Grab our RSS Feed

AND

How GM Decided on the Term E-REV to Describe the Volt

January 25th, 2009 | Posted in: E-REV, Feedback to GM

Last week we held a poll here indicating support of readers to using the term E-REV for extended-range electric vehicle to describe the Chevy Volt, versus REEV as some automakers are using.

The poll (summarized above) showed that of 986 respondants, 70% preferred E-REV versus 10% preferring REEV. 15% felt the term didn’t matter, and 5% had some other idea.

I pointed these findings out to Tony Posawatz who is GM’s Volt vehicle line director who explains to us in some detail how GM came to use this term. Tony is also co-chairman of the Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA) that represents many OEMs engaging in public policy and engineering standards that will help guide and build our electric car future.

Here’s how Tony explained it:

Some background on our use of Extended-Range EV vs. other options (specifically, REEV).

When we initially looked at REEV, we uncovered that there would be confusion around what exactly does it stand for.

Is it “range extender EV,” or “range extending EV,” or “range extended EV?” This made RE-EV difficult to make common.

We focused on the E-REV for the following reasons:
1. extended-range EV was the same convention as battery EV, fuel cell EV, etc.
2. a few gov’t agencies are more comfortable with this term and are using it to uniquely define the VOLT propulsion system. As such, we will help define the standards for this propulsion system.
3. continued to keep this propulsion system distinct and different from hybrid technology.
4. it sounded cooler.

The more we communicate the benefits inherent in an extended-range EV, the more customers view the term and the technology as very positive.

Posted by: Lyle

54 Responses to “How GM Decided on the Term E-REV to Describe the Volt”

Alex S Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 9:51 am

Finally I am first!

Not that it matters too much but I think E-REV sounds better.
Sounds to me like this is like a podcast/netcast naming problem.
Call it whatever as long as you plug it in it’s fine with me.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 10:07 am

How long will it take before the dash is dropped?

No one refers to email as e-mail anymore.

(Quote)
nuclearboy Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 10:11 am

I like the name. It is important to point out differences with hybrid drive trains. This is an electric vehicle 1st and foremost. Then is adds the range extending generator to do away with range anxiety issues.

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 10:40 am

______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 10:41 am

It is important to point out differences with hybrid drive trains.
______________________________

ASSIST = parallel

FULL = series-parallel

EREV = series

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 11:14 am

#2 john1701a Says: “How long will it take before the dash is dropped? No one refers to email as e-mail anymore.”
————————————————————————————–
I agree. Let’s just call it EREV.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 11:18 am

#3 nuclearboy Says: “This is an electric vehicle 1st and foremost. Then is adds the range extending generator to do away with range anxiety issues.”
————————————————————————————-
I agree. The Volt can go 100 miles per hour on the electric motor and batteries alone. This makes it an EV in my mind. The range extender just makes it convenient for longer trips.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 11:30 am

I agree.
____________________

EREV was the whole point of the push for FULL here.

It was quite obvious that this Volt group would eventually notice the same problematic pattern, necessitating a supporter identifier. Prius owners struggled the same way with ASSIST years ago.

Study the history and stop fighting those trying to help. There are reasons for certain approaches, which you’ll discover as you transistion from enthusiast to supporter.

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 11:57 am

From a TV newscast just last week. “GM’s new hybrid car.. the Chevrolet Volt”
____________________________

A good portion of the world is still in the dark on this new technology. Surprisingly, several people at the recent L.A. Auto Show stated, “I can’t buy this car, it only goes 40 miles”. The Chevy Volt girl (GM rep) had to clear this up about 3 or 4 times. Then when asked, “Oh, how far will it go then?”. She replied, “Hundreds of miles”. But she would not be specific on tank size or mpg.

There is still a lot of basic E-REV knowledge that needs to be assimilated. GM should begin each “Volt” ad by saying, “Travel 300 miles with the first 40 being on pure, no pump gas, electric power”.

=D~

(Quote)
Guy Incognito Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

I’m in the “5% had some other idea” because I properly refer to the Volt as a Serial Plug-In Hybrid (SPIH).
I can see why I’m in the oddball minority, SPIH is’nt a cool sounding anagram like E-REV or REEV.

