AND 
Engineering the Cadillac Converj
Nick Zielinki is a Voltec engineer who is charge of advanced engineering at GM. He is responsible for designing their future cars including the Cadillac Converj, and future Chevy Volt generations. I spoke with him at length while in Detroit.
Did you engineer the Converj?
Yeah, my job is advanced system integration I did modeling to make sure its propulsion system would work if we go to production.
Are there design blueprints for under the hood?
The car is a concept, so its a design exercise but it has the right configuration in size and space to fit in the Voltec propulsion system.
Would the car have to be changed in shape?
Not really, very close in the shapes and sizes but probably a little bit of a change for Cadillac performance. The expectations of a Cadillac customer are different than a Chevrolet customer.
Have you developed an all wheel drive Voltec model?
We actually did show a chassis with a front electric drive unit and two individual rear wheel motors in the Provoq concept. The front drive motor has a differential.
How about four in-wheel motors, Michelin showed a concept of a tire and wheel with its own electric motor built into it.
That’s more for mini cars or urban-type vehicles. When you need a motor strong enough to drive a car it gets pretty large. Trying to package it in the wheel and turn the wheel is a challenge.
Was the Converj built to be able to be produced?
The original Volt started as a concept based on the propulsion system and we did a lot of modeling that indicated it would work. We worked with design staff but we didn’t have a set of parts that existed to know how the car should be shaped.
To be honest when we did the concept car we did not do it with the thought that it would be a production car. We thought it would be a good public reaction, but it was actually overwhelming. Then so within a couple of weeks of the Auto Show our board of directors said you better do something. We decided we really wanted to do it and do it fast in a reliable way.
The Converj is closer in basic proportions to be able to use the Voltec propulsion system without making any major modifications. The aerodynamics are also a lot closer.
So would you need a bigger battery pack to achieve its stated performance?
On the Converj even though its a concept car we did go through some modeling to see what we could get in terms of performance. When we designed the Voltec system, we had enough bandwidth in the basic subsystem design that we could adjust its performance.
And keep the range 40 miles?
Yes.
By increasing the battery operating window?
Well there’s a number of things that are happening. In the later generations of the Volt Gen 2 stuff that we’re working on, we’re working on the battery. We’re improving things such as the efficiency of cooling so you don’t need as much energy for parasitic losses. We’re looking at ways of improving the electronic control system and simple things like axle ratio change or final drive ratio change allows us to get a little quicker acceleration for the Converj. With the improvements in the battery and control system we can compensate and attain the top speed of the car and attain the driving range.
It wont be like a CTS-V performance?
No, no its going to be a little better and punchier feeling that the Volt off the line.
117 Responses to “Engineering the Cadillac Converj”
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
- MiaSolé announces commercial shipments of thin-film solar panels November 20, 2009Image: http://www.miasole.com/_assets/images/img-solarfilm-twist.jpg SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--MiaSolé, the emerging leader in the... […]Texas
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- 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
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 16th, 2009 at 9:09 am
It just looks cool. I’ll take one in black, please.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:24 am
It would interesting to see a diesel engine developed for gen 2 to increase fuel mileage even more. Then either bio or petrol based diesel could be used. The Germans figured out to clean up the diesel so lets partner with them and use it.
I would like to see a 0-60 in about 9 seconds in the Volt and maybe 8 for the Caddy.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Why is there so much emphasis on this vehicle when the Volt is still as yet in production?
GM has one concept vehicle, the Volt, which has yet to come to market, and now they’re pushing another one.
I’m not giving this Cadillac a second look until I see the Volt in my dealers show room.
To Bob & Rick, enough with the dangling carrot. I’m not falling for it.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:33 am
#3 Guy Incognito
—-
Main reason for the emphasis, I think, is based on Lutz’s assessment: Two Volts for one Converj. GM can make this one at a profit, allowing them to further develop the technology and scale for the masses, a la Volt.
Personally, I hope the Converj gets the green light ASAP. GM should attempt to get as much of that advanced tech money as they can, although I don’t think you can keep coming back asking for another 1B each time you stamp a new body on top of the Voltec platform (but it sounds like that is what GM is trying).
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:35 am
From the article:
Have you developed an all wheel drive Voltec model?
We actually did show a chassis with a front electric drive unit and two individual rear wheel motors in the Provoq concept. The front drive motor has a differential.
—————-
I love this as I am very interested in an all wheel drive vehicle.
I suspect it will be a long time before we can buy one though.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:35 am
“There’s a number of things that are happening. In the later generations of the Volt Gen 2 stuff that we’re working on, we’re working on the battery. We’re improving things such as the efficiency of cooling so you don’t need as much energy for parasitic losses. We’re looking at ways of improving the electronic control system and simple things like axle ratio change or final drive ratio change allows us to get a little quicker acceleration for the Converj. With the improvements in the battery and control system we can compensate and attain the top speed of the car and attain the driving range”
**********************************************************************************
If GM is now working on Gen 2 Volt, isn’t there enough time left to apply those changes to the first Volts? I have a feeling GM is promising less and will have more when the first Volts comes out at the end of 2010. Lets hope so!!
Go GM go!!
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:43 am
From the article:
Would the car have to be changed in shape?
Not really, very close in the shapes and sizes but probably a little bit of a change for Cadillac performance. The expectations of a Cadillac customer are different than a Chevrolet customer
=============================
Ya. The Volt only had to change a little also, and look what happened to its concept. I wouldn’t hold my breathe on this beautiful car keeping its shape.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:49 am
How can they be working on “Gen 2 Volt” when ‘Gen 1 Volt’ does’nt exist as yet?
GM, introduce yet another serial plug-in hybrid concept and call it the PseudoQuasi
Keep pushing the vaporware guys, you never know, it might just catch on.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Wow.
“To be honest when we did the concept car we did not do it with the thought that it would be a production car. We thought it would be a good public reaction, but it was actually overwhelming.”
In other words, we just built it for show. We never dreamed we’d actually have to build one for sale.
Everyone who said the Volt was a publicity stunt, WAS correct, but you no longer are. NOW what started as a purely promotional ornament, turned into reality. Which shows CLEARLY why the original concept car was NEVER going to hit the street. It was a fantasy.
Wow again.
the Volt is so close to production, they are spending money designing a Caddy version for the Voltec drivetrain, which will take less than half the time and money because so much of the vehicle is already made. they give the volt a caddy makeover, and they can sell it for 50 K and up.
Voltec III will be the (if Saturn still exists) Saturn Flextreme. Third Gen batteries will probably cost less (in real terms) so the car five years from now will cost under 30K, but that will be 22 to 25K in today’s dollars.
It will take a long time for ICE to be a niche, if you consider 15 years a long time.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Any increase in models on the Voltec platform means more batteries. More batteries means lowering production cost. And that should mean lowering Sticker prices. Which should mean more Voltecs sold, which lowers our dependence on foreign oil. — IN SHORT, build the damn thing.
PS When will I see a convertible in my price range — can’t afford a Fisker
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Eco @ 9 – I agree, wow. Just a joke until there was a public outpouring. The power of the internet folks. Newspapers get thrown away. If you missed the story on a given day, it became tedious to find. If you forgot about it, same problem. If your local news didn’t cover it, forget about it. Now I can find stories that are months old whenever an idea strikes, and from any newspaper in the country. We have tons of information at our fingertips.
