago.
NLTDNS
No Lyle Test Drive, No Sale
=D~
Jan 14th, 2009 (8:40 am)#130 Dave K.,
Have you ever flown with wireless video, like this?
http://www.rangevideo.com/
Jan 14th, 2009 (9:17 am)If anything In the USA should be subsidized with our money( beyond the development of EVs and batteries) it is nuclear power. A limitless supply of electric power for business and industry would give the USA a huge competitive lift; electricity costs for malls, factories & etc are huge. The price of coal always comes up with oil and the stack emissions equipment on coal plants are causing huge rate increases with little benefit). A prevalence of nuke power in small plants would eliminate the need for global warming discussions(what a headache); it would stabilize the costs of oil and coal; it could ( with small plants located near loads) eliminate the need for new transmission lines ( which, by the way T. Boone, are length limited); it could displace home heating oil as well and maybe some diesel usage. So the only feasible alternative we have today for rapid and dependable and safe alternative energy is nuclear. Nobody argues against the alternatives but we need to make a move now, it’s already 30 years behind schedule.
Jan 14th, 2009 (11:45 am)#72 RB Says: “Other news reports today say that GM/Wagoner has shifted to supporting higher gas taxes, …”
————————————————————————————–
#96 David Says: “I think the government needs to give the electric auto future a positive shock by taxing fossil fuel and decreasing the same amount from income tax…”
————————————————————————————–
Raising gas taxes works when gas prices are cheap, but those same taxes become burdensome and unnecessary when gas prices are high.
Also, since U.S. oil consumption is only 44% gasoline, a gas tax wouldn’t encourage alternatives for the majority of our oil consumption.
I propose that the U.S. set a minimum price on oil of $65 / barrel. If oil prices fall below that, import tariffs would be raised just enough to meet the minimum price.
Jan 14th, 2009 (11:47 am)Uranium is not limitless. It is becoming more difficult and expensive to extract, much like any other subsurface energy source. Using up the highest quality and cheapest to extract sources first indicates we could be subject to forms of shortage and we can be held hostage to the import requirements of uranium putting us ultimately in the same unstable position as oil dependence does now. Lots of folks indicate how France gets so much of their energy from nukes and we in the US are just incompetent for not taking advantage.
T. Boone has a few good friends that are planning new nuclear sites adjacent to his proposed transmission line development. If this happens T. Boones lines will make him money with or without, 1) changes in water rights 2) Development of new wind corridors.
NUKE PLANT TOTAL (give or take 1or 2)
___________
France—–56
USA——–110
Jan 14th, 2009 (11:51 am)I like the styling, better than the volt (either version). But the interior has got to go. This futuristic obsession will pass, and hopefully quickly.
Jan 14th, 2009 (10:09 pm)anyone else done with fake cars. Perhaps stop spending money on concepts and just show us cars that llok somewhat close to what can and will be built.
Concept Cars = BS.
Jan 15th, 2009 (9:43 am)Great stuff. Can’t wait for it all to get here. This Spring, GM launches the 2010 Equinox, the 21st GM vehicle that gets 30 MPG or more. Between then and the Volt/Converj, GM will introduce three vehicles that get at least 40 MPG, the Cruze, Spark, and Orlando. Then the E-Rev revolution begins, with the japanese now doing the chasing on high mileage technology. With all the hype about the next-gen Prius to get 80-100 MPG, how disappointing that they could only increase the mileage to 50 MPG. And the Insight is rated at 40/43 MPG? Not good enough!! GM is certainly in the middle of a renaissance at all levels, and the E-Rev revolution will be exciting to watch as it unfolds.
Jan 15th, 2009 (1:31 pm)#138, detfan,
Who hyped the Prius to get 80-100mpg? No one at Toyota. People who don’t know have speculated on all kinds of crazy things; one reads all kinds of crazy claims about the Volt, too. Toyota is merely building a better Prius. Since it was already the most fuel-efficient vehicle on the road, an improved Prius will really be something to see. And it’s affordable. What more could one want?
May 27th, 2009 (9:29 pm)[...] More Cadillac Converj Details Emerj | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt … [...]
+1
Jun 24th, 2009 (11:28 pm)[...] vehicles. This will show that Chevrolet and other General Motors franchises such as Cadillac (Cadillac Converj details) and there are plans in the future to roll out this voltech drive-train to other areas of the [...]
Nov 23rd, 2009 (3:55 pm)[...] a plug-in, overnight recharger. Unlike the Volt, it’s a beautiful exercise in design, executed by Simon Cox in England. As they used to tell us in the car biz, styling sells cars. If they can do this one for [...]