GM has just announced at the Chicago Auto Show two important new supplier contracts for the Chevy Volt.
Goodyear has been chosen to supply energy-saving Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max tires and Bose has been chosen to supply the Energy Efficient Series sound system.
GM notes that the specialized Goodyear low rolling resistance tires allowed the Volt to get up to one mile more all-electric range as compared to similar tires.
The Bose stereo system is “30 percent smaller, 40 percent lighter, and uses 50 percent less energy than conventional Bose sound systems,” and is reported to produce energy savings equivalent to removing 50 pounds of mass. To produce these energy efficiencies, engineers were able to reduce the size of the amplifiers, increase the force per unit area of the speakers, and create specialized digital control circuitry.
Per GM’s Volt vehicle line executive Frank Weber, “Everything we do with the Volt is about maximizing its mechanical, electrical and thermal efficiency. From the Voltec™ propulsion system down to individual components such as tires or sound systems, we have been analyzing every part of the Volt so that we can offer a vehicle that is as efficient as possible to maximize the electric range. I think we have achieved this with Bose and Goodyear.”
Also from 5:30 to 6:00 PM EST Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah will be tweeting about the Volt on Twitter @GMBlogs.
Source (GM)
This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 10th, 2009 at 4:35 pm and is filed under Efficiency, Production. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Feb 10th, 2009 (4:43 pm)Great, I like BOSE hifi.
JC NPNS
Feb 10th, 2009 (4:43 pm)More pieces in place
Feb 10th, 2009 (4:46 pm)I have two questions. When can I get the Volt and How much will it cost.
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:00 pm)Can you buy these tires from a Goodyear dealer or are they size specific to certain OEM vehicles. Might be nice to get a little extra economy if you are in the market for tires anyway and you don’t drive a high performance car.
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:07 pm)Too bad automakers don’t go to these lengths to squeeze this much efficiency out of components for every car! It’d make a huge difference in our overall transport fuel consumption.
Good for you GM and suppliers!
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:11 pm)Robert M. Sperry #3: Both good questions. #1 – “When” is dependent upon where you live for the first year’s production run. But we do not know what areas will be the first to get the Volt. #2 – “How Much” is still very much up in the air. It could be as much as $40K, or as low as $30K, if there are federal rebates available. But there has been no official price list made available from GM. Until we see a car at our local dealer with a sticker price on it, it is all a guessing game right now…..
As far as BOSE for the stereo, I am happy with that. But in some of the other audio blogs I check out from time to time, they say that BOSE stands for “Basically Overpriced Stereo Equipment”
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:21 pm)solo2500nt # 4 —– Goodyear is also introducing the Fuel Max tires to the replacement market beginning in April. They showed them to tire dealers earlier this month.
They’ll be available in 27 sizes, which covers about 80 percent of the car tire market. This includes such cars as Pontiac Grand Prix and Chevrolet Impala, minivans such as the Chrysler Town & Country, and hybrids such as the Toyota Prius and Chevrolet Malibu.
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:21 pm)It’s all good. Even more important and encouraging than these two specific items are Mr. Weber’s comments about maximizing efficiency. Amen, Mr. Weber.
#5 Mike-o-Matic:
Too true, but we have to start somewhere. I devoutly hope that the Volt will be the rolling test bed for spreading this philosophy throughout the corporation in the future. Assuming that there is one.
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:22 pm)Oops, answered my own question.
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. introduced its Assurance Fuel Max all-season tire at its 2009 Dealer Meeting in Washington, D.C., earlier this week.
Compared to the original Assurance tire, Assurance Fuel Max provides 27% less rolling resistance.
“In response to today’s economic environment and fluctuating gas prices, drivers everywhere are trying to use less gas. It’s all part of a larger consumer trend toward spending money more wisely,” says Joey Viselli, Goodyear brand director. “With the new Assurance Fuel Max, Goodyear is offering a fuel-efficient solution, but with great wet and dry traction.”
Assurance Fuel Max is engineered with the following features:
* a “Wet Tread Zone” with dual AquaChannel grooves that help evacuate water.
* zig-zagging “micro grooves” and center tread notches for grip in rain or light snow.
* a “Dry Zone” that, with the help of strong shoulder blocks, is designed to enhance handling and grip on dry pavement.
Several sizes of the Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max are shipping now. By April, all 27 sizes, which will cover about 80% of the auto tire segment, will be available for models such as the Pontiac Grand Prix and Chevrolet Impala, minivans such as the Chrysler Town & Country, and hybrids such as the Toyota Prius and Chevrolet Malibu.
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:33 pm)Nokia has a similar tire out right now (not a fuel max tire) that is a mud and snow radial..
Excellent handling tire.. I have them on my 07 MAXX and am throughly impressed… as for milage.. the Bridgestones that were originally on the car barely make 50 K KMS. Running at 40 PSI.. the Nokias are giving me about a 1/2 mile per gallon more than the Bridgstones.
Not much but a lot better tire… I am hoping that if I ever get a Volt, I will have the option of getting the Nokias instead as they are a better tire.. and I have never had any good luck with anything from Goodyear.
Feb 10th, 2009 (5:45 pm)BOSE!!! in Chevy ?
Its music to my ears.
Feb 10th, 2009 (6:21 pm)If the tires can get one extra mile of AER (say 40 versus 39), that means they have about 2.5% less rolling resistance than the next competitive tire.
From an earlier slide by Bob Boniface, 10 kg of weight reduction equates to 0.25 miles of AER. Since 50 lbs is about 22.7 kg, the low energy Bose stereo should provide about 0.56 additional miles AER in the city cycle.
All positive news here, as more components and suppliers are being identified.
Feb 10th, 2009 (6:23 pm)With the quiet VOLT electric motor, the BOSE system should sound extra nice. Now if only Sirius/XM will return to original XM programming – that would be music to my ears when driving the VOLT.
Feb 10th, 2009 (6:30 pm)Nice, actual volt news
As long as I can plug an AUX connection, I don’t care much about the rest
Feb 10th, 2009 (6:31 pm)Isn’t Bose an expensive speaker brand? if so, this alone might put the price of the Volt out of range to some people..
Feb 10th, 2009 (6:38 pm)Off topic for this post, but interesting. 1st mass produced NEV available in North America this year for $15k. High speed version in 2010. You should have been quicker with the Volt GM.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hog9wpZCg8U
Feb 10th, 2009 (6:45 pm)They probably tried Bang and Olafsen but couldn’t get the stains out.
Nice choices, GM.
Those who want other choices can either easily aftermarket kit their vehicles or beg GM to produce BHI (blingtastic and horribly inefficient) and CCT (cheap and craptastic) versions of the Volt.
Feb 10th, 2009 (7:09 pm)Bose has been standard in Corvettes for over 20 years. Nothing new about Bose working with Chevy.