In other news, Bank of American got another $20 billion today, with guarantees for over $100 billion more of its assets. I’m sure that they are a very sound company. Wait – they lost over $1 billion last quarter. I’m sure that they have submitted a detailed business plan about how they will return to profitability- oh wait, they just did. Well, I’m sure that they will be grilled by the Senator Corker for their incompetence – oh wait, they aren’t unionized. Oh well.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:05 am
What this tells me is there is not much left to do on Volt#1, most likely smaller tweaks here and there. The focus is already on the Volt#2 and in making Voltec a propulsion platform like «synergydrive» is for toyota: a resellable product for other companies or other internal platforms.
If volt #1 won’t make money it development will pay lots R&D for many other projects it seems.
NPNS will become norm!
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Joe #6,
I feel like you, announce less to give more is good advertising and makes customers happy.
Regards,
JC NPNS
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Very cool. Now take that same 2-door concept, give it styling cues from the Corvette. Now THAT would be a VOLT I would buy for $40,000. My wife can have the 4-door sedan.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:08 am
#13
We call this demand management.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:15 am
#7 Rashiid
Ya. The Volt only had to change a little also, and look what happened to its concept. I wouldn’t hold my breathe on this beautiful car keeping its shape.
————-
Did you not read the same article as me? I think Nick Z. explained very well why the Volt changed and why the Coverj shouldn’t.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:21 am
______________________________________________________
Recent VOLT-HEAD related links from the MIT guys:
Spotlight on Innovation:
http://www.technologyreview.com/spotlight/clean_energy/index.aspx
GM to Build Its Own Batteries:
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21957/?nlid=1650&a=f
Toyota to Deliver Plug-In Hybrids
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21951/?nlid=1650&a=f
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Why is there so much emphasis on this vehicle when the Volt is still as yet in production?
___________________________
Unfortunately, it is being used to keep attention on GM.
Just 4 months from now Fusion-Hybrid, the new Insight, and the new Prius will be appearing in people’s driveways. That obviously puts technologies still a few years away from nationwide availability in an awkward position.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:31 am
john1701a # 18,
This is called monopolistic competition even before the products even exist on the market and internet makes things more complicated than before.
regards,
JC NPNS
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:34 am
#7 Rashiid,
I think the Volt Concept was planned to be that, a concept. GM really wasn’t thinking it would go to production. It was the overwhelming public response that left GM with no choice but to produce the Volt. But many changes had to be made for it to become highly efficient.
With the Converj, GM already knows what to expect, and has defined many of the components that would be utilized. I don’t expect this concept car to change much from an exterior point of view when it goes to production.
Look at the Camaro, LaCrosse (Invicta concept), and Cadillac CTS Coupe (spy shots on internet). These vehicles all are close in appearance to the original concept vehicles. But I believe these concepts were designed with a great deal of understanding of how they would be built in production.
The Volt, however, went to the 2007 Detroit Auto Show as more of a showpiece, without the same production intentions. Thus, that is why we see so many changes versus the original concept.
Actually, I prefer this new Cadillac Converj to the original Volt concept, and by a wide margin.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:34 am
So, the Volt was designed purely as a concept but public reaction made them change their minds and actually produce it. Hurray for Lyle and the GM-Volt website. 40,000+ people saying they want to buy it apparently carries real weight. Congratulations, Lyle, you’ done a really GREAT job!
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:35 am
Any company that any hope of surviving for more than a few years MUST have engineers and designers working on the next generation and the generation after that. You can’t put all your people on any project. There are dozens of case studies where they show that above a certain R&D team size, the schedule starts to move out. Once you have the optimum number, don’t add any more.
The Volt was a concept car and should be thought of as one. I remember a motorcycle concept that Chrysler did that had a 5L V8 and was capable of going 300MPH. I don’t think anyone was surprised that they never went into production. The problem with the Volt concept was that it was Too close to being what the market wanted today and GM was caught off guard by the response. Does that make them idiots? Probably not. They’ve had dozens of concept cars and nothing has ever had this kind of response. That fuel cell powered skate board generated a lot of talk at the time but nobody expected GM to drop everything and go into production with it.
As for the Converj, that is a different kind of concept car. It is supposed to be closer to an actual production design but don’t be surprised if it is changed.
Why did GM make the Volt a Chevy and thus had a lot of price pressure? Their stated reason was that the new E-REV technology is supposed to be the New Way Things Are Done and that, over time, they would be migrating this technology across their entire lineup. So, they chose their Everyman brand to signal this. What is the logical next brand? Why Cadillac of course. With a Cadillac you can charge enough to actually make a profit.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 10:59 am
I will take Converj in red, with 4 wheel drive, and the El Camino option;)
Anyway, any timeline on Volt #1? When will Lyle get a test drive? More Volt Mules on the road? Yes I know some of these are tough calls. However we have been promised some transparency. During the early development photos there were some other cars in the Volt studio, under wraps. It was suggested that they were the next generation.
I want my Volt and I want it now! (OK, rant off)
Come on GM, lend Lyle a Volt, you can get all the data you need with Onstar, Yes some of the info is proprietary, lock the hood if you like, give us a tease!
Most of the people that will buy the Converj do not read this blog. It Is a really nice car, and a good #2 to the Volt. We just want an new oil less society, with all the implications and complications.
Maybe the government has to be involved, it is a big idea.
Red HHR (I really think Converj would be a good name for a restaurant, who is going to be the first to start one?)
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:03 am
From the article: “How about four in-wheel motors, Michelin showed a concept of a tire and wheel with its own electric motor built into it.
That’s more for mini cars or urban-type vehicles. When you need a motor strong enough to drive a car it gets pretty large. Trying to package it in the wheel and turn the wheel is a challenge.”
————————————————————————————–
Ford already has an F-150 pickup prototype with 4 wheel-motors:
http://www.hipadrive.com/sema.html
Its four Hi-Pa Drive motors deliver more power and torque than the 320 horsepower 5.4 liter V8 engine they replaced.
They also have a Volvo station wagon and a sports car:
http://www.hipadrive.com/phev.html
All 3 cars are made possible by PML Flightlink and their new “Hi-Pa Drive” wheel motors. These motors are dramatically smaller and lighter weight than previous wheel motor designs.
I’m really surprised that an advanced system integration engineer from GM doesn’t seem to know what PML has been able to achieve here.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:13 am
K-Dawg #16 says,
Did you not read the same article as me? I think Nick Z. explained very well why the Volt changed and why the Coverj shouldn’t.
——-
Yes I did read the same thing. It doesn’t mean I believe it.
They also said they would not change the Volt concept much.
It changed a lot. That was my point.
And sarcasm doesn’t show up well in print. I was being sarcastic while being serious.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:17 am
BillR # 20 says,
Actually, I prefer this new Cadillac Converj to the original Volt concept, and by a wide margin.
——-
I do as well. This Converj is a very beautiful car but to me, not worth 75K-80K. Someone will buy it though. It’s just gorgeous.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:21 am
#23, Myself
“Maybe the government has to be involved, it is a big idea.”
A two edged sword if I have ever seen one. All I can say is GM has to succed and pay back the loans. Otherwise any future fuel tax would be known as the “GM” tax.The goverment may pave the way for them to succed as they only can. They also have the ablity to really muck it up.