On that note, my all time favorite anagram is TARDIS.
Time And Relative Dimensions In Space.

(Quote)
JoeAlvord Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 12:32 pm

I like reason #4.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 12:55 pm

#10 Guy Incognito,
Have we been watching too many old brittish TV shows…

(Quote)
Ben Roethlisberger Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

Get Real. The Volt is just a HYBRID. Nothing more and nothing less.
If GM actually spent this much time and thought on a new name for existing technology than this would explain why it is taking them a huge amount of time to get this vehicle on the road. I can assure you had the folks at Tesla had $1 Billion dollars the Volt would be on the road last year. Let’s pick it up a notch Mr. GM Engineers.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 1:08 pm

For me, the relevant points are these:

1) Having a common name for this type of vehicle is important. We need a name that works across all manufacturers, otherwise consumers will be price comparing vehicles with dramatically different capabilities.

2) The term REEV has been used by both Chrysler and Tesla, but EREV seems to have gotten more traction in the press.

3) The term “PHEV” has already come to mean a full hybrid with a Li/Ion battery replacing the normal NiMH battery, yielding an 8-15 mile electric range. Examples include the Toyota Prius and Saturn Vue plug-ins. In my view, cars with this little electric range are not worth the trouble of plugging in.

For example, if you plug/unplug every day, but you only have to go to the gas station every 2 months, the total amount of time you spend fueling is less than a regular gas engine car. That makes cars like the Volt more convenient than a regular gas engine car.

But if you plug/unplug every day, and still have to go to the gas station 3 times a month, then the total amount of time you spend fueling is more than a regular gas engine car, which makes it less convenient than a regular gas engine car.

Due to this inconvenience factor, I don’t want the Volt and other similar cars labeled the same as PHEVs with only 8-15 miles of range.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

#5 john1701a:

John, how about:

ASSIST = good

FULL = better

EREV = best

(Quote)
statik Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

I’m going with #11 JoeAlvord,

I say they decided on E-REV primarily because it sounds cool…and I have no problem with that, lol.

/nice graph Lyle

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

#13 Ben Roethlisberger Says: “I can assure you had the folks at Tesla had $1 Billion dollars the Volt would be on the road last year.”
————————————————————————————–
If you listen to Elon Musk talk about future inexpensive Tesla models like the BlueStar, he always points out that it will take good amount of time to get there.

GM says their first Volt assembly line will be capable of producing 200,000 Volt’s per year. Tesla is aiming to produce 2000 Roadsters a year. To get from 2000 to 200,000 requires a whole different process. The car has to be designed differently. Testing has to be much more rigorous. The assembly line is completely different.

Developing a mass production car takes time.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 1:37 pm

The term “PHEV” has already come to mean a full hybrid with a Li/Ion battery replacing the normal NiMH battery, yielding an 8-15 mile electric range.
___________________________________

What kind of nonsense is that?

Many of the aftermarket builds, including one of Toyota’s, use NiMH batteries. Some options offer significantly larger capacity too. For example, the Hymotion upgrade offers roughly a 30-mile “range”.

Of course, the whole point of EREV identification is to stop measuring the other hybrids using criteria that doesn’t really apply. FULL hybrids equate to “capacity” to boost MPG, not a measure of “range”.

(Quote)
canehdian Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 2:00 pm

Reason #4 is the best.
Haha

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 2:01 pm

A rose by any other name…

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 2:04 pm

I’m surprised GM hasn’t copyrighted E-REV already. It’s only for marketing purposes anyway.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 2:07 pm

EREV simply rolls off the tongue better than REEV.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 2:16 pm

#21 CorvetteGuy Says: “I’m surprised GM hasn’t copyrighted E-REV already. It’s only for marketing purposes anyway.”
————————————————————————————–
GM wants to make E-REV an industry wide term, so copyrighting it would be counterproductive.

From the article:
“…Tony Posawatz who is GM’s Volt vehicle line director… Tony is also co-chairman of the Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA) that represents many OEMs engaging in public policy and engineering standards that will help guide and build our electric car future.”