Feb 10th, 2009 (7:23 pm)All great Chevys ride on Goodyear tires. Period.
Feb 10th, 2009 (7:27 pm)anyone know if it’ll be a HD radio?
Feb 10th, 2009 (7:34 pm)Is the ” best guess” curb weight still 3520#?
Feb 10th, 2009 (7:35 pm)Tire replacements will cost?
Feb 10th, 2009 (7:52 pm)Yes, Bose is good. I agree, #1. Make it so.
I don’t mind low rolling resistance tires as long as they’re not also low side-to-side traction for poor handling tires (I like Michelins, myself).
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:03 pm)Bose? This car is going to cost a friggin fortune. What happened to KISS??? Yes I like Bose; yes I can afford it. But it’s a little excessive fellas, don’t you think?
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:06 pm)Too bad automakers don’t go to these lengths to squeeze this much efficiency out of components for every car!
________________________________
There’s a good reason. Improved efficiency has always come at a tradeoff. Was there a recent breakthru? Otherwise, the tires will be expensive… or wear out quickly… or have disappointing traction… or be noisy.
That’s why I use high-traction all-season tires on my Prius, rather than something that would contribute to better MPG.
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:39 pm)It seems all levels of all Auto industries are getting pretty excited about the Volt as well. About all I use the stereo/CD for is very rare occasional use (15 times a year), and, since I have “tin ears”, the extra cost of a high end sound system, while really nice for most, is just not at all a priority for me. While most digital sound systems do not use lots of wattage in the first place, I’d be perfectly content with just a basic single CD from Delco if it saves $200 or more.
Whatever it takes to keep the overall costs down for me to get my Volt is top priority. (There is no 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, or 10th priority).
The Goodyear ultra-low-rolling-resistance tires are really a “must”, and, that’s the place where there ought not be any compromises.
What are the expected wear mileages and replacement costs for the Goodyear Assurance? Have these been published yet?
Dan Petit Austin TX
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:39 pm)Excellent. Top notch American tire company, top notch American audio company (albeit with overseas manufacturing). Great choices.
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:40 pm)#3 ROBERT M. SPERRY Says: “I have two questions. When can I get the Volt and How much will it cost.”
————————————————————————————–
November 2010. Around $30,000 after tax credits.
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:41 pm)Good move by GM.
Thank Christ GM didn’t go with Toyo tires and an Erickson 2″ speaker system.
=D~
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:44 pm)#6 Jim I Says: “As far as BOSE for the stereo, I am happy with that. But in some of the other audio blogs I check out from time to time, they say that BOSE stands for “Basically Overpriced Stereo Equipment”
————————————————————————————–
Bose is not on the top of my list either. But I’m sure Bose gives GM a lot better prices than they give us.
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:48 pm)I downloaded the tire picture that was linked in the GM article.
I expanded the picture, and although I couldn’t find the actual size, the print on the tire said to mount on a 16″ rim. Max load was 1609 lbs, while max inflation pressure was 61 psi.
I’m not a tire expert, but are these tires uni-directional? I couldn’t find a rotation arrow (like on my Goodyear F1′s), but it is difficult to see the sidewall text on one side of the tire due to the camera angle.
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:55 pm)Back in 73-75 when we were trying to build a hybrid it was Firestone that supplied us with tires. We installed them and drove the car a little with no problems. Then we had to do a parade. Decided we should check the tires. They only had 4 PSI in them. We pumped them up and did the parade. The side walls were very stiff. The weight of the batteries made the ride better. JMHO
Take Care
Arch
Feb 10th, 2009 (8:58 pm)Excellent! I like Bose and you can’t go wrong with Goodyear.
Feb 10th, 2009 (9:13 pm)#16 Steve Orino Says: “1st mass produced NEV available in North America this year for $15k. High speed version in 2010. You should have been quicker with the Volt GM.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hog9wpZCg8U
————————————————————————————–
I would never buy an electric vehicle without a range extender.
I will only buy cars from a manufacturer with a network of dealerships throughout the U.S..
0 for 2.
Feb 10th, 2009 (9:23 pm)No doubt the Goodyear tires will be fine tires for the Volt. I wonder how they differ from ordinary tires. All tires have lower rolling resistance if inflated to a higher pressure. Maybe these tires are s designed to be (relatively) high pressure tires with little flex in the walls.
Feb 10th, 2009 (9:46 pm)Well, finally a news item that is mostly good news (not about rare lithium on Bolivia, threats of bankruptcy or silly attempts at making “plug in ready” communities.
I think this is a good thing. The R&D Bose put into that radio system will work across the board.
I kind of feel the same way I did when the 77 full sized GM line came out. It was a clean sheet of paper and designed to maximize efficiency. As we all know, for a variety of reasons all our vehicles have become, like most of us, significantly overweight for the interior volume and cargo capacity. I think the Volt may start another revolution in construction that will see significant cuts in mass, with resultant gains in fuel economy, with little or no loss in interior space or gains in NVH. But I may be dreaming.
Feb 10th, 2009 (9:49 pm)All tire manufacturers now have a line of low rolling resistance tires. Bridgestone’s is called the Ecopia. I have always had great luck with Bridgestone tires and therefore they are the only tires that I buy.
I am glad that GM is getting closer to releasing the Volt but unless they get the price down significantly lower they will not be able to get much market penetration with it.
Feb 10th, 2009 (9:55 pm)From the article: ““Everything we do with the Volt is about maximizing its mechanical, electrical and thermal efficiency.”
Then why did GM go with a conventional vehicle shape instead of aiming for a lower Cd?
It makes a difference. At higher speeds, a bigger difference.
Why the compromise? Why the half measures?
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:10 pm)#15 & #24 Are we the only ones that realize adding Bose to the Volt is going to increase the price? I hope they make a strip-down version.
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:13 pm)# 3 Robert… In 658 Day’s….we hope
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:20 pm)Well that just added over $1000.00 to the cost for four snow tires and wheels.
You aren’t going to go anywhere with these tires in snow.
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:20 pm)I would suspect a tire that has lower rolling resistance does not “stick” to the road as well….lower coefficient of rolling friction. Therefore, braking distances will be longer, especially considering that the vehicle will have that heavy 300lb battery pack in addition. Probably not a deal breaker, but the oil lobby may work to focus on “safety” issues like this. Just something to keep in mind.
#31 BillR
Great catch looking at the jpg. For those who want to see the hi-res version, see link below. Maybe a tire expert can tease a little more out. 61 PSI. Wow. That’s getting up there with my road bike.
http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/*query?VoltPortTech&page=1&source=all
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:22 pm)At least you can’s say GM is not keeping expectations of quality high with names like Bose and Goodyear. Even if the components are a little higher costs compared to lower cost alternatives, the cost surely cannot make that big of a difference overall on the bottom line to kill the deal on the purchase of the car.