Red HHR (A table for two, by the window, Thank You)
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:27 am
#6 Joe Says: “If GM is now working on Gen 2 Volt, isn’t there enough time left to apply those changes to the first Volts? I have a feeling GM is promising less and will have more when the first Volts comes out at the end of 2010. Lets hope so!!”
————————————————————————————–
Don’t get your hopes up.
It’s important to remember that large design efforts like this flow like a pipeline. By the time they get into testing mules, the advanced design engineers are already working on something else. I’m glad it’s an EREV like the Converj, and not some other type of car.
The first Volts sold will be the 2011 year model (due in showrooms in November 2010). We already knew from Lyle’s previous interviews that the 2012 model Volt has over a dozen improvements. Now let’s say they wanted to get those improvements into the 2011 year model. First, they would have to stop the mule testing, make the 2012 design changes, and then start testing the mules over from scratch to see if the new design changes cause any problems.
My point is that once they’ve frozen the design and start testing, most design changes will impact the schedule. So you only make a design change for a given year model when the testing shows a problem. But you can make design changes to the next year’s model.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Too funny. What he means by the Volt Concept was just for PR is they were getting hammered because of Who Killed the Electric Car. Chris Paine deserves a huge pat on the back for getting this fire under their butts started. And thanks be to Lyle for keeping it going!
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:32 am
#3 Guy Incognito:
Amen.
I wonder where the money is coming from to develop this Cadillac concept, as GM is essentially broke and crying out for more taxpayer bailout cash? I have very limited interest in having my tax dollars finance Cadillacs. Show me a Volt I can buy, and then let’s talk about Cadillacs.
#11 MarkinWI:
Very perceptive and well said. One more time:
“The Shock Doctrine”
The Rise of Disaster Capitalism”
Naomi Klein
The economic meltdown, whether accidental or on purpose, provides the opportunity to bust the hated unions once and for all.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:35 am
#28 Dave G:
Hey, just do it like Fisker and forget all of that boring and time consuming testing. Don’t worry folks, if there’s a problem, we’ll fix it right away. LOL.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Need to practice saying all together –Give me a T..t, give me a e..e, give me a s..s, give me a t..t, give me a D..d, give me a r..r, give me a i..i, give me a v..v, give me a e..e What’s it spell???? Give Lyle a frekin test drive before I come over there and hit you with my cheerleader pompoms.
NPNS
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:48 am
#29 omnimoeish Says: “What he means by the Volt Concept was just for PR is they were getting hammered because of Who Killed the Electric Car. Chris Paine deserves a huge pat on the back for getting this fire under their butts started.”
————————————————————————————–
Yes, we’ve known this for a while, based on Lutz’s description of how the Volt started. In addition to Chris Paine, we should also thank Tesla motors.
According to Bob Lutz, he had been wanting to do an electric car for some time (probably to deal with the bad press from the Chris Paine movie), but he had a hard time convincing other GM management that an EV could be viable. Then when Tesla came out with the Roadster model, Lutz had the ammo he needed. “If some little startup like Tesla can do it, then why can’t GM do it?”
So GM management authorized some initial research and a concept car to show it off, all of which was relatively cheap compared to any real production work. The research showed that an EREV would be much more viable than an EV. The Volt concept car was just a sexy skin with a golf-cart motor inside, and some modeling to show that a production EREV would probably work.
Nobody at GM expected the overwhelming response to the Volt concept car. That’s what started them working on a Volt production model. Never under-estimate the power of a groundswell in public opinion.
Now the question is: What will be the public reaction to the Converj?
By the way, Chris Paine is making a new movie called “Who Saved The Electric Car”, and GM is giving him unprecedented access. I’d call that a pat on the back…
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 11:57 am
“How can they be working on “Gen 2 Volt” when ‘Gen 1 Volt’ does’nt exist as yet?
GM, introduce yet another serial plug-in hybrid concept and call it the PseudoQuasi
Keep pushing the vaporware guys, you never know, it might just catch on.”
That’s quite normal in engineering. There are two main reasons:
1) GM is far into the final stages of Volt 1 development. They can’t change much. Small things like control system firmware and cupholder design can be tweaked, but certainly not basic things like battery design.
2) It’s common to develop Gen 2 models with expectations of future developments. If you expect that in 4 years the same battery will take 30% less space then you can design your car with smaller battery in mind.
In short, Gen 1 Volt development now is focused on _how_ to build it. And Gen 2 Volt development is focused on _what_ to build.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
It’s off topic, but needs to be mentioned.
today’s headline:
Wall Street turns down as oil rises….
yesterday’s headline:
Low demand and sinking oil prices pull market lower….
Huh?
=D~
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
#33 Dave G:
Well, my public reaction to the Converj went into moderation, so I guess that tells you something.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
#35 Dave K:
LOL!!!
Witch doctors have to create some kind of explanation, so that they continue to appear “relevant”, even when they really have no idea what is going on.
I guess you actually said that much more succinctly with “Huh?”, but I couldn’t resist.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
#19 Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
This is called monopolistic competition
Isn’t that an oxymoron?
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
#24 Dave G – How about four in-wheel motors, Michelin showed a concept of a tire and wheel with its own electric motor built into it.
That’s more for mini cars or urban-type vehicles. When you need a motor strong enough to drive a car it gets pretty large. Trying to package it in the wheel and turn the wheel is a challenge.
————————————————————————————
I didn’t get his response either. Obviously he knows about the mini with four in-wheel motors (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/08/the_hybrid_mini.php) each with 160hp, for a total of 640hp. How is this not a strong enough motor to drive a car?
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
#3 Guy Incognito and #30 Noel Park :
“I wonder where the money is coming from to develop this Cadillac concept, as GM is essentially broke and crying out for more taxpayer bailout cash? I have very limited interest in having my tax dollars finance Cadillacs. Show me a Volt I can buy, and then let’s talk about Cadillacs.”
————————
I beg to differ. You have it upside down. It’s much easier to get a premium price on a Cadillac than on a Chevy for basically the same technology. If you want to pay for your research fees fast, that’s the way to go.
Actually, GM is doing the right thing : they get a second product on the market fast and they send the message to everyone including the government that they are committed to this technology and confident they have a winner at hand. This prototype is great news for us : it shows that the Volt will exist.
One more thing. There should be a ‘GM tax’ on oil. 1) It would keep oil prices higher, improving demand on alternatives such as the Volt and 2) It would allow the government to subsidize those who buy an electric or hybrid vehicule, and in doing so helping to drive costs down. It’s the fastest way to reach a tipping point and bring change fast.
They do it in France and it’s working just fine. People over there don’t buy gas guzzlers since oil is expensive.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
I think it’s fantastic voltec is being used in a coupe. Now wait for a pick-up, minivan, Crossover, and SUV. Give GM a little time and there will be some real choice for consumers. Although money is tight with GM, THIS is what is going to pull it from the gutters. As a shareholder, I think this concept is a winner and would like to see it move to production status ASAP.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Follow the money: for the investments in producing alternative-powered vehicles to make economic sense, there has to be the ability & desire to buy the alternative vehicles by enough customers. Current conditions suggest neither the ability nor the desire currently exists in sufficient numbers (some anecdotal comments: http://www.newsweek.com/id/179517). GM may have stumbled into good timing on the Volt’s >= late 2010 release: severe recession, credit crunch (both effecting ability to purchase) and low gas prices (desire to purchase) may be over by then.