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

#13 Ben Roethlisberger

“The Volt is just a HYBRID. Nothing more and nothing less.”

I suppose that works for simpletons. Here are some more broad characterizarions:

A diamond is just a mineral.
Jessica Alba is just a female.
A Ferrari is just a car.

However, some people are more discerning and want distinctions.

(Quote)
David Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 3:42 pm

#24 is right – #13 Ben just doesn’t get it. Ben, in an “attempt” to follow your logic, how would you then decribe the difference between the Prius hybrid that can go 10 miles on electric power at low speeds and the Volt that travels all electric for the first 40 miles and can go 100 mph?

(Quote)
Mark Z Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 3:57 pm

If E-REV is Extended Range Electric Vehicle, it could be interpreted as Electric – Range Extended Vehicle. But it’s not a stove (an electric range.)

E-REV is truly the Electric REVolution with an unlimited coast to coast driving range without plugging in.

Brings to mind the jingle, “See the USA, in your Chevrolet.” The Tesla would only allow you to, “Wait to charge your car, cause you can’t go far.”

(Quote)
ccombs Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 4:17 pm

Thank you all those who realize that the volt is an E-REVolution, not “just another hybrid”. This somehow needs to be communicated to the public, cause everyone I hear talking about it is sooo confused and thus not very excited. When I explain it to people and they finally get it they are usually extremely excited and wonder why GM couldn’t communicate the same thing to them. I think GM just needs to continue to harp on “volt facts” until people finally understand that this is truly a new and amazing type of vehicle.

(Quote)
George K Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 4:35 pm

Tony Posawatz:
“3. continued to keep this propulsion system distinct and different from hybrid technology.”
- – - – - – - – - -

#3 says a lot. A typical full hybrid uses 2 propulsion systems – a gas engine and an electric motor. A plug-in hybrid uses 2 propulsion systems and 2 different fuels – gas and grid electricity . The Volt uses ONE propulsion system, and 2 different fuels.

Admittedly, this is confusing to the public. Thus E-REV.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 5:23 pm

#23 Dave G says:

GM wants to make E-REV an industry wide term, so copyrighting it would be counterproductive.
____________________________________________________

Respectfully, I disagree. “HYBRID” is the accepted term for any system that combines electric and gasoline engine technology. “E-REV” will be for branding and marketing.

Examples: “Vortec” engines by GM and “HEMI” engines by Chysler/Dodge. Both systems achieve similar results but you don’t see GM using “HEMI” on their engines which I believe is a term that has been in use for much longer than “Vortec”. When you say HEMI, you think Dodge or Chrysler. And that is the point. GM wants/needs a term for the technology that rolls off the tongue and makes every American think Chevy VOLT.

I prefer “E-REV” because “REV” brings to mind “revving it up” which sort of implies ’speed’ and/or ‘power’. But that’s just me.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 6:00 pm

#29 CorvetteGuy,

I’m reading Lyle’s article above, and it sure seems like GM is working with the Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA) to standardize the term E-REV across the whole industry.

I don’t really see any other way to interpret this. I seems pretty clear.

As for the term “hybrid”, I have no real desire to debate this. It’s semantics, and everyone seems to have their own opinion. My only point is that cars that can go 100 MPH on the electric motor and batteries alone seem to be in a different class than other hybrids.

(Quote)
BillR Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

# 30 Dave G,

I too see a huge distinction between the Volt and a hybrid.

The hybrid cannot drive an EPA cycle without using the ICE. The Volt can.

Another distinction is the future capability. If battery technology progresses fast, the Volt might someday go perhaps 80 miles AER. If EEStor can pull off a miracle, it might go hundreds of miles AER and recharge in 20 minutes. It’s all dependent upon the electrical storage means.

Hybrids, as currently designed, cannot truly operate over the vehicle’s entire operating envelope without starting the ICE.

So as the name implies, a hybrid NEEDS both means of propulsion for successful overall operation, while the E-REV is truly an EV, with an onboard generator to extend range (and of course, for those who must nitpick, we must mention that for the entire Volt fleet, it will be used up to 5% of the time to save the battery from cold weather operation).