GO-VOLT
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:37 pm)Financial news:
Question: “If we just gave all the bailout money to taxpayers, how much would we each get? I’ve seen $25,000, $300,000, $1 million – what’s the real answer?” — Miranda Marquit, Logan, Utah
Answer: $9,718.49
To arrive at that figure, CNNMoney.com took the total of the bank bailout, $700 billion, and added that to the proposed stimulus spending in the House of Representatives bill, $819 billion. That totals $1.519 trillion.
We then divide that number by 156.3 million, which was the total number of U.S. filers in 2008.
So: $1.519 trillion divided by 156.3 million equals $9,718.49 per U.S. taxpayer.
=D~
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:44 pm)#15, #24, #39
Bose makes good stuff but when they sell to you and me there is a really big profit mark up.
You can bet your bippy they gave Volt a good price or they wouldn’t have the contract.
Feb 10th, 2009 (10:49 pm)For those that checked out that BG NEV video.. Does the car come with an iPhone, or just the iPhone dock?
That’s be hilariously sweet if it came with an iPhone.
Feb 10th, 2009 (11:11 pm)Breaking news!
Obama joins Korean officials in meeting with Morales on Lake Titicaca
http://cambridgeforecast.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/fdrsaud.jpg
(Dangerous dictator unwitting freeworld leader file photo)
Feb 10th, 2009 (11:15 pm)Are you kidding me? BOSE is just going to make this car’s price tag shoot through the roof.
There is no justification for any ‘energy efficient’ system that QUADRUPLES the price of the speakers. BOSE is a luxury brand for people with no brains and lots of money.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:11 am)I have some Bose stuff. It’s not that expensive though it may be overpriced. The tag line for Bose is: “No highs, no lows, must be a Bose.” That’s basically true. It’s also true that really nice mid-tones give you decent sound.
Of more interest, on the GM Twitter Farah said that the top speed of the Volt would be 100 mph. Is that up from 90 mph or did I just have this wrong? Also handling similar to a 260 hp V6 engine. For a car the size of the Volt that will prove pretty impressive.
#42 Cautious Fan says “I would suspect a tire that has lower rolling resistance does not “stick” to the road as well….lower coefficient of rolling friction. Therefore, braking distances will be longer”
Generally you have a point that you’re trading off handling for mileage, but generally tires have gotten better on both counts over time. For example, radial tires with stiffer sidewalls give you both better mileage and better performance.
My guess is these tires will be fine. I don’t think GM is going crazy with efficiency like they had to do with the EV-1. The gen set allows you to make different trade-offs. The fact that they’ll be available in 27 sizes suggests they are a mainstream tire.
Feb 11th, 2009 (3:16 am)A harder rubber and more air pressure = less friction.
Feb 11th, 2009 (3:26 am)#38 charlie h says “Then why did GM go with a conventional vehicle shape instead of aiming for a lower Cd?”
Either charlie h or I missed the whole thing where GM achieved an excellent Cd with this body. And I think it’s charlie h. Accuracy is often the first casualty of reflexively negative comments.
———————–
#47 carcus1 says “Dangerous dictator unwitting freeworld leader file photo”
Actually Morales was democratically elected and enjoys genuine support in Bolivia. Disagreeing with someone’s policies doesn’t make them a dictator, unless your name is Merriam Webster and you have the power to redefine words. (No, I don’t like the guy either…)
Feb 11th, 2009 (3:45 am)DonC
I don’t know about highs and lows, but at least I can make out the words and understand.
“equivalent to removing 50 pounds of mass” does this mean we can all put on another 50 lbs (22.7kg for statik) ?
NeoCon slick tire good for bonneville, bad everywhere else
Feb 11th, 2009 (3:47 am)Don’t forget that the absolute best traction in dry weather is a 100% slick tire. It was actually banned in F1 for a while and still used in NASCAR.
The treads only become important in adverse weather like rain or snow. So the discussion of tread design doesn’t excite me so much.
I’m happy with the compromise.
And I’m really happy to get my hands on a plug-in to ween the western world off of foreign oil.
Feb 11th, 2009 (6:19 am)keith #41 says,
Well that just added over $1000.00 to the cost for four snow tires and wheels.
You aren’t going to go anywhere with these tires in snow.
——–
I was thinking the same thing. I wonder how they will perform.
Feb 11th, 2009 (7:31 am)#42 cautious fan says
I would suspect a tire that has lower rolling resistance does not “stick” to the road as well….lower coefficient of rolling friction. Therefore, braking distances will be longer, especially considering that the vehicle will have that heavy 300lb battery pack in addition.
————————————————
As rolling resistance comes mainly from the flexing of the sidewalls, it may be simply a stiffer tire, similar to a regular tire with extra tire pressure. More tire pressure would give about the same amount of improvement. In itself stiffer side walls will not produce longer braking distances. As you note, it may be also that the tire surface is less sticky, but then again, it may be the same.
Feb 11th, 2009 (7:46 am)The Volt is a great car. The people bringing it to market are smart and capable people. Their selection of OEM parts is based on market data, customer surveys and bottom line cost. To think that this team of professionals would select a vendor that will tank the MSRP is ludicrous. I have HP computers with Harmon Kardon speakers in them – the brand quality drove the sale.
Bose Corporation was founded in 1968 by Dr. Amar G. Bose, then professor of electrical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His research in the fields of speaker design and psychoacoustics—the human perception of sound—led to the 901® Direct/Reflecting® speaker system. Bose also makes the WaveGuide and WaveRadio desktop receivers that have excellent sound and FM tuner properties.
The Bose systems I’ve listened to in autos have been fantastic – rich, tight base response and sparkling highs from multiple speakers installed at passenger height to deliver full spectrum response and combat wind noise. Bose is very good at what they do.
I’d say, while it’s fun to have a little blog to armchair QB the introduction of electric automobiles from – the GM Voltec Team is doing a fine job of building the first mass market E-REV. I’m considering buying a second Volt to put up on blocks as part of my retirement plan. One day a cherry Volt will be worth big $$$$.
Feb 11th, 2009 (7:47 am)its goog that GM chose goodyear and bose.these are ome of the legendary american companies. we americans must understand that american industries are no way inferior to foreign industries.if at all foreign industries make cheap products it is due to currebcy manipulation of the country and poor labour standards
Feb 11th, 2009 (8:09 am)#48 Ignatius said
Are you kidding me? BOSE is just going to make this car’s price tag shoot through the roof
—————————————–
We just don’t know that. The prices paid to BOSE by GM for a special order item have no particular relation to prices for BOSE at normal retail stores. My guess is that GM likes the BOSE name, At the same time, BOSE wants the work. Probably GM is going to get these units for a low price. After all, if you were shopping for 10K of something, you could get a low price also, especially considering that’s just the first model year. BUT, the replacement unit purchased at the Chevy dealer will be high priced, I imagine.