The low gas prices may disappear ‘on their own’ or with the help of some sort of tax/cost floor on gas, that would be politically palatable when the economy improves.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
#24 DaveG
Wheel motors also greatly increase the “unsprung mass,” making for a rougher ride. Caddy buyers are going to expect a smooth ride, no compromises there. Maybe newer motors get the weight down, but it’s still going to be an issue. I suppose you could also use predictive shocks…but now cost is really starting to claim.
With trucks, buyers are not expecting a smooth ride so the concept works better.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
#40 Tall Pete
Your oil tax would also punish poor people who can’t afford new cars
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
this is outright stupid!
If the so called volt ever made into a production vehicle and it doesnt sell due to cost, reliability, convience ect what are you going to do with the rest of your “electric” lineup??
Make something that:
1)exists
2) is available to someone who wants it
3)improve it as time progresses
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
I hope lots of wealthy people pile into these cars. Heck, they could help atone for their pollution sins (or at least feel that way). They’ll pay for the bleeding edge technology, and a couple of years later it’ll flow down to peasants like me.
Imagine if the pace of innovation in the auto industry becomes more akin to our consumer electronics. Crap….now I’ve drooled all over my keyboard.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
@ # 42 Big Picture
If the economy isn’t better in another 2 years, I don’t think GM is going to survive anyway. New car sales get hammered during economic slow downs. I think in another 2 years, we will see oil prices resuming their $3-$4 price.
Some more food for thought, there are already over 40,000 people just on the unofficial waiting list and 2 more years to go. That means that theoretically, with the expected production levels of 10,000 per year for the first few years, GM has at least 4-5 years of production before economics and oil prices even figure into their sales figures which means they don’t have to even question whether people will buy the Volts they are making until 2016 or so. By then they’ll have a 2nd gen Volt that should be cheaper with all the improvements it sounds like the advanced engineering team is making (according to the article). So as long as the economy gets better by 2016, the Volt’s sales are pretty much guaranteed.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
#47 omnimoeish says,
By then they’ll have a 2nd gen Volt that should be cheaper with all the improvements it sounds like the advanced engineering team is making (according to the article).
————-
Maybe, maybe not. If GM doesn’t have any incentive to lower the price, there isn’t any great reason to expect them to do so.
Having said that, I hope you are right.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
#3 Guy Incognito and #30 Noel Park :
“I wonder where the money is coming from to develop this Cadillac concept, as GM is essentially broke and crying out for more taxpayer bailout cash? I have very limited interest in having my tax dollars finance Cadillacs. Show me a Volt I can buy, and then let’s talk about Cadillacs.”
I totally agree. The Volt was to be the “Affordable” product for the 80% of the population of which drive at the most 40 miles a day. Sinking funds to develop the Caddy only cover the upper 15% of the bell curve. If you can mfgr the Caddy for less because the platform is already there then mfgr the Volt for less first. The Volt is the “Flagship” of this tech. Now they’re spending funds on a product that only covers 15% of their market to cover a “Speculated” higher profit margin. Isn’t that the same decision making they used when they went to Large trucks and SUV’s? Because the profit margin was more?
GM,make it “Affordable” and available first before you decide to “Luxurise” it.
This is a little disappointing.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
GM is good at making lots of cars, to do so they have to price them right…
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
#47 omnimoeish Says:
Some more food for thought, there are already over 40,000 people just on the unofficial waiting list and 2 more years to go. That means that theoretically, with the expected production levels of 10,000 per year for the first few years, GM has at least 4-5 years of production before economics and oil prices even figure into their sales figures which means they don’t have to even question whether people will buy the Volts they are making until 2016 or so.
======================================================
I thought I read here or heard Lutz say that production would be 10,000 the first year and 50,000 the second year as they ramped up production. I’m counting on that so I can get a 2012 model. I showed up late to this party so my number on the list is 44,026.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Goin electric in Ontario..working on province wide public electric vehicle recharging places…
http://en.autos.sympatico.msn.ca/news/canadian-press-car-article.aspx?cp-documentid=16836834
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
The Caddy is for the Senators…
Red HHR (Oh did I say THAT?)
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
The BYD e6 that is now showing at the Detroit Auto Show looks like it will put the Volt to shame.
It’s a plug-in hybrid that will go 250 MILES on the battery before engine kicks in !
Its a crossover SUV that looks pretty good too.
It takes about one hour for a FULL charge, but after only 10 minutes you can go 125 miles. This car makes the Volt’s 40 miles look like crap.
The question is:
WHY CAN’T GM BUILD A CAR LIKE THIS ?
Is GM going to let the Chinese kick their behinds with this car. Time will tell.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
@Red HHR 53
Good one…..
lol…
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
OMNIMOEISH WROTE:
That means that theoretically, with the expected production levels of 10,000 per year for the first few years, GM has at least 4-5 years of production before economics and oil prices even figure into their sales figures
—————————————————————————
Someone who adds their name to a list on the internet with no cost or obligation is not the same as a closed sale for $30k. Ask anybody who earns his living through sales commissions on big ticket items. The number of the 40,000 list members who actually buy is hard to estimate, but I would guess 1-10%.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
What is good for GMAC is apparently good for…
——————
Chrysler Financial gets $1.5B loan from bailout
WASHINGTON (AP) — The government says it will provide a $1.5 billion loan to the auto financing arm of Chrysler LLC.
The Treasury Department says the new aid will be in addition to a package of loans provided to both Chrysler and General Motors Corp. last month in an effort to buy time for the two companies to reorganize.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Chrysler-Financial-gets-15B-apf-14085183.html
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
#54, I can’t find anything that says the engine will kick in at 250 miles.
Heck, I can’t find anything that says it has an engine at all.
As far as mileage is concerned. I have read 400km and 186 miles. Obviously both can’t be right. I wonder if someone is screwing up the conversion because 400km = 248 miles.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Converj? Converj on what? Voltec is diverjing. Did Nick Zielinki pick that name?
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
@Rashiid Amul 58
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/04/byd-electric-car-e6-crossover-mpv.php
From the Link…
“Range per charge is expected to be 300 km (186 miles).”
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
#56 Tom H Says:
The number of the 40,000 list members who actually buy is hard to estimate, but I would guess 1-10%.
======================================================
Good news for me! 10% * 44026 = 4403. Maybe I can get one of the 10,000 2011 models. I suspect it will really come down to where they decide to roll out the early models. I suspect CA will be towards the top of the list. I tried to buy a 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid here in Texas last January-February, couldn’t find one anywhere in the state while the CA dealers had dozens to choose from and were talking about shipping me one. I think NY had them too but I’m not sure. I ended up ordering a 2009 here locally in April and picking it up the end of July. My point is that it seems like these low volume and hard to get “green” vehicles can be much easier to get in some markets than others.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
@Rashiid Amul 58
“BYD e6 is a pure electric car,”
From: http://www.wheelsunplugged.com/ViewNews.aspx?newsid=2312
Interesting. A BEV that can go 186 miles per charge. But 80 MPC with the wife driving.