(Quote)
Zach Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 7:51 pm

son of a bitch. Someone delete post#32…..

(Quote)
Zach Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 7:52 pm

I can’t believe he said “it sounds cooler”, lol. So awesome!

(Quote)
tim-the-dreamer Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 8:46 pm

Now that the earth shattering debate is over, I would like two questions answered please…..when is the launch date and how much exactly is the e-rev gonna set me back? And, can I get one in black with matching rims and glowing (LED based) starfleet emblems with the appropriate costum? . Reason #4 tells me some of their engineers might have a scense of humer, is that possible?

(Quote)
Red HHR Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 9:41 pm

eREV

Red HHR (H—’s Hot Rod)

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 10:51 pm

#34 tim-the-dreamer Says: “Now that the earth shattering debate is over, I would like two questions answered please…..when is the launch date and how much exactly is the e-rev gonna set me back?”
————————————————————————————–
Launch date: November 2010.

Price: Around $30,000. Note that this includes the $7500 U.S. tax credit.

(Quote)
unni Says:
January 25th, 2009 at 10:53 pm

From :

http://www.electricmotors.machinedesign.com/guiEdits/Content/bdeee11/bdeee11_4.aspx

–
Cooler operation lengthens a motor’s service life in two ways. For every 10° C reduction in temperature, motor insulation life doubles; high-efficiency motors tend to operate 10 to 20° C cooler than standard-efficiency motors.
–
Do this means Volt running in Alaska is more efficient in running but takes battery issue ( battery may loose power as temp decreases ) where volt running at Greenland Ranch, Calif will have both range issue ( ( because cooling is needed for the battery ) and electric motor issue ? how electric motor cooling is done ? and how cruising affects volt ?

The good part is Alaska ones will be very great in Extended range mode.

(Quote)
JoeAlvord Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 12:10 am

I just read that President Obama will reverse the Bush policy and allow California and other states to set stricter emission standards than the national ones. This should help the case of the Volt and other EV’s.

(Quote)
jeff j Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 12:24 am

Obama – as if the auto Co. needs to jump threw more government hoops,, Oh yeah this will help!!

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 12:44 am

# 30 Dave G,

I too see a huge distinction between the Volt and a hybrid.

The hybrid cannot drive an EPA cycle without using the ICE. The Volt can.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I agree there are differences in how some Hybrid systems operate. That’s not my point. I’m only saying that the term “E-REV” is a marketing term for GM. Or it should be. And I’m sure all the other car makers are working on their own acronyms that may be even catchier.

(Quote)
stuey Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 5:10 am

i agree with an eariler post about how people dont understand exactly what your explaining when talking about the chevy volt. i had a heated discussion about why the volt was a revolutionary technolgy with my father in law! YES i agree, this has been done before in cruise ships and locomotives, BUT no one has ever done this in a mass produced car before. long story short, some people can understand how exciting this car is, some cant – each to there own i guess. me myself, i cant wait, so much so, im keen to build an electric go kart with on board range extender! – whos with me?

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 5:45 am

#41 Stuey,

I have had similar discussions. I do my best to explain it.
Sometimes it works, other times it doesn’t.
But I still spread the word as often as possible.

(Quote)
RB Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 7:58 am

#38 JoeAlvord said “I just read that President Obama will reverse the Bush policy and allow California and other states to set stricter emission standards than the national ones.”
—————————————————————

It seems Obama’s directive will not change the rule directly. Instead, Obama’s directive will be to the EPA directing that agency to review the rule that makes all states follow the same standards. No doubt the EPA will do that review, and they are likely to follow Obama’s implied directive to allow each state to be different. This process takes a year or two, so it is slow moving.

Maybe a rule change away from a single federal standard will be a good thing, and for sure CA loves to be different. Maybe we will all have to buy CA cars, at higher prices. On the other hand, if the result is multiple different and possibly conflicting state standards, then it could mean that cars presented for sale in one state will not be for sale in another. That will mean fewer choices and much higher prices for consumers.