Feb 11th, 2009 (8:27 am)#38 Charlie H says:
From the article: ““Everything we do with the Volt is about maximizing its mechanical, electrical and thermal efficiency.”
Then why did GM go with a conventional vehicle shape instead of aiming for a lower Cd?
It makes a difference. At higher speeds, a bigger difference.
Why the compromise? Why the half measures?
————
Somebody wake this guy up and send him to bed.
Feb 11th, 2009 (8:29 am)Just reading through the comments now (had a late night out), and thought I would mention that BOSE and GM have been together for a very long time. Actually, since the beginning…well at least since when BOSE started getting into ‘automotive applications’
They started cranking out auto music in 1983, and it was found in all the ‘high end’ product from GM that same year….you know things like the Oldsmobile Toronada and Buick Riviera (Alright, in all the Caddys too).
Also of interest, not only was BOSE “GM supplier of the year” back in 2003…but they also have not gone bankrupt (nor are on the verge of bankruptcy) after winning that award…no small feat.
Feb 11th, 2009 (8:30 am)For a $40K car it better have a good sound system. If they were to cheapen out all the creature comforts it would be a lot harder to justify to the wife we need one!
Feb 11th, 2009 (8:38 am)I believe performance is still an issue with these new tires. Though some writing here have noted that the performance gains for tires have come from strengthening the side walls there still has been a noticeable decrease in traction (but not all the gains are from side wall changes such as the change in rubber compounds) with the current generation of higher efficiency tires . Car reviews of the Chevy Cobalt XFE found it to have poor braking and it was attributed to the reduced rolling resistance of the tires. Putting wagon wheels on a car would give it extremely reduced rolling resistance but that doesn’t mean you would stop or corner very well. By changing the rubber compound I assume they are making the rubber harder to reduce rolling resistance which is not going to promote traction. I would like them to compare the new tire to performance attributes of a comparable standard tire.
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:06 am)#62 Kyle said
By changing the rubber compound I assume they are making the rubber harder to reduce rolling resistance which is not going to promote traction. I would like them to compare the new tire to performance attributes of a comparable standard tire.
——————————————
Like you, I am looking forward to data on braking performance. We will see if the reduction in rolling resistance hurts braking. That is not automatically so, but it could be so. Thinking positively, the tire is being sold across a broad range of sizes by Goodyear, a company that does have a lot of experience with tire engineering and testing, so I imagine that this tire’s performance (braking and otherwise) will be at least respectable.
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:07 am)#51 jim,
On Morales dictatorship:
Just wait.
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:25 am)Here’s an idea I hadn’t hear before. Regenerative shock absorbers. Sounds expensive.
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/shock-absorbers-0209.html
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:30 am)#55 RB
Wouldn’t stiffer sidewalls mean less material is in contact with the road, tire dimensions being equal? Therefore, braking distance would still be reduced, even if the rubber is equivalent stickiness?
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:41 am)I don’t have a problem with BOSE, but given the fact that GM has traditionally used BOSE in their higher-end cars (like the Corvette as someone mentioned earlier) give the impression that the Volt will be a niche car?
Personally, there is just too much road, traffic, and other external noise where I live and commute to be concerned with HD radio or a high-end sound system in my car.
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:41 am)I’m not worried about “expensive” Bose raising the Volt price. GM will squeeze its suppliers to the lowest possible prices, even forcing them to sell at or below cost. Especially on a project like the Volt, where cost is a top concern.
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:42 am)#51
Dear Jim:
I am afraid I will have to disagree with you regarding president Morales. I am Bolivian and I am pursuing my Masters degree in government here in the U.S. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, dictator is “one ruling absolutely and often oppressively”. Even thought he has been democratically elected, he acts in a totalitarian manner by violating our Congress and Supreme Court independence. He has ruled mostly by Supreme decrees, and he has constantly neglected what represents almost 40% of the country’s population and 70% of the territory and the GDP. In other words, his government is not anything more than a tyranny of the majority.
Best regards,
Alejandro Arana
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:53 am)Since these tires are going to be used for other vehicles as well as the Volt, I would imagine that before the Volt is introduced you will be able to go to TireRack or some auto magazine article for a comparison of these tires to conventional tires.
That should help to provide some answers in regards to their performance.
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:58 am)#16
Steve Orino Says:
Off topic for this post, but interesting. 1st mass produced NEV available in North America this year for $15k. High speed version in 2010. You should have been quicker with the Volt GM.
========================
Sorry, they weren’t first. These guys have been around awhile. I’m sure there’s others too.
http://www.getkurrent.com
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:13 am)#66 cautious fan asks
Wouldn’t stiffer sidewalls mean less material is in contact with the road, tire dimensions being equal? Therefore, braking distance would still be reduced, even if the rubber is equivalent stickiness?
——————————————————
It is another one of these maybe so, maybe not scenarios. Stiffer sidewalls do mean less tire in contact with the road, a negative for braking performance. The car still weighs the same, though, so there will be more pounds per square inch pressing down where the tire does make contact, a significant positive. If the tire diameter is larger, that also will mean more tire area in contact.
Putting all this together, some unfavorable, some favorable, it seems to me we just don’t know and will have to wait for actual data on braking performance. I don’t see how these tires will make the Volt brake better, but they may not make it much worse, if at all. These tires may actually improve control during partial braking, which is of course also a critically important factor in an emergency.
Ride quality also is an issue. Generally harder tires (less flex in the sidewalls) make for a harder ride. Perhaps that will be taken into account in the suspension and we will like the combination.
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:21 am)#51, Jim in PA,
What I heard is a Cd of .28 for the Volt. The 2008 Prius is .26. Toyota claims .25 for the new version. That’s a signficant advantage at high speed, which translates into an opportunity for extra distance (or a bigger cushion for the 40-mile claim) lost.
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:25 am)It is good to hear that GM is looking at absolutely everything to preserve the 40 mile range aspect of this vehicle. I still come from the school of thought however that they should plentifully over-shoot the 40 mile range ceiling—say to 50 or 60 miles all electric range. Under-promise and Over-deliver philosophy all the way. Chrysler accomplishes their 40 mile range in aerodynamically in-efficient vehicles such as the Jeep Wrangler concept simply by utilizing more battery capacity. I strongly suggest this to GM to do the same as it appears you have the room in the rear of the car to install more cells. What the heck will it hurt to have MORE range than the 40 miles suggested?
I just want this car, and more widely speaking, this “idea” of EV’s to catch on and be a rampant success. That’s why I can’t stress it enough here….Always, always, always…Under-promise and Over-deliver!!!
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:27 am)#64
I like the idea of regenerative shock absorbers! This might give an extra mile or so to the Volt’s all electric range as well working with the regenerative braking system will result in a small amount less of gas used to get to the point of charge that shuts down the I C E for a short period of time during each cycle. HOPE GM IS LOOKING AT THIS PRODUCT!
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:27 am)#51, Jim in PA and #59, Guido,
FYI, the reflexively negative post would have been:
“Thank goodness for this. I was lying awake nights, worrying about tires and the radio… these things have never been produced for cars before. Oh… wait…”
Which actually morphs nicely into the reflexively reactive post:
“Just build the blasted thing.”
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:31 am)$40,000 cost to build a Volt. 25% subsidy by GM reduces sticker to $29,995. Federal tax incentive of $7,500 brings the cost to owner down to $22,495.
GM is on record on two occasions(once in answering a U.S. Senators inquiry about whether he would be able to afford a Volt) claiming they would be subsidizing the Volt. The other occasion, they stated they were willing to subsidize the Volt to the same level that Toyota did with the early Prius’s, which was, actually, 50%)
Cost for subsidy on first 100,000 Volt’s– a cool $1 billion.
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:38 am)from : http://twitter.com/GMblogs
@chrislovett We have #ChevyVolt test mules on the road now and I drive them every week. They’re pretty real to me.
about 16 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to chrislovett
@slocricchio we haven’t announced any test fleets yet, but we will have fully operational vehicles on the streets next year. #chevyvolt
about 16 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to slocricchio
@rustyventure 100 mph and 0-30 mph time comparable to a 250 hp V6. #ChevyVolt
about 16 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to rustyventure
@ethanroelle not in its first generation, but it is ideally suited for a range extender application #chevyvolt
about 16 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to ethanroelle
5 more minutes, so fire away w/ more questions. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck
Lyle : Time for you to look again to get a drive and get a blog on drive exp: and phots
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:48 am)Alejandro, People have spoken, in Bolivia,in Venezuela,in Brazil, Ecuador, after 400 years of minority oppression. Get over yourself. A traveler
Re volt site- thanks for all the expert commentary. Very educational! D. NPNS
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:49 am)Full twitter tweets
Thanks for the great comments and questions everyone. I look forward to doing this again. Bye. -Andrew #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck
@jmw4952 Yes.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to jmw4952
@chrislovett We have #ChevyVolt test mules on the road now and I drive them every week. They’re pretty real to me.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to chrislovett
@slocricchio we haven’t announced any test fleets yet, but we will have fully operational vehicles on the streets next year. #chevyvolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to slocricchio
@rustyventure 100 mph and 0-30 mph time comparable to a 250 hp V6. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to rustyventure
@ethanroelle not in its first generation, but it is ideally suited for a range extender application #chevyvolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to ethanroelle
5 more minutes, so fire away w/ more questions. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck
@ramgarden We chose li-ion & extended range as a better overall solution than a pure EV. We also believe li-ion has better cost future.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to ramgarden
@LearVanderYacht that is exactly why the Volt is a hatchback. You get the “trunk” and gass free driving #chevyvolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to LearVanderYacht
@ramgarden Battery technology is significantly different, & the #ChevyVolt is better suited to today’s consumer b/c of its EREV capability.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to ramgarden
@GeorgeAtha Tesla approach was a great way 2 build a few cars & get moving. My guess, they’re doing a lot of re-engineering now. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to GeorgeAtha
Alright, I have a question. What features should the Volt have to make it a better EV? #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck
@mageep working with Bob has been a pleasure…I will miss is no BS approach…and invite him back for a ride any time.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to mageep
@kdcherrick No. We’re purposefully introducing it as a Chevy to drive volume. Chevy is our largest global brand. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to kdcherrick
@classicaliberal Voltec technology will be unveiled in Opel Ampera, and keep your eyes peeled for others. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to classicaliberal
@ThatScottGuy Tesla is learning a lot the hard way. E.g., their battery architecture is not scalable to large volume production. #chevyvolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to ThatScottGuy
@jimParkinson What color would you like?
#ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to jimParkinson
@ramgarden We’ve got a lot of new things to develop to the level of a production car, and the car can’t just be a battery pack on wheels.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to ramgarden
@jeff_bare Jan 2006 is when concept began. Unveiled Jan 2007, and I was involved by June. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to jeff
@jeff_bare Those two technologies are good for all cars, but I’m interested in tech more specific to EVs and EREVs. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to jeff_bare
@blipsman Opel Ampera is coming. Converj is an intriguing concept. Stay tuned for more! #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to blipsman
@chrisjlee We’re actually far ahead from where we were 10-15 years ago b/c of the learnings on EV1. #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to chrisjlee
@mrweatherbee Lower cost is ideal. We’re managing well with today’s mass and volume. Although a little less volume w/n hurt.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to mrweatherbee
@yergi Yes. It will provide traditional services, but we’ll also use it 2 link w/ vehicles charging function (i.e. smart grid) #ChevyVolt
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to yergi
Hello everybody. Andrew w/ the #ChevyVolt team here. I’ll respond to as many tweets as I can. Volt, Voltec and Ampera first. Go.
about 17 hours ago from TweetDeck
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:06 am)GM is on record on two occasions… claiming they would be subsidizing the Volt.
_____________________________
That’s back when GM still had cash reserves available. Now they are in debt to taxpayers, using federal money to avoid bankruptcy.
Subsizing is a hard-sell in this new emerging economy, especially if they bet the farm on EREV without also investing in the biggest market… competitive midsize hybrid cars.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:07 am)74. Schmeltz wrote:
What the heck will it hurt to have MORE range than the 40 miles suggested?
====================================================
You sound like GM exec material! It is that kind of can-do attitude that has made the Volt what it is… not good for most people
It will hurt in terms of cost.
It will hurt in terms of production capacity.
It will hurt in terms of how much useless battery is being hauled around.
GM needs to decrease the range now and only increase it when they solve the battery issues.
Also, for the record, GM tends to over-promise and under-deliver, not the other way around.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:20 am)#17…Can I have the cheap and crap-tastic version???
I love all these efficiency measures (for this car) however I really hope future Voltec cars have such an efficient powertrain that they don’t need any of this stuff to crank out 40 miles AER. Cheap prices are what we really need in the next generation Volts. As much as people on this site malign SUVs and light trucks, I think we will know when Voltec has truly become viable when these sorts of non-efficiency optimized vehicle designs can get 40 AER for a reasonable price.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:20 am)I have BOSE in my Enclave, and wow. Great audio.
I have the pleasure of engineering product with a custom BOSE sound system. They do excellent work, but yes the price tag is usually very high. For what the Volt required though, I don’t know if you could trust anyone else to do the job right.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:28 am)#77 Detfan Says:
“Cost for subsidy on first 100,000 Volt’s– a cool $1 billion.”
Yes. Annually, about 1/700th the money we send overseas for foreign oil.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:32 am)Unni #80.
Thanks for the post. It was a little hard to read, but informative nonetheless.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:34 am)I have not been exactly an apologist for GM lately but:
We have small Bose bookshelf sized speakers in our living room. They offer very good performance at a reasonable price, and take up about 1/4 of the room that our previous speakers did. My wife bought them and I have to hand it to her. It was a smart decision.
Clearly, there is a tradeoff between cornering force and braking distance on the one hand, and low rolling resistance on the other. There is no way out of it. On the other hand, with modern disc brake and ABS systems, anyone who is awake and sober while driving should be able to stay out of accidents. To me, the Volt is about maximizing fuel economy and efficiency. I will take the tradeoff, and the lowest rolling resistance tire available.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:36 am)Customers are never sure what they want / need anyway. The company first to market with things that customers say they wouldn’t pay for, but then find extremely valuable is the winner.
There are many examples of this in the auto industry, People haven’t thought that many so called standard options today are the top priority now (FOB Keys for example). How many people would buy a car that doesn’t have a remote unlock feature on the key? BUT if you asked them to pay $200 extra for a key they would say no I don’t need that. SO my point is they are trying to give people what GM Thinks customers will value once they have it. High end stereo with XM and plugins for I-Pods are where the industry is going not just the volt. They will have to Pay to Play!
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:37 am)#85 Pragmatic:
Amen.
And when you figure in the externalized costs, imperial wars and air pollution related health impacts for example, the cost easily doubles.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:37 am)#77 Detfan Says: “$40,000 cost to build a Volt. 25% subsidy by GM reduces sticker to $29,995. Federal tax incentive of $7,500 brings the cost to owner down to $22,495.”
————————————————————————————–
The latest news I’ve heard from GM is this:
GM CEO’s Best Guess: Volt Will be Priced in “Mid to High 30’s”
http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/19/gm-ceos-best-guess-volt-will-be-priced-in-mid-to-high-30s/
This means the Volt will be around $30K or less after the tax credit.
As for GM’s cost to build a Volt, no one can say for certain, but I for one think it’s much less than $40K. I doubt that GM will make a lot of money on the first Volts (2011 model year), but I don’t think they’ll lose money on each 2011 Volt sold either.
I’m also hopeful that the 2012 Volt will cost significantly less. GM has already announced over a dozen cost and quality improvements, and that was a while ago.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:37 am)Where are all the Nancy nay-sayers today. Ok I will help them out
Bose= American BAD, any japaneese brand =Good.
Goodyear BAD=Any foreign brand=Good.
Now at least thanks to me the average American idiot has been represented properly on this blog.
HAVE A NICE DAY COMRADES!!!!!!!!
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:42 am)Good information although no hot-button information. Bose has bee a big supplier to GM for a very long time. This will not significantly increase the cost. The tires will increase the cost more than the stereo system. I hope GM gives you an option to not choose the low-resistance tires. Maybe they will be OK if they get really well tested by some auto magazines. Then maybe I will be more in favor of them. I just don’t won’t to give up traction control for an small amount of increase all electric mileage.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:47 am)#90
The latest news I’ve heard from GM is this:
GM CEO’s Best Guess: Volt Will be Priced in “Mid to High 30’s”
———————
Which puts it out of reach for 95% of Americans. Especially in the current economic market.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:48 am)63 RB
I agree with you, performance might not drastically suffer and there is good reason to be optimistic.
Thanks!
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:54 am)#88 Scott Says: “The company first to market with things that customers say they wouldn’t pay for, but then find extremely valuable is the winner.”
————————————————————————————–
Actually, this is not true.
For example, Apple didn’t make the first MP3 player. Creative beat them by 2 years. But Apple was the first to make MP3 players sleek, easy-to-use pocket devices that everyone wanted, so Apple got the credit.
There are numerous other examples of this in the market. Being first with a new product doesn’t really count. Being first with a really great new product wins. Let’s hope GM remembers this…
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:58 am)#93 Kim J Says: “GM CEO’s Best Guess: Volt Will be Priced in “Mid to High 30’s” – Which puts it out of reach for 95% of Americans. Especially in the current economic market.
————————————————————————————–
Remember the $7500 U.S. tax credit. That puts it under $30K. That may be out of reach for many people, but no where near 95%.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:02 pm)5 GM vehicles to be in new Tansformers movie (ofcourse the Volt is one of them). Corvette Stingray, Camaro, Chevy Spark, and Chevy Trax mentioned.
http://www.freep.com/article/20090211/BUSINESS01/902110334/GM+looks+to+cash+in+on++Transformers++sequel
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:06 pm)Dear David:
I think you are mixing apples with bananas here. Yes, too many people have been living in poverty (indigenous or not) in Latin America for centuries, all this due to corrupt governments. That been said, you cannot support the idea of a socialist and very resentful man to run the country in a tyrannical way. I am glad you have traveled; however, I have lived, not only traveled, in many countries. If you actually would have lived in any of these countries you would realize that their governments are using the flags of resentment and class fights in order to alienate those who believe in free markets and political liberties the very same things that have made the U.S. a great nation.
There are only two reasons why someone would support a regime like Chavez or Morales. One is that he has been deceived by those left-wing writers who comfortably write from their offices in Europe or the U.S. but would never live in those wonderful places they so much admire e.g. Cuba. The second reason is that simply he is a socialist. For those who are deceived, information is the solution, for the socialists, I am afraid there is not a known cure because you do not buy common sense on the grocery stores. All countries, everywhere in the world where socialism has been in place are in average much poorer and less free than are those where constitutional republicanism, rule of law, and free markets prevail.
Sincerely,
Alejandro
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:08 pm)#27 Jim in PA Says:
February 10th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
“top notch American audio company (albeit with overseas manufacturing).”
Bose has 700,000 sq ft manufacturing in both San Luis Mexico AND Columbia, South Carolina. Neither is overseas.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:10 pm)#65 Cautious Fan Says: “Here’s an idea I hadn’t hear before. Regenerative shock absorbers. Sounds expensive.
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/shock-absorbers-0209.html
————————————————————————————–
If I remember correctly, this was discussed inthe gm-volt forums back in 2007.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:16 pm)Ok…now we are up to 3 top execs/board members leaving in 8 days:
DETROIT – General Motors Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner announced today that William E. Powell, GM North America Vice President of Industry-Dealer Affairs, has elected to retire on March 1, 2009.
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewmonthlyreleasedetail.do?domain=3&docid=51992
Maybe he didn’t have the stomach/agree with what was coming, or maybe he just didn’t like the 10% pay cut and would rather package himself out now while he can, lol.
(of course it could just be a big coincidence all these execs are parachuting out…and they all really just want to ‘spend more time with their familiies’)
What it doesn’t say in GM’s press release is that he is not going to be replaced, that position is gone…and it will be management by committee from now on.
/bonne chance dealers
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:25 pm)#98 Alejandro Says: “All countries, everywhere in the world where socialism has been in place are in average much poorer and less free than are those where constitutional republicanism, rule of law, and free markets prevail.”
————————————————————————————–
To me, it’s not so black-and-white. There are degrees of socialism and capitalism.
Many European countries are more socialist than the U.S., and the Euro has doubled in value against the dollar since 2002, so they must be doing something right.
On the other hand, I’ve saw first hand what communism (pure socialism) did to Moscow and Eastern Germany back in the early 90′s, so it’s obvious that doesn’t work. The trick is to find the right balance. More capitalist than socialist, but still a mix.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:25 pm)#73 RB
OK. I’ll move. Braking distance is probably not a big deal. Like you pointed out though, harder tires will require better shocks, else drive ride will suffer. Check out my previous link on MIT’s shock design. Variable resistance, regenerative, fail-safe, sounds really cool….and expensive.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:28 pm)#16 Steve Orino Says: “1st mass produced NEV available in North America this year for $15k. High speed version in 2010.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hog9wpZCg8U
Never even knew that this company was releasing vehicles? The more options the better!!!!!!!!
GO EV!
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:34 pm)Dear Dave G.:
First, Europe is not socialist. They might have a welfare state, but the governments don’t control and decide what is going to be produced and at what prices. Besides, 80% of the economy is run by the private sector, and private property is not only protected but widespread. Second, The Euro values only 1.2927 U.S dollars. and by the way with all that the U.S. per capita income is higher than the European.
Greetings,
Alejandro
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:41 pm)#101 statik Says: “Ok…now we are up to 3 top execs/board members leaving in 8 days:”
————————————————————————————–
When you get a federal bailout, top execs get paid much less, so it’s no surprise they are looking for greener pastures.
What puzzles me is Lutz. He didn’t need the money to begin with. I thought he would stick around until the Volt was launched, just to bask in the moment. Maybe I’m missing something here.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:42 pm)#79 David R:
Well said. Thank you.
#101 static:
Not replaced? So much the better. Another couple of million off the count, I hope.
As to the dealers, GM’s announced goal is to get rid of about 1/3 of them anyway. Maybe they’re better off without this guy, hehehe.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:44 pm)#101 Statik,
From the interview you referenced previously:
“Lutz: No, but there’s no stopping chronology and physical aging. There comes a time when getting up at 4:30 in the morning for a 6 a.m. meeting doesn’t seem quite as thrilling any more. You know that Tommy Lee Jones movie, No Country for Old Men? Well this is no profession for old men.
So when did it stop becoming fun?
Undeniably, I’m a creative person. I’m very market focused. I think I have a good, innate intuition for what the public wants and what’s going to be a hit and what isn’t. And a lot of that has been rendered moot now, because what the market wants to have will become secondary and we’re going to have to produce cars that satisfy regulations.”
http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/10/robert-lutz-general-motors-business-autos-0210_robert_lutz.html?partner=yahootix
_____________________________________________________
Bob doesn’t want to change. Doesn’t want to accept the new reality.
The whole interview is peppered, no . . . scratch that, . . . slathered in this attitude. If the rest of GM’s management is like minded. Then maybe it’s time to just “dump the board” (double entendre intended) and start over.
Feb 11th, 2009 (12:47 pm)#93 Kim J Says: “GM CEO’s Best Guess: Volt Will be Priced in “Mid to High 30’s” – Which puts it out of reach for 95% of Americans. Especially in the current economic market.
————————————————————————————–
#96 Dave G said:
“Remember the $7500 U.S. tax credit. That puts it under $30K. That may be out of reach for many people, but no where near 95%.”
=====================================
I think it was true that more than 5% could spring for the Volt when in debuted, I don’t think that holds true today.
According to the US Treasury Department, there were about 138 million taxpayers in 2006, with the median income being around $30,000. Average yearly new vehicle sales had been running about 17 million annually…or 12% of taxpayers per year, with a average retainment rate of 3.5 years….that works out to be a new car affordibility index of about 48% of the population with the ability to buy any new car.
This year we are probably looking at 135 million taxpayers and a SAAR around 8 million by years end….or about 5.9% of taxpayers per year, with a average retainment rate of a new car over 5 years…that works out to a affordibility index down to level of about 15% (give or take) to buy ANY new car…and thats if this thing doesn’t get any worse.
If only 15% of the population are in a position/willing to buy a new car at all…I’m pretty sure that little more than a third of those (5%) can afford (or will pull the trigger) on a new Volt. That is just the reality of market right now. You could say it will improve by then… but I could also say I will grown wings and will fly wherever I want to go.
In all fairness, GM really can’t be faulted for this terrible demographic for their product. When GM introduced the Volt…the math was no where near this ugly (not even getting into what has happened to gas prices), and it had a strong, stable (and virtually untapped) segment to take advantage of.
Feb 11th, 2009 (1:00 pm)#108 carcus1 said:
Statik, From the interview you referenced previously…
“Undeniably, I’m a creative person. I’m very market focused. I think I have a good, innate intuition for what the public wants and what’s going to be a hit and what isn’t. And a lot of that has been rendered moot now, because what the market wants to have will become secondary and we’re going to have to produce cars that satisfy regulations.”–Lutz
The whole interview is peppered, no . . . scratch that, . . . slathered in this attitude. If the rest of GM’s management is like minded. Then maybe it’s time to just “dump the board” (double entendre intended) and start over.
===========================
Carcus, I entirely agree…except it should have happened 5 years ago.
There is still no time like the present, but the damage is done and the company is at the whim of the US government now.
I’m pretty sure a lot of them seeing the writing on the wall and want to make their exodus on their own terms, before the blood-letting/blame game really gets going…or while they are still able to get a parchute ride out of the Renaissance Center.
Feb 11th, 2009 (1:06 pm)#109 statik Says: “You could say it will improve by then… but I could also say I will grown wings and will fly wherever I want to go.”
————————————————————————————–
LOL
Feb 11th, 2009 (2:00 pm)#51 Jim in PA
In one interview, Bob Boniface stated that the Volt would have the 2nd best Cd of any GM production vehicle (meaning that the EV1 would still be #1 with a Cd of 0.195).
So we know it will be greater than 0.195.
However, here is a link regarding the new Opel Insignia, which will have a Cd of 0.26.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/10/02/paris-2008-debut-of-the-opel-insignia-ecoflex/
Therefore, I would conclude that the Volt’s Cd is somewhere between 0.195 and 0.26.
Feb 11th, 2009 (2:06 pm)Regarding Bob Lutz,
The man speaks five languages, can fly jets and helicopters, has worked for no less than 4 major global auto manufacturers, and seems to have a great deal of respect from his peers.
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090209/CARNEWS/902099988
I’m sure he’s worried about the comments he gets from all the world leaders on this site.
Feb 11th, 2009 (5:59 pm)I’m ordering mine without a radio.
Yes, it’s going to be expensive, but a soldiers life is worth more.
Feb 11th, 2009 (6:01 pm)#113 Billr1,
I suppose your sarcasm is aimed at me, so I’ll answer.
The post at # 108 is not meant to personally attack Lutz, but to point out the major problem with his mindset. He obviously doesn’t believe that fuel economy is of great significance, or even what the unbridled customer wants. The mpg rating is just a government regulation that he has to deal with and it inhibits his ability to design and sell cars.
In my opinion, he’s got a disconnect with the new reality and so do any board members that share this attitude.
Surely there’s no reason, especially on this website, to go into the reasons for wanting automobiles to be fuel efficient or free from petroleum all together (peak oil, global warming, pollution, national security… pick your poison).
Yet, in between the lines, and sometimes very overtly, Lutz continues to demonstrate the attitude that if the regulations were out of the way, we’d go back to building cars the way we were supposed to and making money like the good old days.
It continues to look like GM just wants Volts and the like for “green badging” and to help meet their CAFE standards while they’re really in the business of building and selling 14 mpg pickups, SUV’s, Hummers, what have you.
This attitude has been. . . . and, long term. . . . . will continue to be, fatal for volume automobile manufacturers.
Lutz thinks: electric cars and strong hybrids will be niche markets.
I think: anything other than electric cars and strong hybrids will become niche markets.
(Oh, and . . .Mr. Lutz, I have to tell you. On this matter, I value my opinion more than yours. I’m sure you will agree with me on this.)
Feb 11th, 2009 (7:08 pm)#112 BillR1 Says: “Therefore, I would conclude that the Volt’s Cd is somewhere between 0.195 and 0.26.”
————————————————————————————–
Lutz: Production Volt Has a CD Between .27 and .28 and Battery Extreme Cold Performance is Good
http://gm-volt.com/2008/08/20/lutz-production-volt-has-a-cd-between-28-and-29-and-battery-extreme-cold-performance-is-good/
By the way, the gm-volt.com search feature works pretty well. I just did a search on “cd” and this link was at the top of the list.
Feb 11th, 2009 (8:09 pm)Remember the $7500 U.S. tax credit.
___________________________
Emphasis on the word “remember“.
With an expected market of 14,000,000 vehicles per year, the tax credits will be used up quickly. Currently, only 250,000 are available for the entire industry. Expansion to 500,000 is being considered, but even then that’s hardly enough to promote as an expectation.
Feb 11th, 2009 (8:36 pm)#117 john1701a Says: “With an expected market of 14,000,000 vehicles per year…”
————————————————————————————-
When we get to 14 million cars per year, manufacturing engineers will have decreased battery costs to 1/3 of what they are now, so tax credits will not be necessary.
That’s really the whole point of tax credits – to get the unit volume high enough so that manufacturing engineers start getting really serious about decreasing unit cost. After all, this is what pays their salary. Manufacturing engineers aren’t really financially motivated to cost reduce low volume products.
Feb 11th, 2009 (9:56 pm)Put BOSE in the Cadillac version. I’d be happy with no radio at all. Saves 100% of the electricity and 100% less weight. That should push me up to 41 miles AER. Then I could put some good traction tires on it that keep me in control of the vehicle at the expense of higher rolling resistance which cuts my AER back down to 40.
Seriously, if we’re splitting hairs over the weight of the radio then we should all sign up with Jenny Craig to reduce the pilot weight a bit. While I’m stripping it down, let’s loose the space shuttle cockpit and just give me some basic gauges like my Geo Prism. It wouldn’t break my heart if the only fancy thing in the cockpit was a battery state of charge meter. Let the computer handle the details of battery management, I’ll just navigate myself, and the car will get me to and from work every day. That’s all the car is really supposed to do in the first place!
Feb 11th, 2009 (10:05 pm)#116 Dave G,
Then why doesn’t GM just print this in their specifications for the Volt? What’s the big secret if Lutz has already told the world?
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewpressreldetail.do?domain=2&docid=48589
I guess time will tell us what the real value is.
Feb 11th, 2009 (11:25 pm)When we get to 14 million cars per year…
____________________________
We are already there.
The race to transition away from from them being guzzlers is on. 3 automakers already have hybrid platforms available for plug-in augmentation. They will gobble up the credit in competition with Volt.
How many of the 250,000 will actually end up being Volt?
Feb 12th, 2009 (1:56 pm)Hey guys & gals,
I’m pretty sure that the $40,000 (before Gov’t rebate) price INCLUDES the prices for the Goodyear tires & BOSE speakers.
And, when they built the latest versions of VOLT mules, I’m sure they had the tires & speakers in there already to test them out (much like they tested the batteries). Not to put a dampner, I’m not entirely sure whether you can extra all-electric miles on top of the 40 mile range because you got these components. It sounds to me that the 40 mile range already factors in the components.
Any thoughts on the pricing & all-electric mile range?
Feb 12th, 2009 (2:56 pm)Wonder if anyone at GM has had a chance to check these out for future addition to the Volt?
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/12/mit-students-develop-shocks-that-generate-electricity/
Feb 12th, 2009 (4:14 pm)Sorry to crap on everybody’s parade, but seriously, what horrible decisions.
The Volt will already get, what, 10-20x the all-electric range of the next-best plug-in hybrid, right?
They’re that far out in front of the competition, so why are they choosing expensive poor-handling tires and an expensive stereo just to eke out a few extra percent efficiency?
These choices are just complicating things and driving up the price. I wonder how much earlier (and cheaper) GM could release the Volt if they weren’t pissing around on this stuff.
Feb 12th, 2009 (4:38 pm)#124 Tom and I are on exactly the same wavelength here! There’s a point where “Perfect” becomes the enemy of “Good”. I’d settle for “Good”.
Apr 2nd, 2010 (2:32 pm)[...] This confirmed that Volt will use Assurance Fuel Max. Volt has 17" rims so that means it will be an option in the future. Cruze Eco is said to use the same 17" wheel and tires. GM Announces Goodyear to Supply Chevy Volt Low Rolling Resistance Tires, and Bose to Supply its Ener… [...]