Still a descent car. Just have to question quality at this point. Gonna have to weigh the differences. It’s a new company just as all the other new companies but it’s heart of products is battery. Might be a plus though. I’ll wait and watch them for a bit.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
#54..can you post a link to those specs? all I can find is info regarding the fact that the e6 could go on sale as early as 2010…plust they do not meet NA safety standards.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Looks like the US will not see this BYD car till 2011. Sounds right though. Deliver first in China then modify to meet NA DOT standards. Yup, that takes about a year.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
#54 Build Your Dreams Says:
The BYD e6 that is now showing at the Detroit Auto Show looks like it will put the Volt to shame.
It’s a plug-in hybrid that will go 250 MILES on the battery before engine kicks in !
======================================================
The BYD e6 is a BEV. The BYD F3DM & F6DM are plug in hybrids. I don’t think BYD has a E-REV like the Volt.
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/auto_shows/2009_detroit_auto_show_naias_auto_shows/production_debuts/byd_f3dm_f6dm_e6_auto_shows
The article above says BYD claims a 250 mile range for the e6. In a quick search, most articles list a 250 mile range for the e6 and one article did claim it’s gas engine kicks in after 250 miles. Too bad it doesn’t have a gas engine.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
#62 CaptJackSparrow,
Thanks for the link
Here is the 400km website where I got my information.
http://www.hindu.com/2009/01/14/stories/2009011456261400.htm
The comment about your wife really cracked me up. That was good.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
#63 Mitch says,
I can find is info regarding the fact that the e6 could go on sale as early as 2010…plus they do not meet NA safety standards.
——-
Well, now there’s a shock………………Not!
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
hi ThombDbhomb #59
“Converj? Converj on what? Voltec is diverjing. Did Nick Zielinki pick that name?”
____________________________
It was either the former lead singer for Nightwish “Tarja Turunen”, or the current drummer “Jukka Nevalainen”. Hope this helps to clear things up.
=D~
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Mr. Lutz said that the Converj would cost GM about the same to produce as the Volt, but they could sell it for TWICE the price because it wears the “Cadillac” badge.
Is he really saying that all Cadillac buyers are narcissistic morons?
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
I am sick of all these ludicrous “vaporware” allegations.
PS. The person who posted that it is stupid to talk all about the Volt when the insight and next-gen prius are coming out is sooo off base. These cars *are in no way equivalent to the Volt!!!!!!* They are just modded-out IC engine cars. What we need is a modded-out EV, which is the Voltec platform!
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Just saw the CEOs from Bright and Tesla on CNBC. I really think both these companies have a great future. Starting with a clean sheet and not having to support the legacy problems of a dinosaur like GM is a huge advantage.
I want to support an American startup without supporting corporate bailouts wasted tax money, so I will be looking to these guys when its time to buy.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
#71 James Says:
so I will be looking to these guys when its time to buy.
======================================================
I don’t know anything about Bright but I know I can’t afford a $100,000+ Tesla. I wish I could, I’d have one on order now.
I think it is probably only “wasted tax money” if GM fails and the taxpayers get no return on Investment. I would just as soon support GM so maybe my tax dollars won’t be “wasted”.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
The Tesla sedan will probably be $50k. Still pricey, but the Bright should be less than the Volt with similar to better specs. Given that choice, I would much rather support an American startup.
I think people underestimate the backlash GM will get based on the bailout. Contrary to the fans on this site, almost every person I have talked to said they will not buy GM again because of it. I think there is 0 chance that money will be paid back, and only more baliout requests to come.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
“Mr. Lutz said that the Converj would cost GM about the same to produce as the Volt, but they could sell it for TWICE the price” (and make a profit)
And that, my friends is the problem with GM. If they could build & sell the volt at a profit they wouldn’t be in the fix that they are.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
# 44 Cautious Fan
You say that “my” oil tax would also punish poor people who can’t afford new cars.
I say an oil tax would reduce car usage, reducing pollution and greenhouse effect. With the money of that tax, you can also offer an incentive of a few thousand dollars to poor people who own old cars worth virtually nothing so they can trade up for a more recent car (not necessary new) that pollute less and have a better milleage. The goal is to create a situation where a change of behavior makes more sense. You can’t wait for the next oil crisis to change, you need to push in that direction right now.
I’m not talking about a 1,50$ a gallon tax here, don’t get me wrong. But you need to find the right combination of tax / incentive so people will start mass buying the new technology. Then and only then will true change appear.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
The only thing I have to say about the Cadillac Converj is that GM has most of the development cost already taken care of with the Chevrolet Volt. There is not that much more left that is really costly. The interior and exterior skins and that is about all. The software, batteries and other drive train enhancements that a Cadillac would need to make it stand out from a Chevrolet Volt is being done now for Volt version 2.
So, yeah, GM needs to produce this car and get it out in early to mid-2011. They need to cash infusion. And if they intend to keep the Buick, Pontiac and Saturn lines they need to start planning a Voltec line of cars for those brands.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
I would love to own a converj, great styling but I never will have $70000 US to spend.
It seems to me to be a sensible next step, a highly profitable car that will capitalise on the Voltec technology.
Will GM sell heaps of them? Of course they will, to all the little old ladies in Pasadena.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
“its going to be an extremely difficult challenge to make a major shift away from petroleum-powered internal combustion engines to whatever the next technology is going to be.”
From the link: http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/01/16/gm-wants-your-help-in-producing-alternative-powertrains/
I’m stumped here. The E-REV vehicles and PHEV’s use both Petrol and Electricity. A BEV uses Electricity. From last I saw, EVERY Gas station has both!
What’s to change?!?!?!?
Am I missing something?
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
#69 Tim, you say :
Mr. Lutz said that the Converj would cost GM about the same to produce as the Volt, but they could sell it for TWICE the price because it wears the “Cadillac” badge.
Is he really saying that all Cadillac buyers are narcissistic morons?
——————————————-
Not ALL of them, of course. But do you really believe that a 60 000$ car is twice as good as a 30 000$ one ??
For some people, image is worth a lot, which explains why they buy 1000$ shoes just for the ‘name’ – again they are not 10 times better than a 100$ pair of shoes.
It’s not just the badge, it’s the leather seats, the touch of wood and so on. It’s what it says : I’m successful and I show it. Are you a moron for that ? Don’t think so.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Those of you who are expecting GM to reduce the price of the Volt may very well be disappointed for at least 5 years after its introduction. I just don’t see the price to the consumer coming down for at least the first 5 years. Maybe after that if thing go well and they sell a ton of them. There is a tremendous amount of development cost to try to recover, plus they will be trying to repay the federal loan during that time. I just don’t see a price decrease anytime soon. IMO.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
#73 James says:
but the Bright should be less than the Volt with similar to better specs.
======================================================
I would be surprised if we ever see more than a handful of Brights. Besides I don’t need a truck
http://www.indystar.com/article/20081219/BUSINESS/812190366/1003/BUSINES
“Primed to revive the state’s ailing auto economy, the former General Motors engineer is the chief executive officer of Bright Automotive, an obscure Anderson startup whose 20 employees are busy on one job: creating a car company.
Led by Chrysler, GM and Delphi veterans, Bright is designing a 100-mile-per-gallon light truck assisted by electric power stored on the vehicle in a massive lithium-ion battery recharged from a wall socket. The goal: Get an assembly line going by 2012 for mass production of a high-tech truck known as a plug-in hybrid.”
======================================================
As for the the Tesla Model S (sedan):
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/tesla-coughs-up-sedan-price-details-on-economy-car-5344.html
“Speaking at the Tesla dealership in Menlo Park, Calif., company CEO Elon Musk revealed that its all-electric passenger sedan, the Model S, will be priced at $57,499. The government will offer a $7,500 tax credit to bring the price to $49,999. ”
“The revealed price is slightly lower than earlier projections, even without the tax credit, that the car would cost around $60,000. The price figure, however, must be qualified.”
That makes the Volt approx a $32.5k vehicle ($40k – $7.5k tax credit). the $17,500 difference is a lot of money to most of us. Admittedly they are 2 different vehicles, an E-REV Volt vs a BEV Model S. It is kind of an apples to oranges thing.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Actually, I’m looking forward to paying $22,500 for my Volt. $40,000 cost to build, less 25% subsidy(1/2 of what Toyota subsidized on the early Prius), less $7,500 tax credit. GM has been on record on several occasions stating that they are going to subsidize the Volt.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
#68 Dave K.
Not Serj Tankian?
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Too bad I missed the Moscow 2008 Auto Show….
“The Booth Professionals Of The 2008 Moscow Auto Show”
http://jalopnik.com/5132557/the-booth-professionals-of-the-2008-moscow-auto-show?skyline=true&s=i
I wonder what the Detroit “Booth Professionals” looked like….lol
Before you flame on me, remember, I’m TP (Trailer Park)….
lol =op
Time for another beer……
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
@Detfan 82
“less $7,500 tax credit”
Aw man, dude, don’t fall into the misconception that the fake $7500 tax break will decrease the price of the car. It will not. It will only allow you to write of $7500 of your yearly income. You’re loan will still be for the FULL amount of the car less your down pmt. It will never decreas because of the fake tax incentive.
Then who does the tax incentive work for? you ask.
It works best for people who are close to crossing a tax bracket and even more so for those who are close to the bottom of a tax bracket in a sense that the $7500 will drop them below their current tax bracket.
Sucks huh?
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
#85 CaptJackSparrow Says:
“It will not. It will only allow you to write of $7500 of your yearly income.”
======================================================
I don’t think that is correct. It’s a tax “credit”, a credit towards taxes owed. It’s as if you had an extra $7500 in withholding from your paycheck. True, you will not get the credit at the time of sale so must either pay it or finance it but you will get it at tax time, it’s a true credit. It is phased out for people who must pay AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) so if you fall into that category beware, Many people who thought they were going to get the credit for buying a hybrid found out the hard way that since they owed AMT they didn’t get all or any credit.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Recommend this site change its name from gm-volt.com in favor of new name: gm-converj.com
Very little difference, exchange one concept car for another; neither in production.
Let fantasy persist, just different name, that’s all.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Zardoz is fantasy/science fiction
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
This thing about bringing the BYD up to American standards is an insurance joke .
Let me ask you in all seriousness how does that help you when you crash your car into something at 40 miles per hour or more , you still will get killed .
Don’t think for a second that they are building unsafe cars in China , it just is not so .Gm , Ford , Mercedes , Audi , VW and all the rest make cars there . GM could make the Volt in Shanghai GM plant and sell it in America for $25,000 and make a tidy profit from it too .
The interesting thing about this is that it would be built by GM in a GM factory , it is just that the factory is not in America but in China and the destination shipping charges would be less than a thousand dollars per car too, more like $ 300 to $500 each to Seattle or San Fransisco .
They all have the same safety things on them as they have in USA.
American standards just means lighting , inside knobs , bumper height .and English stickers on them because most Americans cant read Chinese labels
I don’t care what car you are talking about no car will withstand an impact into a solid block of steel and concrete .
If you think that American standards are so great for protecting us then why are so many of our people killed on American streets and highways every year.
Some American cars cant be imported to Canada either because they dont meet Canadian standards.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
#89 Keith
Go to Youtube and check out a Smart car hitting a wall at 70 mph.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
I saw it , and look at the Chinese car smashed up in Russia , that was done by a group of business men so I am told to bad mouth Chinese cars as well. I have heard that the car was crashes at over 100 miles per hour on high speed film and then slowed down in presentation to give the impression that it was a normal test too.
Don’t believe everything you see or read my friend . I don’t and I wont , I learned that many years ago.
Beside the stickers on Chinese made cars they have to change the speedometer as all cars made in China only read in kilometers .
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
#88 ThombDbhomb
Yes, Zardoz is fantasy/science fiction
As are Chevy Volt & Cadillac Converj, at least until available in dealer showroom.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
#73
Sounds like the people who support a backlash against GM are trying to show the government that they will do everything they can to insure our money is not repaid cause they are mad and are taking their toys home, so there!!
Boycotting GM regardless of an improved product is childish temper.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
#92 Zardoz
If your wife is pregnant, do you doubt that the baby will come?
I’ve been following the Volt closely. There is a demonstrated commitment. The development process continues to advance. It is more real than unicorns.
Blanket statements like yours demonstrate a lack of insight on the topic. Maybe they will go over better with a less-informed crowd.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
#94 ThombDbhomb
Impossible that I impregnate wife, sterile all my life, shooting blanks.
Do not doubt that Volt is real, unicorns for that matter either.
Like you, I too follow Volt development.
Looking forward to being proven wrong when Volt appears in dealer showroom.
Until then, Volt just fantasy, like leprechauns.
Trust me, you & I on same page on this.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
#95 Zardoz
I think we understand each other now; the Volt is not yet available to us, but it has a good chance of becoming real. It is not total fantasy.
BTW, even though you are shooting blanks, maybe your wife could become pregnant. Call me, if you need help.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
#85 CaptJackSparrow says “Aw man, dude, don’t fall into the misconception that the fake $7500 tax break will decrease the price of the car. It will not.”
Actually it’s better from a cash flow perspective. It sort of works like the very popular “cash back” programs. You finance the car and then get a check for $7500. You end up with a higher monthly payment but $7500 in your hand. Most people think money up front is a sweet deal.
If you aren’t worried about cash flow it’s a wash — you write a check for the car amount and get a check back. The downside is that with a rebate you have to pay sales tax on the full amount of the car unless you live in a state without sales tax. From that perspective a lower car price would be advantageous.
#44 Cautious Fan says “Your oil tax would also punish poor people who can’t afford new cars.”
Yes if all you had was a gas tax. However, the alternatives I’ve seen are revenue neutral, pairing the gas tax with a cut in payroll tax. This is strongly progressive.
To me this is a complete no-brainer. If you want to stop financing terrorism then you have to send the right price signals. Taxes on gas will cut consumption without question.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
“The expectations of a Cadillac customer are different than a Chevrolet customer.”
——————————————————————-
This statement, coming from an important GM designer, upsets me considerably, as a Chevrolet owner. It certainly explains a lot about the decline of the Chevrolet brand. Even GM doesn’t think much of Chevrolet, apparently.
It doesn’t quite say “If you buy a Volt, don’t expect much”, but almost.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
From the worksheet: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8910.pdf
It looks like it is just “Pooled” in with other tax deductions.
So, IMHO, it’s just a tax deduction, no rebate, no cash back.
Or am I reading it wrong? Possible.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
#43 Cautious Fan Says: “Wheel motors also greatly increase the “unsprung mass,” making for a rougher ride…
With trucks, buyers are not expecting a smooth ride so the concept works better.”
————————————————————————————–
I used to think the same thing, until I saw the PML wheel motors.
Note that sports cars and stations wagons also need a fairly smooth ride, and the Volvo Recharge and Lightning GT also use 4 PML wheel motors.
Take a look at the following links. I think you may change your mind on this.
http://www.hipadrive.com/phev.html
http://home.deds.nl/~daihard/electroCar/Hi%20Pa%20Drive.pdf
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
#97 DonC
I cannot agree more
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Well, since tax season is coming I figure this may be useful to help understand the guts of the “SEC. 205. CREDIT FOR NEW QUALIFIED PLUG-IN ELECTRIC DRIVE MOTOR VEHICLES.” and who/what qualifies.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/01/16/engineering-the-cadillac-converj/#comment-91019
Page 41.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
#99 CaptJackSparrow Says:
It looks like it is just “Pooled” in with other tax deductions.
So, IMHO, it’s just a tax deduction, no rebate, no cash back.
======================================================
I’ve been looking at IRS forms all afternoon since you brought it up earlier. You must be misreading the form, it’s a tax credit not a deduction. On the Form 1040 you calculate your taxes due then subtract the Alternative Vehicle tax credit then subtract any amount of federal withholding from your paycheck to determine how much you still owe or how much you will get back. A couple of points…if your total taxes are less than the credit then your tax owed is zero. So in this case, you would get all your federal withholding back, but you won’t get a refund of the difference between the credit and your total tax. I also found out to my dismay that there is a thing called the Tentative Minimum Tax which is calculated on the Alternative Minimum Tax form which determines how much of the credit can apply. If you are a high wage earner (which a lot of Volt buyers will be), even if you don’t actually owe AMT you may still have your credit reduced. If you do pay AMT then you get no credit. I was running my rough numbers this afternoon to determine my credit for my 2009 Ford Escape Hybrid I bought in July. The credit is supposed to be $3000 and it looks like I will be eligible for a whopping $2. I’m a little pi$$ed! The government givith with one hand and taketh away (through byzantine IRS codes) with the other.
I’m no accountant but buyer beware, the tax credit may be mostly smoke and mirrors (like CaptainJackSparrow pointed out above). When they finally have Volts for sale I would recommend you check with your tax preparer/accountant or as a minimum run it through TurboTax to see how much credit you will really get. Pretty hard to swallow if you think your tax bill will be $7500 lower than it turns out to be.
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
_____________________________________________________
Todyay’s Tesla News update from Elon Musk newsletter:
As mentioned in a prior update, we delivered our 100th Roadster last month. Since then, we have delivered over 60 more cars to customers and will continue delivering cars at a rate of 15 per week (excluding holidays), rising to 30 per week in the spring. By the end of 2009, we will have delivered over 1,300 Roadsters in the United States and Europe.
Tesla is in the fortunate position of being sold out through October this year and we continue to add new sales each month, despite the negative economic climate. As a result, we expect to turn the corner on profitability by the middle of 2009, shortly after we reach our target of 30 per week production rate for the Roadster.
Due to our order backlog, it seems that owning a Roadster can be a smart investment. In November, well after the markets crashed, a Roadster was sold at the Happy Hearts Fund auction in New York City for $160,000. The first buyer then donated the car back to the charity and they resold it that same night for $150,000. Many Roadster owners that have taken delivery of their cars have already decided to purchase a second Roadster or Roadster Sport because they like the first one so much. And the Roadster has become the car to own for environmentally conscious celebrities, business leaders, and even royals.
An important factor for many in the buying decision is that by purchasing a Tesla Roadster, they are not simply obtaining the only eco-friendly sports car in the world, they are also helping pay for development of lower cost, mass electric market cars. The same obviously cannot be said if someone were to buy a gasoline sports car from other makers of super cars. As I said in my first blog posting about Tesla several years ago, our goal is to make electric cars that anyone can afford. The Model S, which will be unveiled in a few months, is a big step in that direction with a starting price to consumers of $49,900 (after subtracting the $7,500 federal tax credit).
Taking that a step further, I was happy to announce this week that Tesla is working with in partnership with Daimler (maker of Mercedes) to create an electric version of the Smart car. The initial agreement is for 1,000 cars and if that proves to be successful it could expand to tens of thousands of cars. We are honored that Daimler chose Tesla after a detailed investigation of their options.
This announcement follows over a year of development and is planned to be the first of a few key partnerships with other auto manufacturers to engineer and produce electric cars. By no means are we trying to keep a lock on the technology – we will do whatever is needed to accelerate the electric car revolution and help end the world’s addiction to oil…
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________
(Quote)
January 16th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
One really important thing most folks never realize is that GM protects us all from unreasonable cost of repairs. If you researched really persistently regarding how much some small hybrids cost to repair when
1. The traction battery wears out,
2. The vehicle is driven hard or is abused, what service and repair alternatives you have,
3. The “black hole” estimates that I have seen (and have diagnostically verified as an L-1 advanced systems educator) when the only repair option you have are at the small hybrid dealership,
you would very carefully reconsider and maintain your patience and allegiance to GM, and * ONLY * GM!
When several small hybrid car owners had lent out their vehicles to family members (over the last few years), friends of these (in 4 cases) drove these vehicles very hard to the point where their previous “$8,000 to $15,000 retained value” became worth “$1500 to $4500 in trade-in value” because of the damages, and, there were no competitive independent servicing alternatives for those 2001 through 2004 small hybrid cars.
GM has always shared technical servicing information with the independent shop. From what I see within the Voltec design even from the very small picture I downloaded last month, the design is clearly GM Service-Friendly. Other brands are definitely *NOT* independent-shop service-friendly, and I greatly caution readers to not generalize that any other brand will be.
Yes, there will most certainly be serious OEM training mandates that likely will be in place before anyone is authorized to service these vehicles, but GM design is in fact the finest all-around for the motoring public regarding long-term repair economics.
THAT is why I am relentlessly loyal to the GM designs.
THAT is why the Volt and Converj command my complete attention.
Dan Petit Austin TX
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 7:39 am
From Lyle’s interview for this topic (above): “Have you developed an all wheel drive Voltec model?” “We actually did show a chassis with a front electric drive unit and two individual rear wheel motors in the Provoq concept.”
============================================================================
The Caddy Provoq concept using the current Saturn Vue chassis layout and shown at last year’s Detroit Auto Show is one I sincerely hope GM will productize and offer for sale. I’m sure Lyle (& perhaps a few others here) will recall that the Provoq design was what motivated me to attend VoltNation in NYC last March and I remain convinced that a Voltec version of the Provoq crossover concept would be a record-breaking sales sensation for GM!!!
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Just found the latest “specs” on the new Honda Insight. If these are correct I am disappointed, and will likely remove myself from Honda’s waiting list
The 41 combined mpg is very disappointing! (But, is this just a ploy on Honda’s part to keep its Civic hybrid selling until Insight release?)
About the 2010 Honda Insight
•What? New compact, four-door, front-drive hatchback model sold only as gasoline-electric hybrid.
•When? On sale April 22 (Earth Day).
•Where? Made in Japan.
•Why? Honda needed a Toyota Prius fighter, a hybrid-only model, unique and recognizable as such.
•How? Scale down the Civic hybrid’s drive system.
•How much? Honda won’t say until closer to sale date, but promises it’ll be priced as an economy car.
•How potent? Not very. Four-cylinder, 1.3-liter gas engine rated 98 horsepower at 5,800 rpm, 123 pounds-feet of torque at 1,000 rpm. Electric motor: 10 hp, 53 lbs.-ft. Continuously variable automatic transmission.
•How lavish? Base LX is surprisingly deficient: no stability control, center storage or map lights. Honda expects 65% of buyers to take the fancier EX. Navigation, Bluetooth optional on EX.
•How big? Compact, smaller than Prius, between Honda Fit and Civic. 172.3 inches long, 66.7 inches wide, 56.2 inches tall on a 100.4-inch wheelbase, 2,723-2,734 lbs.
Passenger space: 85 cubic feet; cargo, 15.9 cubic feet behind rear seat, 31.9 cubic feet when seat’s down.
•How thirsty? Honda expects federal ratings of 40 miles per gallon in town, 43 highway, 41 combined. Preproduction EX tester got 48.8 mpg on Honda-selected route including hills, curves, highways and suburbs, but no stop-and-go.
Regular (87-octane) gas specified.
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 9:20 am
When they were used, electric vehicles proved to be very reliable and economic. I recall when the N.Y.Times was distributed in NYC by electric trucks and it seemed those trucks never wore out. I often wondered why the Times ever discontinued their use. If they were still available, I have no doubt they could be put back into service. This may prove to be a problem for GM, for the purchaser of a Volt could very well use it for decades, something that would be quite unusual with a gasoline powered car. I look forward anxiously for the production and sale of the Volt.
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 9:31 am
A gas tax is stupid and shows little into the real world effects. If you truly want the Volt to be bought, make it better than other cars. Don’t punish people into it. Do you think just because there is a gas tax, people who are barely getting by are going to go out and buy a new car? A gas tax is a punishment on the poor and middle class.
As it is, I was talking to a car salesman yesterday and they aren;t that excited about the Volt because they don’t see it as a high seller (no profit for them). It might be the future, but the future is still 5 years away as far as making them a profit.
I love the Volt, but some of us need to think through our tax us into the future ideas. Sheesh.
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 9:38 am
#99 Captain Jack (on the tax credit that he thinks is a deduction)
My Lord man, if it’s a deduction, why is the form entitled “Alternative Fuel Vehicle Credit”? LOL
#105 Dan Petit says “When several small hybrid car owners had lent out their vehicles to family members (over the last few years), friends of these (in 4 cases) drove these vehicles very hard to the point where their previous “$8,000 to $15,000 retained value” became worth “$1500 to $4500 in trade-in value” because of the damages”
Yes, driving your car into a tree generally does not enhance its resale value.
#109 Adrain says “a gas tax is stupid”
Then you have a bunch of “stupid” Nobel Prize winners. Of course it makes sense! If you want to reduce the consumption of something a good way to do it is to tax it. It works like a charm. Shouldn’t those using gas — and thereby driving up health costs for others and causing taxpayers to spend trillions of dollars protecting their supply — pay their own way? It’s not punishment, it’s paying what you should for the costs you are imposing on society. Nothing extraordinary about this.
The Volt per se has nothing to do with this.
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 10:14 am
hi Adrian #109,
”I was talking to a car salesman yesterday and they aren’t that excited about the Volt ”
_______________________________
I see this as good news. GM may have already laid out ground rules concerning mark ups on the E-REV models.
=D~
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 10:24 am
#109
I completely agree with you. People say it is the only way to get us off oil.
How about telling those of us who can afford the additional tax that rather than punishing the working poor we will pay it for them. fMaybe a federal home tax based on number of people living there devided by the total square footage. excess footage could be taxed as an energy waste. Damn! If we wouldn’t scream about that as a punishment for us being successful.
I would have no problem with a tax on oil payed at the end of the year on those that can afford it. But not on the poor who struggle just to make ends meet. People do not drive tired old cars because they can’t decide which new one to buy in order to get us off oil, or to be green.
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 10:27 am
110 DonC
“Of course it makes sense! If you want to reduce the consumption of something a good way to do it is to tax it. It works like a charm.”
———————————————————————————–
Taxes at federal levels results in the govt finding a new revenue stream, and then they need to create new branches of govt to “utilize” this new found wealth. This new branch then finds that it could sure use more money to keep it growing….so maybe they increase that gas tax a little more and hire a few more “regulators” to be sure they are getting their fair share of this revenue stream.
Pretty soon this little gas tax funded branch becomes a whole tree, that we the tax payers continue to fund forever. Even if we did become 100% oil independent, this branch would still need to be nurtured and funded by the American tax payer. Oh, and to believe that this gas tax would be used to fund oil indendency, you would be a fool. This tax will be used as the govt sees fit, not as you our I would want it applied.
Taxes are not the answer.
The answer to oil independence will lie in the hands of entrepreneurs , who find ways to beat oil without government subsidies or handouts. This type of growth has deep roots, and can flourish under its own means.
As H.W. Bush said “Read my lips, no new taxes” (well he did say it, but he did not follow through, and he regrets this today)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP9_kkzfN-w
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 10:33 am
I won’t buy one. Better things to do with my money than buy a show off.
(Quote)
January 17th, 2009 at 11:14 am
#97 DonC
I like the the idea of a revenue neutral gas tax increase, balanced like you say against a cut in payroll taxes. It naturally aligns incentives much more efficiently. For example, if we need a larger military due to our gas consumption, this cost should be borne by the oil users. Higher payroll taxes provides a disincentive to job creation so cutting those is good. The only problem is the payroll taxes goes to worker benefits like social security, unemployment, etc. There’s a natural link between working more, paying more social security, and getting more when you retire. If you disconnect those, it becomes difficult to develop “conversion” equations that are fair, especially when it’s a politician doing the work.
Note however that to work well, the tax would have to be applied to all oil users, not just gasoline. Up in New England they actually subsidize fuel oil usage. I thought it was hilarious when, during the campaign, one candidate wanted to place an windfall tax on oil companies, and use the money to subsidize consumption. Hmmmm. So when prices are high, punish production and reward consumption. Sign me up.
(Quote)
January 18th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Hi-Pa claims their in-wheel motors can be lighter than a regular wheel assembly, mostly due to getting rid of the heavy disc brake components. They use electronic brakes and regeneration.
Then again Hi-Pa has not show a full power working prototype..all their prototypes move very slowly:
http://www.hipadrive.com/sema.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
#43 Cautious Fan Says:
January 16th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
#24 DaveG
Wheel motors also greatly increase the “unsprung mass,” making for a rougher ride.
(Quote)
January 18th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
they will never make this concept car like this, they cant.. they will have to raise the roof line and it will not look as cool.. probably reduce the size of the wheels also.
Can you visualize the typical cadillac owner getting into a car made for a 4′ midget?.. they are not flexible enough
The could stretch the car out so the headroom became normal, but then the volt powertrain could not be used.
(Quote)