To the degree that it means that states require automakers to offer cars that customers do not want, there is trouble ahead.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 8:37 am

#37 unni Says: “how electric motor cooling is done ?”
————————————————————————————–
Good question. I’m not exactly sure how it’s done.

Electric motors are very efficient, like 90-95%, so the amount of waste heat generated in the motor is much less than an ICE, which is only around 20% efficient. It could be that only air cooling is required for the electric motor.

I know that cooling the motor controller (a.k.a. inverter) is somewhat of an issue, but I don’t know how that’s done either.

The Tesla Roadster does have a liquid cooling system, but this may be just for the battery pack.

Let us know if you find anything out on this.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 8:50 am

#41 stuey Says: “…long story short, some people can understand how exciting this car is, some cant – each to there own i guess.”
————————————————————————————–
Many people don’t get excited until it’s tangible, right now – today. Once cars like the Volt start selling for under $30K, and they’re on the dealer lot with no waiting time, then I think a lot more people will get excited.

By the way, I’m really not so excited about the Volt itself, but rather the fundamental change it represents. If we can replace 80% of our gasoline usage without any major compromises on range, comfort, acceleration, etc., that’s a big deal. Once it becomes real, lot’s of people will get excited about it, and other car makers will start making cars like this as well. It’s also good to see an American car company leading the way again.

(Quote)
Jason The Saj Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 9:58 am

I still stand by the following:

E-REV as a technical term. Beneficial for the E-REVolution marketing campaign. But REEVer will become the street vernacular for these type of vehicles. For the mere fact that it is easier and faster to say.

(Quote)
Jim in PA Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 10:41 am

#31 Bill R

The day the Volt can go hundreds of mile on a charge and fully recharge in 20 minutes is the day they drop the range extender (or offer an electric-only model in addition to the EREV). Most recharges would still be done at home, and on-the-road recharges would be rare since most people simply don’t drive that far. If I needed a recharge during a 300 mile roadtrip, I would be more than happy to sit and drink a cup of coffee for 20 minutes while the car recharges. That would be a small price to pay for having an electric car.

PS – When on-the-road charging becomes commonplace, GM would be wise to include an On-Star feature that maintains an up-to-date database of charge stations, phone numbers, and business hours, and overlays them on a GPS map by radius from your current location, or by distance from your planned route. That would remove Range Anxiety for most people. You could plan your recharge locations before you even pull out of your driveway.

(Quote)
Jim in PA Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 10:45 am

#45 Dave G

I am also excited about replacing 80% of our gasoline use. Unfortunately, gasoline only accounts for a portion of our oil consumption, with the rest going to diesel, heating oil, plastics, lubricants, fertilizer, etc. The Volt isn’t a cure-all for our oil dependence, but it is a key piece in the puzzle. A companion to EREV technology needs to be the commercialization of viable biofuels and viologically derived oils (i.e. not corn ethanol) to fit into many of these other applications. Oh, and as a fuel for our EREVs too.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 12:00 pm

#2 john1701a:

OMG, I’m still using “e-mail”! You mean tht’s obsolete?
Showing my age again. Arrrrrrgghh!!

#43 RB:

There will not be multiple standards for multiple states. That is simply auto industry propaganda.

The way it works under the Clean Air Act is that California, as the state which had the worst air and started pollution controls, can propose tougher standards than the EPA. The EPA must grant a waiver to allow same. Other states can then adopt the CA standards. NO OTHER STATE can follow this process.

These waivers have been granted in every single case since the beginning of the Clean Air Act until this latest one, blocked by the Bush EPA at the behest of the industry. Some 13 other states, home to the majority of the US population, have signed on to adopt the CA standards. History shows that, once this happens, they are adopted nation wide. There are no “49 state” cars any more, and have not been for many years.

I’ll say it again. Once the price of gas goes back up, any manufacturer who dos not equal or better these standards will be out put out of business by the marketplace anyway. What has happened to GM, Ford and Chrysler is the result of this type of counterproductive stalling and whining. Better they should get with it and make their products more fuel efficient. With the millions of dollars they have wasted on lobbying and litigation to stall these regulations, they could have made a lot of progress already.

LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS!

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 12:25 pm

#48 Jim in PA Says: “I am also excited about replacing 80% of our gasoline use. Unfortunately, gasoline only accounts for a portion of our oil consumption, with the rest going to diesel, heating oil, plastics, lubricants, fertilizer, etc. The Volt isn’t a cure-all for our oil dependence, but it is a key piece in the puzzle…”
————————————————————————————–
Yes, I’m in total agreement.

The United States imports around 2/3 of the oil 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 plug-ins got to 80% market penetration. The Volt would eliminate about 80% of the gasoline used in those cars. 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

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 1:43 pm

E-REV does sound better than REEV and is easier to “say”.

As to some of the discussion about EPA standards, I would like to say that it is not just GM, Ford and Chrysler who opposes some of the rules and regulations proposed by California and the EPA. Our friends at Toyota, Honda, Nissan and some of our European friends have stated their opposition at times. But, of course, only the American automakers get the recognition of being in opposition. I wonder why that is.

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 7:17 pm

#13 Ben Roethlisberger and others… sigh amazing how so many don’t even understand the car that they are so excited about. The volt is NOT a hybrid. Technically it is NOT a hybrid. Do you know what a hybrid is?

Let me clear something up for those that may still be a little confused about what the Volt is and what it could do.

No. 1: The volt is an electric vehicle. Its propulsion system is driven entirely by electricity. There is nothing in its design that allows for gasonline propulsion.

No. 2: RANGE!!! Lots of talk time and print has been taken up with talk about the Volts range. Let me put it in terms that will hopefully clear the air on this issue. If you are driving from the Florida Keys to Alaska and back you would have to stop and refuel less with the volt than with most car on the road today. You ONLY need to get a motel room when you need to sleep and you Never have to worry about being stranded.

(Quote)
tim-the-dreamer Says:
January 27th, 2009 at 12:14 am

David G @36

Thanks, with all the debates over every little detail it’s easy to miss the important stuff. If the wheels don’t roll then these minor details will be for nought, and I want our babies built stateside.

JoeAlvord @38

If you remember Cali tried to push green by setting a new standard that resulted in the ev-1 and the auto industries plus the oil comp. fought tooth and nail to have it repealed. According to wikipedia the head honchoes in gm regretted it to this day. People like senator Dingle(berry) tried to make it illeagal. If it’s reinstated, that would be the catalyst the auto industries need to help promote the e-revs even better thanks to the public figures in entertainment industries.
Late breaking news:

Lohan smacks another tree, thanks to its carbon fiber body the volt delivered a fatal blow to the tree and surounding bushes. It’s feared the tree will not survive. Miss Lohan is back in rehab, and the nation mourns the scratched paint job the E-REV suffered, well-wishers sending cards and cans of paint. Specialist working round the clock no news yet on the results, Details at 11.

(Quote)
I*VOLT*I*EVS*E*REVS Says:
February 4th, 2009 at 8:14 pm

Hello, I am a young driver! I know how expensive the gas prices can get! I LOVE THE way Volt and other cool electric cars look! I love the fact that electric cars can be charged from solar panels-at home! I hope I can’t wait to have one RIGHT NOW! Would there be only one RIGHT now for a reasonable price, I would have bought! I like that the electric cars and REVs are very quiet!
I agree with the nuclearboy:
“Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!”
WaY! To go!
Hurry up the BIG 3! Hurry GM!
Electric and REVs are two cars of the future even if you do not admit it! Hydrogen and diesel will soon die out! Diesel is not clean unless it is the BIO-which is dangerous to make. Diesel is also very noisy. NOISE POLLUTION IS A PROBLEM IF YOU LEAVE BY A BIG STREET!!!!!!!!!!*********** The Diesel prices cancels fuel economy. Hydrogen is not practical. Hydrogen escapes too much and costs too much.

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009
This 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, 2009
I 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, 2009
The 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, 2009
Link 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, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier

How GM Decided on the Term E-REV to Describe the Volt

54 Responses to “How GM Decided on the Term E-REV to Describe the Volt”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts