Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Chevy Volts Can and Will be Frequently Updated

February 12th, 2009 | Posted in: Engineering

One of the unique features about the way the Chevy Volt was designed is that it can be easily and rapidly updated. Most of the car’s behavior is controlled through software which could easily be revised. Furthermore, the T-shaped battery pack could easily be replaced with future packs containing more advanced cells and/or battery management systems.

Although GM hasn’t publicly commented on how long the Volt generational lifecyle will be, it is expected to be considerably shorter than typical cars. Today’s standard combustion cars don’t vary much in their behavior from one generation to the next which could be as long as five years, whereas the Volt could evolve as frequently as yearly.

Frank Weber who is GM’s Volt vehicle line executive told Reuters “This is almost like getting software updates into your car. This is not a mechanical world. This is suddenly you get updates, improvements much more rapidly. So, even within a vehicle lifecycle you will see updates that are very significant.”

The Volt is expected to roll into dealer showrooms in November of next year. GM is already hard at work on the next generation.

Weber notes that the next generation plans are to keep the 40 mile electric range but lower battery cost. Weber said “My goal is not to go from 40 to 60 (miles) in the next generation vehicles. My expectation is that the battery is equally capable, but they are half the size and half the cost of the batteries that go into the car right now.”

Weber was reported to believe the Voltec system will be viable for several generations of vehicles until a time when energy storage allows for low-cost long range pure EVs.

Source (Reuters)

Posted by: Lyle

178 Responses to “Chevy Volts Can and Will be Frequently Updated”

BillR1 Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:09 am

So as they learn more from day-to-day operation of the fleet about the battery, ICE, etc., they can change the software to accomodate this.

GM has done similar updates to my Envoy. It’s a reprogramming, and takes only a few minutes.

Now the prospect of an updated battery pack sounds good, but I’m somewhat confused about the benefit. If you will get 40 miles AER with the old pack, and the new pack is smaller and lighter, but still only yields 40 miles AER, what is the great benefit other than perhaps some weight savings. And what will it cost to upgrade to a new battery.

Of course, GM may give the first year’s production (10,000 Volts) a Gen I battery, and possibly replace them all in a year or two with Gen II, just for warranty purposes.

Sounds like this will be a dynamic product for at least the next 5 to 10 years.

(Quote)
sudhaman Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:09 am

this is indeed a good move . the promises so much to us . it is goanna be expensive at 40k but then its worth it. i dont think any other carmaker especially the japanese make a good promising car . We americans should spend money on this car .those who buy this car at the beginning contribute to the R&D of the company. Dont buy japanese cars as buying them will further increase strength of the yen and harm them . let japanese buy GM’s volt and make their currency weaker and so that their products will be cheaper here if at all u want to buy a japanese car

(Quote)
PhilippeP Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:20 am

apt-get install Volt
I’ll like it allready

(Quote)
RB Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:21 am

I wonder what will happen in practice. When one goes to the Volt dealer, will anyone there know that an update for the car exists? If they do remember it will be to generate some income, So, how much will it cost? Realistically, most places most of the time simply check out specific customer requests. So how will a customer find out that some update or upgrade is available? Will GM tell us? But GM functions by sending out glossy ads, mostly pictures, that have a spirit but no content. GM ads are based on the theory that the customer is too dumb to understand anything. So how is it going to work that I am going to find out?

Still It is very good that the car has such a capability. Maybe there will be a shade-tree mechanic with a computer somewhere.

(Quote)
Bearclaw Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:26 am

Updating sounds great as long as we don’t get a Volt “Vista” Update.

(Quote)
Ash Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:28 am

I want the battery to be made replaceable and the software updatable. Five years down the road, the battery will have twice the capacity for the same price, so replace that along with the software, Vola, you have double the performance.

I want frequent updates of Maps in the GPS navigation, constantly updating with new charging stations all around the country as they come online.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:28 am

What this means is that they will be downloading bug fixes at a pretty constant rate for the first generation of vehicles, because they did not have enough time to get a real fleet of test vehicles on the roads all over the country/world…. Those first 10K cars will be the beta testers.

This is pretty standard in the software industry, as how you think the code is going to be used, and how it eventually gets used in the real world is usually very different. Programmers think differently than users. Being a programmer, my wife tells me that everyday………….

And for this car, I would think they would be using OnStar for the updates. It would be much quicker and efficient.

By Gen-2 it should be pretty stable.

As for the battery pack, I think that they expect the next generation of batteries to be smaller and less expensive, so why put another large expensive pack in as a replacement, should your original pack fail under warranty. Kind of like hard disks in a computer. If you bought your system two years ago with a 100 GB drive and it fails, you are going to replace it with a 500 GB drive today that costs one half of that original drive. Plus, you would have a hardtime finding one of those original drives!

Sorry for the computer references, but that is what I do………

(Quote)
Gsned57 Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:50 am

# 4 RB, I can’t imagine having to go to the dealer for software upgrades. As Jim I beat above said (just beat me to it) it will probably be somewhat automatic and through onstar.

I do however hope that onstar asks you if you want to install the update and gives you the option to decline. I work with software that gets a pretty frequent update and it seems that things never work 100% correct for the first day or two after an update and there is usually a patch for the update.

Also, for those of us who like to tinker with our cars, you could have some aftermarket parts designed to a certain software rev and if GM goes out and changes the software, your parts upgrades could then just get in the way.

(Quote)
Jason Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:06 am

How about Bluetooth connectivity to my home network? Then, I can manage the update from my computer and install from the GM site.

On the other hand, what about the hackers and viruses readily available to hijack my Volt.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:08 am

I hope it can be done through something other than Onstar. I am sick of being nickle and dimed to death with monthly fees.

(Quote)
Tom C Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:15 am

Ok
Sounds good
But I hope I don’t get the “BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH” after an update
I have enough problems with Vista
It would be nice to have an option on the Gen II battery to have two install for an 80 mile range

(Quote)
TALLPALL Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:17 am

*** 656 Day’s to go ***

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:17 am

Software updates should be available without paying a monthly bill for OnStar. With a cell bill, expanded cable bill, high speed internet bill, and electric bill. Few of us desire one more bill.

Even if “free update” means waiting a few days or downloading off peak. Let’s not get too complicated now.

=D~

(Quote)
r22wink Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:32 am

Couldnt the system do something similair to that of the new Dodge Ram pickup. It has a wireless internet access feature that is available. Not sure exactly how is works. But one would think that something like this could be done and updates could be completed as they become available, with no action by the owner needed…just a thought..

(Quote)
r22wink Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:35 am

However…Onstar seems like a perfect solution for downloading the updates for the volt.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:37 am

From the thread ditty:

“Furthermore, the T-shaped battery pack could easily be replaced with future packs containing more advanced cells and/or battery management systems”

=================================

I like to hear this…however, I see no reference anywhere in the article to it. And as I think about it, I have never heard anyone say this is going to be a ‘easy’ swap.

How do you easily swap a a giant 400lb T-pack battery encased in the car? Is there any possible configuration that could be more difficult…other than scattering each individual cell all over the car?

…unless of course you just meant ‘easy’ for GM (not existing customers) to swap in newer, more advanced packs in future models. That seems like a reasonable assumption to me as batteries are only going to get more efficient and therefore smaller, which leaves a huge cave inside the platform to add capacity.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:49 am

The practice of upgrading vehicle Firmware at the dealer is not new. Most new cars today do this. It’s covered in your warranty.

The only real piece of news here is the frequency of the updates, which corresponds to a new type of drive train, so that’s kind of expected.

To be clear, I use the word Firmware here because this code is vastly different than the code that runs on your PC. On your PC, you have many different companies all writing code that all runs together on many different hardware platforms. Most of the bugs in today’s PC software stem from this interaction between different companies’ software and hardware.

With Firmware, you have one company writing much lower level software that runs on one hardware design. There are much fewer bugs. It’s more like the software that runs your microwave oven or clothes washer.

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:49 am

Battery could be a bottom loader – Not so bad to replace maybe.

This update is begging the question of vehicle life for the Volt. Many of us think in terms of 100k or 200k miles for reasonable vehicle life.

An upgradeable Volt might have an extended life and a high resale value/
This would help offset the pricing problem. The ICE may last a very long time in mileage terms if the vehicle is largely employed in local transit.

Does the electric motor have easily replaceable bearings and what is its expected life? I check these blogs almost daily and don’t think there’s been a discussion of expected life milewise.

PS; Wouldn’t it have been great if computers had been upgradeable instead of the buy a new one every three years scheme?

(Quote)
Van Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:56 am

Some speculation on benefit and cost. It would not make sense to buy the first generation with a 400 lb battery that costs say $12,000, and then in a year or two “upgrade” to a battery that costs $6,000 for a 200 lb weight savings but no additional range. Instead, I will wait and buy the second generation battery version of the car.

The first generation is, even at about $40,000 not going to make money for GM, but if they can sell the second generation for nearly the same price, but make a profit because the battery now only costs GM $6,000, the benefit to GM is clear.

So the question is: Who has a long lived 240 Wh/kg battery in development, A123 or LG?

(Quote)
TALLPALL Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:56 am

I would definately take a bet that once the next generation batteries come into play ( smaller – lighter + cheaper) GM will soon realise that there is a market for filling up the spare capacity in the old T-shape with extra cells.

I am willing to bet that they wont resist giving us a
Gen 3
$30k – 40 mile EREV
or
$35k – 60 mile EREV and so on……

It makes common sense to use the extra space and make extra well needed income…..

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:03 am

GM has mentioned battery modularity in the past so they are thinking of user preferred AER.
GM may be working with someone else on the next gen battery.They have hinted that also in the past.
As long as batteries are fairly scarce, GM is going to keep the AER down and the number of cars up.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:05 am

#16 statik Says: “How do you easily swap a a giant 400lb T-pack battery encased in the car? Is there any possible configuration that could be more difficult…other than scattering each individual cell all over the car?”
————————————————————————————–
The Volt’s T-shaped battery is not encased in the car. It’s bolted in from the bottom. There is a T-shaped hole in the bottom of the chassis.

Yes, you would need a hydraulic lift to handle the 400 lb weight, but it would be much easier than swapping out a gas engine. Probably more comparable to swapping out a large automatic transmission.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:17 am

#18 Shawn Marshall asks,
PS; Wouldn’t it have been great if computers had been upgradeable instead of the buy a new one every three years scheme?

——–
Yes. I milk mine for about 5 years. By that time, technology has changed enough where I don’t mind spending the money. My computers rarely break and occasionally might need a hardware update. But I try to do all that when I buy it. I pick and choose the parts and manufacturer that go into my machines.

If the Volt can be easily upgradable, that will be a bonus for the rest of us.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:23 am

#20 TALLPALL Says: “I would definitely take a bet that once the next generation batteries come into play ( smaller – lighter + cheaper) GM will soon realize that there is a market for filling up the spare capacity in the old T-shape with extra cells.”
————————————————————————————–
I’ll take that bet.

80% of drivers in the U.S. travel less than 40 miles per day. Marketing 101 says you don’t go after the remaining 20% of a market until you have saturated the 80% segment. This is called the 80/20 rule, and it’s probably the biggest rule in marketing. So any good GM marketing person would fight tooth-and-nail against increasing the 40 mile AER.

What’s more, many of the people that drive more than 40 miles a day will find other solutions. For example, charging at work will allow 80 miles of electric driving per day. So I suspect we’re only talking about 10% of the market that really needs more than 40 miles AER.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:33 am

#16 statik Says: “How do you easily swap a a giant 400lb T-pack battery encased in the car? Is there any possible configuration that could be more difficult…other than scattering each individual cell all over the car?”
—————————————
#22 Dave G said:

The Volt’s T-shaped battery is not encased in the car. It’s bolted in from the bottom. There is a T-shaped hole in the bottom of the chassis.

Yes, you would need a hydraulic lift to handle the 400 lb weight, but it would be much easier than swapping out a gas engine. Probably more comparable to swapping out a large automatic transmission.
=========================
Looking at the skinless Volt pics, it is certainly the case that the battery is accessed from the bottom (I assumed that anyhow…no clue how else you would get get it out, hehe)…I guess by use of the word ‘encased’ was a bad choice…but the question remains, is there a more difficult place?

Hydraulic lifts and working from the underbelly presents about as much challenge as you can get…especially comparing it to where we know other packs are going (ie trunks, engine bays, under rear floorboards, etc – and a lot of these ‘interior’ packs are more modular in design.

Side note: I’m not really all that in a twist about it…just a talking point to discuss I guess. I don’t expect GM (or anyone else) to be out with a new pack swap when I own the vehicle…and with the gov’t imposed 10yr/150, I really don’t care too much about the cost/difficulty of a swap.

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:42 am

I’d like to know where the picture from this article came from. The words “Update Available” are clearly added in, but did this come from GM, implying the car will know when there is an update?

We know it’s not the latest interior anyway because it’s missing the “hoodie” over the center display.

(Quote)
BobS Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:43 am

Questions:
Does OnStar have a monthly cost?
Is OnStar an option?

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:45 am

IMHO the GenX Volt will have hydraulic jacks for elevating the car so it can lay the T-pack like an egg and roll away. The T-pack will be lowered by 2 internal winches.
You will be able to change batteries in the same time as an oil change.
This post is nearly as relevant as many others.

(Quote)
Lunoir Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:45 am

From what I read they go for less expansive/shorter recharge time (less power recherge the battery too). The weight being less the regen-brakes would be more efficient too (less loss to heat)… This leads to more AER and if we don’t want it we make the battery even smaller…
All this sounds good to me…
NPNS!

(Quote)
SteveK Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:53 am

Seems to be a lot of focus on replacing the battery (of interest to folks on this site that want to purchase version 1), but I think the GM executive is really thinking more in terms of the next version of the car. And, from what he said he is looking to lower costs, not offer any major improvements in performance (absolutely necessary if this is to be a viable product).

If the battery pack is designed to last 10 years, why would you replace it? Also, we don’t know details but I don’t know why replacing the battery pack would be a big deal, unless you are thinking of doing it yourself. It would be a surprise if they made this extremely difficult—why would the have to do so? You know engines weigh quite a bit too.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:53 am

#19 Van Says: “It would not make sense to buy the first generation with a 400 lb battery that costs say $12,000, and then in a year or two “upgrade” to a battery that costs $6,000 for a 200 lb weight savings but no additional range. Instead, I will wait and buy the second generation battery version of the car. The first generation is, even at about $40,000 not going to make money for GM…”
————————————————————————————–
First, let’s get the costs right. The latest info from GM says the Volt will cost “mid-to-high 30s”, so that will be around $30K after the tax credit. Also, Lutz said the first battery will cost GM $10K, and that was assuming someone else will assemble the packs. With GM now assembling the packs, it’s a good bet that the actual cost of the first batteries will be lower than $10K.

Second, I don’t believe GM will be losing money on the first Volts. The Volt uses essentially the same platform as the Chevy Cobalt, which sells for $16K. That includes profit/markup for GM and the dealer. The Volt sells for around $37K before tax credits. That’s a difference of $21K. Figure the battery is $10K. That leaves $11K for everything else. That’s a lot! Remember that these are the costs that GM will pay for these parts in high volume, not what you or I would pay for one of these parts. Also remember that some parts, like the automatic transmission, belts, pulleys, etc are being removed. So while GM may not be making a lot of money on the first Volts, I doubt they will lose money with a $37K sticker.

As for upgrading your battery to a new cell chemistry later, I agree – most people aren’t going to be doing this. Batteries will be replaced if and when they fail, and mostly under warranty.

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:56 am

Regarding the nextgen battery, GM said they are not focused on improving range, but on making the pack cheaper, more reliable, with a broader temperature range. If they could get rid of the liquid coolant system, think of how that would decrease cost and improve reliability. I’d take that over a 10% improvement in AER any day.

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:58 am

Tesla is rolling out their Model S on March 23.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/02/12/tesla_model_s_rollout/

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:06 am

#31 Dave G says:
“First, let’s get the costs right. The latest info from GM says the Volt will cost “mid-to-high 30s”, so that will be around $30K after the tax credit.”
_______________________________

I disagree Dave. If you qualify for the “tax credit”, you won’t see a difference until you file. I know I keep bringing this up, but it’s an important point (and my biggest frustration with the tax credit re: the Volt). Your bottom line number at the dealership won’t be affected and you’ll still be financing $35K – $40K, depending on trade, taxes, title, fees, etc. See this forum discussion for more info:
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2321

Edit
I feel that this is a really important point because people need to know this BEFORE they get to the dealership, BEFORE they have a contract placed in front of them that they are asked to sign, BEFORE the salesperson says “No problem, GMAC will work with you to finance that $40,000 over 6 years.”, and BEFORE they have that infamous “car lot fever”.
/Edit

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:06 am

Offering software updates should help save development time. As software complexity increases, it my become the critical path for vehicle development efforts. So you cut down the software requirements until it’s no longer on the critical path, and then offer the rest as updates.

This means that early adopters may not get all the functionality they were expecting, but early adopters are far more able to handle the temporary inconvenience then a general consumer.

(Quote)
Adrian Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:16 am

I just read the Tesla article, and since they figured out power (speed and acceleration), the next step would be the conquer the biggest market… pickup trucks (SUVs and family vehicles too). Since this is the majority of the market, are there plans for a Volt style Chevy Silverado or Buick Enclave sized vehicle? I remember a small SUV prototype picture for a Chevy but I am talking about the big vehicles for work and family use.

(Quote)
Jim Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:17 am

So is it safe to assume Volt2 will have more interior room since the battery pack will take up less space?

(Quote)
KUD Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:18 am

This all sounds great and I am looking forward to the VOLT.

BUT, here is what I am worried about Dealer pricing. Like … Sorry we do not have any new VOLT’s in stock, but you can buy this 8 Mile used VOLT for $60K.

Remember the ~used~ Miata’s when they first arrived.

Or the PT Cruiser etc.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:19 am

#25 statik — Having the battery accessible from the bottom makes it easier to swap it out. Lutz talked about expecting some failures (in so many words) and wanting the dealers to be able to pull the pack and ship it back to GM. As time goes on the dealer might just pull the pack and replace one module. Given that you don’t want the battery either at the front or the rear of the car for handling reasons I think the design is very slick. Can you imagine having to pull the seats out to work on the battery?

#24 Dave G says “80% of drivers in the U.S. travel less than 40 miles per day.”

The rub is that 40 miles is not an abstract concept, it’s defined in relation to how you’re driving. That 40 miles is probably equal to 28 miles on a SoCal freeway where you’re going 75 mph. And of course it might be far less if it’s windy. Aero drag is calculated with respect to wind speed not ground speed, a fact I was reminded of when driving in the 30 mph winds we had a couple of days ago.

While I’d agree with your approach generally, I can see going from 40 miles to 60 miles just as a way to actually get a more realistic and consistent 40 mile range.

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:19 am

#37 Jim Says:
“So is it safe to assume Volt2 will have more interior room since the battery pack will take up less space?”
_____________________________

Awesome point!

GM, please, please, please give us back that 5th rear seat!

(Quote)
Ray Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:26 am

None of this means anything as GM can speculate about Generation 2..3…4…etc forever..
Until the Volt is in the dealerships accross the continent .. and in Canada… and in large numbers…. it is still smoke and mirrors…
This post and some the the previous ones (sorry Lyle) are just filler to keep us occupied.

As with that old commercial.. “where’s the beef? ”

Where is My Volt. ??

(Quote)
DonC Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:28 am

Off topic, but if I’m reading the stimulus bill which came out of conference correctly, the bill contains something that looks like nasaman’s proposal for the GSA to acquire Volts (and other cars) — $300,000,000 for buying high fuel economy cars including plug in hybrids.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:29 am

Let me just say this about that:

LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS***************Independence Day 2010

(Quote)
Mike-o-Matic Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:49 am

@26 Fredevad,

>> I’d like to know where the picture from this article came from.
>> The words “Update Available” are clearly added in, but did this
>> come from GM, implying the car will know when there is an update?

>> We know it’s not the latest interior anyway because it’s
>> missing the “hoodie” over the center display.

Not to mention, “avaiable” is missing a pretty important letter. Let’s hope the SECOND update isn’t a firmware flash to correct misspellings in the interface. That would not inspire confidence

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:55 am

I would be very surprised if the data transfer didn’t, somehow, go both ways: based on what we’re hearing lately, GM is regarding Volt Gen I as a kind of public-participation developmental program. They have every reason to obtain statistics on how the cars are actually driven to guide not only the upgrades themselves, but the design characteristics for Gen II.

The “recharge at work” option comes up often here, but wouldn’t this double-cycle the batteries which have been designed, sized and priced based on 40 miles a day, and no more? I’m guessing that this would, at best, be covered as “severe use” when considering how, or if, a warranty replacement is made. There’s another reason for the information conduit into the Volt to work both ways: they’ll need to see who’s doing what.

Finally, I seem to be hearing the sound of “40 miles, and no more” being chipped into stone, over at GM.

American car makers love options, and they’re willing to make them at least possible in the design, if it means more money, particularly at the dealer level. Yes, I think GM will need to get the cars cheaper as a main priority, but how much does it cost to leave space for a dealer-installed “extra range” option — particularly since the software could make it ‘plug and play.’

With 50, never mind 60 miles, I could cycle my batteries once a day and never run the engine. As things stand now, I’ll need to run it daily, or risk a pro-rated warranty battery replacement for severe use.

(Quote)
Jason The Saj Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:56 am

November 2010 for Volt release????

That bums…I was really hoping for something a little earlier in 2010.

(Quote)
Mike-o-Matic Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:56 am

@11 Tom C (and similar posts),

>> But I hope I don’t get the “BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH” after
>> an update [...snip...] I have enough problems with Vista

Boy, Vista sure has had a ripple effect around the entire world of computers & electronics. I’m glad I’m still using XP pro on all my machines. But, I would caution folks to take a deep breath. I don’t think Microsoft’s name has been muttered anywhere near the Volt project yet… has it?

(Quote)
Luke Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 10:58 am

Sounds like exactly the right approach for a Technology Car.

Toyota’s been doing this for the Prius for a decade, too, so it can work very well — just so long as the production folks are willing to accept improvements mid-run, I guess. I’m in the computer-industr, and we rarely get anything right the first time — so we *always* have to build an infrastructure send out fixes after-the-fact and improve machines before a user touches them the first time.

apt-get dist-upgrade Volt, indeed!

(Quote)
Luke Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:14 am

Mike-o-Matic @ 47, TomC @ 11, etc:

If you’re tired of the BSOD, there are alternatives. I’m a Linux and Mac OS X user, myself, and I also use and maintain other systems (including other Unixes and even Microsoft products), as-needed.

The folks over at Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.com) (or Canonical LTD, if you prefer) have spent some money to hire professional programmers to make Linux usable for normal people. It’s not perfect, but they have more-or-less succeeded, and they’ve certainly applied a certain polish that was missing from most Linux distributions in the past. Also, the Ubuntu desktop installation CD can also run as a LiveCD — so that you can get a feel for the graphical user interface (GUI) and the applications without modifying your system’s hard drive. Ubuntu’s GUI is about as different from Windows as the Macintosh GUI.

Of course, changing operating systems is not for everyone. For instance, if you use a windows-only application (like AutoCad, or some accounting systems) for your work, then you should stick with what you’ve got. Another group of people who should stick with what they have people who know one system very well, but who rarely use the computer — learning to look for different icons, wording, and visual queues takes a couple of days for those of us who use computers 8-12 hours a day — so if you use it 1 hour a week, it’ll take months of fumbling around to learn the new system, no matter how good the new system may be. The system that you know will be the Right Tool for you To Get Things Done. But, if you like new toys that don’t suck, Ubuntu is worth a look!

(Quote)
ziv Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:16 am

I am with Dave G on this one, the car isn’t going to have an MSRP of $40,000, it will be around $37,500, give or take a thousand, according to the latest articles I have seen.

Last year GM’s Deb Allen said,
Now a new report quotes Dee Allen, a spokesperson for GM, trying to give a more specific number.

Allen’s exact words:

-It’s starting to look like it’s going to be close to $35,000,-

Wagoner told Rose, when asked for a specific price,
-We haven’t finalized that. It won’t be as high as 50 but it’ll be in the mid to high 30s is my best guess.-

So figure $37.5k, and most of us will be able to change their tax deduction as soon as we get the car so our tax savings will be immediately impacting our take home pay. The first Volt is going to be overpriced for most of us, but there will be 10,000 people more than willing to pay the early adopter premium, which will allow the rest of us to get our cars late in 2011 for less, or possibly we’ll be able to ask for a slightly better AER for the price of the original Volt. Battery pack and management prices are going to come down steadily, and there is going to be a ton of competition by 2011 so GM will not be able to jack the MSRP too high for too long.
As a fellow poster gently chided me a few days ago, the price of oil is going to rebound, the only question is when. If oil spikes and gas goes to $4 or $5 per gallon and stays there, the Volt will be a no brainer. It will help us wean ourselves off of foreign oil, it will allow us to generate our own energy at home with wind generators and solar arrays, it will save its owner thousands of dollars per year if gas gets to $5, and its resale value will be significantly higher than an ICE car.
Just build the thing at or below $37,500, with a reasonable approximation of a 40 mile AER for most commuters. Sorry, if you live in Las Vegas and commute 19 miles each way to work at 75 mph in 110 degree heat, it might not get you home without the ICE kicking in, unless your boss installs chargers in Volt designated parking spots. But for most of us, for 80% of us, it will do just fine.
And once the Volt becomes the premium green car, and it will, there will be charging points at every other business in the area to allow you to top off your battery if you choose to, especially in Las Vegas. Another thing to remember is that though your battery won’t fully recharge in an hour at a cafe for lunch or dinner, it will charge enough to give you some more flexibility in the odd day you are driving 50-60 miles.

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:23 am

#45 Jackson says:
“… GM is regarding Volt Gen I as a kind of public-participation developmental program.”
____________

Hey, I’d have no problem allowing GM to upload “logged” data for their research for a reduced retail Gen 1 price of $32K (yep, that’s my “I can afford it” price). I think I would have the perfect driving profile:
- 36 miles round trip to work 4-5 days a week.
- 300 miles every other weekend.
- Midwest summers and winters.
- A high school aged exchange student that has to be driven everywhere (they aren’t allowed to drive even through they are 16 – 18). [OK, my wife does most of that driving!]

—————-
As a side note, I’m LOL because as I’m reading the thread related to software updates for the Volt, I noticed the “Update Available” (not “update avaiable”, thanks for the laugh Mike-o-Matic) icon in my system tray.

(Quote)
Jim in PA Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:27 am

Frank Weber emphasizes using technological advancements to lower costs, not to increase electric capabilities. Whereas this is the smart short-term decision in the cut-throat car industry, I hope GM realizes that this is a horrible long-term strategy. As the technology becomes more affordable, the public will demand higher performance not just lower prices. If the computer industry followed GM’s short term strategy, we’d all be visiting this website on $40 IBM 286 computers. Advancements in battery storage and rapid charging should someday make range extenders obsolete, even if they are slightly cheaper than all-electric models.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:27 am

#37 Jim Says: “So is it safe to assume Volt2 will have more interior room since the battery pack will take up less space?”
————————————————————————————–
#40 fredevad Says: “GM, please, please, please give us back that 5th rear seat!”
======================================================
Battery technology has been improving at an average rate of 9% a year. At that rate, you’ll get back your 5th rear seat around 2016, give or take a few years.

(Quote)
omnimoeish Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:29 am

I know that GM is locked in their contract with LG Chem through 2015 (at least 2014), the fact that they are talking about building the gen 2 already and are planning on a smaller battery already means that LG Chem is probably going to be keeping the pedal to the floor on R&D for GM to make the battery cells more energy dense. I think a bluetooth firmware update is the best idea. With a password etc., it would be difficult to hack into your Volt system, but I would imagine it’s conceivably possible. This will make for some great movies.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:32 am

#38 KUD Says: “BUT, here is what I am worried about Dealer pricing. Like … Sorry we do not have any new VOLT’s in stock, but you can buy this 8 Mile used VOLT for $60K. ”
————————————————————————————–
GM can control this somewhat. For example, it GM finds out that a particular dealer is price gouging, they can stop sending them any more Volts. Just the threat of this can discourage price gouging.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:34 am

#43 Tagamet:

Amen!

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:42 am

#41 Ray Says: “Until the Volt is in the dealerships across the continent .. and in Canada… and in large numbers…. it is still smoke and mirrors…”
————————————————————————————–
Development of any new vehicle takes 3-5 years. GM only started developing the production version of the Volt in early in 2007. Give them some time to get it out. We don’t want any lemons.

As for smoke and mirrors, just look at the number of people on the project, and the money they’ve spent so far. While nothing is certain, I would say the Volt becoming real is a very good bet…

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:47 am

#49 Luke,
#47 Mike-o-Matic,
#11 TomC,

Forget Microsoft, Apple, or anything like that. This is FIRMWARE. It’s more like the code that runs your microwave oven than the code on your PC.

(Quote)
Van Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:50 am

Hi Dave G @ 31,

Here is the quote from the source article: “GM has said it does not expect to make money on the first generation of the Volt, making its subsequent launches more important for the struggling automaker.”

So it may be fiction, but to indicate my view did not accurately reflect the facts as presented in the article, seems a tad heavy handed.

I did not include the government incentive of $7500 in the price. The idea, not to put to fine a point on it was that GM, the seller, was not going to make a profit at 40,000, so the $7500 cash back to the buyer is irrelevant to the point.

And remember, as I said, this is speculation. I think $12,000 for the pack including its management system is a better estimate than $10,000, especially in light of GM’s expectation to be able to cut the cost in half.

(Quote)
Mark Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

I wonder how they will distribute software updates to Volt owners..

I hope it’s as simple as a download from their website, and burn it onto a blank CD, and have the car’s CD deck read the disc.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

Check this out: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/020909dnprotexascleancars.4108ab6.html

“Chevrolet aims to release the Volt in late 2010 with a sticker price somewhere under $40,000, Eppling said. A federal tax credit of up to $7,500 and a possible Texas rebate of $5,000 could effectively reduce the price to $27,500″

The state that people usually associate with “Big Oil” just might become a big state for Volt owners and other plug-in hybrids. Who woulda thunk that Texas politicians were big electric car fans like us? They say everything is big in Texas, so I guess it shouldn’t be too surprising for Texas politicians to offer some big incentives to buy a Volt.

They’re already doing plenty of big things with wind energy, so I guess they wanted to do it for electrified cars too. Sounds good to me. Texas is where EE Stor is located, so maybe Texas wants to be a big player in the NEXT generation of transportation … the post-oil electric car era. If EEStor is successful, the next “silicon valley” could emerge in a Texas city. Who knows? They want to have a big battery research center in Austin … similar to Sematech which helped the semiconductor industry expand and grow back in the 80s.

I hope ALL the states in America have incentives to buy the Volt in the next few years like they will in Texas. A $27,500 Volt is do-able for a lot more people that’s for sure. Thank you Texas Guv Rick Perry.

(Quote)
RB Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:03 pm

#8 Gsned57 said, to me
# 4 RB, I can’t imagine having to go to the dealer for software upgrades. As Jim I beat above said (just beat me to it) it will probably be somewhat automatic and through onstar.
——————————————————————-

I hope it can be that way, but I think it will be through dealers. At one level, it is how GM has always done it. At another level, they will be worried that something gets messed up during the upgrade, resulting in a disfunctional car. Then the owner may not know what to do next, and be stranded. And, realistically, dealers do not want to be cut out of the loop, because that is how they make a living.

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:06 pm

Weber said “My goal is not to go from 40 to 60 (miles) in the next generation vehicles. My expectation is that the battery is equally capable, but they are half the size and half the cost of the batteries that go into the car right now.”
_____________________________________________________

This sounds like the right approach to me.

Another reason for keeping the AER no higher than 40 could be maintenance related. Dry seals and stale gas could spell trouble for a volt owner who never uses the ICE.

This is a hybrid, after all. It is designed to burn some fuel.

Customers that want to burn no gas should be shopping for a BEV.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:10 pm

#52 Jim in PA Says: “Frank Weber emphasizes using technological advancements to lower costs, not to increase electric (range) capabilities… I hope GM realizes that this is a horrible long-term strategy… If the computer industry followed GM’s short term strategy, we’d all be visiting this website on $40 IBM 286 computers.”
————————————————————————————–
Let’s look at computers as an example. The human interface factors have remained fairly constant. Do you always want or need more keys on the keyboard? Humans can only use so many. Beyond that, it’s just wasted cost and added complexity. The same is true with AER.

By the way, with the same 40-mile AER, a smaller, lighter battery would yield better acceleration and better efficiency. People will want that…

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:12 pm

November 2010 for Volt release????

That bums…I was really hoping for something a little earlier in 2010.
______________________________

That when the limited market rollout begins, and only a limited quantity too.

2012 is the real date to focus on. And by then… GM, Toyota, Ford will all be offering FULL hybrids with a plug-in option.

(Quote)
Tom H Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:12 pm

Does the electric motor have easily replaceable bearings and what is its expected life? I check these blogs almost daily and don’t think there’s been a discussion of expected life milewise.

===========================================
Local repairmen do not typically change motor bearings. They swap failed motors for new or rebuilt ones, and send the carcass back for rebuild. It is much more economical to have a motor tech in a motor shop rebuild dozens of motors per day than to have an automechanic in a garage repair a motor every few months.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

Dave G #31:

Don’t forget about the +/- billion dollars GM spent on R&D for this project. And the costs for the new manufacturing plant. Those costs have to be considered. So for the first few years, GM will not really make any profit on these vehicles, especially when the volumes are not that high to start…

Also, IMHO, one of the reasons GM should consider many of the people on Lyle’s list as Gen-1 buyers, is that we understand and accept that we would be beta testers. We would be much more forgiving of a minor software/firmware bug and willing to give GM feedback on our experiences than say some movie star or a DC politician….

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:21 pm

#1 Bill R
Now the prospect of an updated battery pack sounds good, but I’m somewhat confused about the benefit. If you will get 40 miles AER with the old pack, and the new pack is smaller and lighter, but still only yields 40 miles AER, what is the great benefit other than perhaps some weight savings. And what will it cost to upgrade to a new battery.
=======================

Maybe you can get more performance out of a new battery. For example, quicker acceleration, but still keep the same 40 mile range. The packs may have better heating & cooling, or allow for more electricity to be used for equipment inside the cabin.

Also the cost on the new packs should go down, so should be less to replace w/a new one.

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:22 pm

#62 RB Says: “And, realistically, dealers do not want to be cut out of the loop, because that is how they make a living.”
____
I completely agree with you RB.

“And by the way, we’ll throw in a complementary 36 point inspection (OK, a 35 point inspection now that there is no transmission) while we’re doing your upgrade.”
….
“We noticed in our inspection that points 3, 5, 7 and 9 need service. You need to have these taken care of right away. Would like us to take care of that now?”

Yep, that’s just the way it works. I don’t think that GM or any other car maker is going to design a car and self-service system where they won’t ever see you again. From what I’ve heard (and I’m no expert, I’m another one of those programmer types), the goal of a successful business model is to create a need for recurring business.

(Quote)
frankyB Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:26 pm

OnStar may be good enough to place a call or to send telemetry, but I don’t think it has the bandwidth to accommodate Firmware update.

Don’t forget, in order to perpetuate the current business model where you go to your dealer for regular maintenance, regular firmware check would replace your typical “oil change” check. And I’m fine with it, if something goes wrong with the update, the mechanics will be there to fix it.

I even expect GM to pull logs from my car and compile the overall efficiency of the Voltec fleet out there. Instead of counting burger they could count the number of miles free of CO2, you can’t get a better “green” message then this one.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:26 pm

This type of battery progression was only expected. It would be silly to the extreme for a Volt owner to replace its battery unless the battery was worn out or defective. I don’t think that was the expectation of the GM executive. We all generally have been expecting the battery to become smaller, weigh less and go at least as far as the gen 1 battery at some future date. Nothing really surprising here except some of the comments.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

#59 Van Says: Here is the quote from the source article: “GM has said it does not expect to make money on the first generation of the Volt, making its subsequent launches more important for the struggling automaker.”
————————————————————————————–
Was this quote before or after congress approved the $7500 tax credit?

Here is the sequence of events:

1) GM announces the Volt at $30K.

2) Congress begins legislation on PHEV tax credits

3) GM says the price of the Volt will be $40K or more, every Volt will require 2 battery packs to last 10 years, and GM will lose money

4) Congress approves $7500 Volt tax credits

5) GM says the Volt will cost “mid-to-high 30s”, and most cars will only require 1 battery after all. GM says nothing more about losing money on the Volt.

Reading between the lines, it’s clear to me that GM’s press announcements about higher costs and losing money were all geared toward obtaining the maximum tax credit possible.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:34 pm

#69 fredevad Says: “And by the way, we’ll throw in a complementary 36 point inspection (OK, a 35 point inspection now that there is no transmission) while we’re doing your upgrade.”
————————————————————————————–
Yes. That’s what I was going to say. You beat me to it!

(Quote)
Silvio Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

Oh boy, that reminds me of the old GM vs Microsoft joke. More specifically, points #3 and #4:

3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

#54 omnimoeish

it would be difficult to hack into your Volt system, but I would imagine it’s conceivably possible. This will make for some great movies.

=======================

That movie was already made, with Chevy products. It was called Transformers.

Oh, i forgot about Terminator 3.

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:43 pm

#70 frankyB says:
“… regular firmware check would replace your typical “oil change” check.”

I can see it now…
“And remember to have your firmware checked every 3 months or 3,000 miles.”

[ I don't remember ever having posted this much in the 4 months I've been on this site... must be a slow(er) day! Thanks Lyle! ]

(Quote)
Jaime B Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:47 pm

If it is 37k, how many people will be able to afford a Volt? It depends how you define “afford”.

Related to car purchases, most financial experts agree:

1. Never, ever finance a car. If you have to finance any portion you can’t afford it period. Only buy a car you have the money to buy otherwise you are paying interest on a rapidly depreciating expense – one of the worst financial situations to be in.

2. Don’t buy a car thats over a third of your yearly income. So thats $111k per year in this case.

So that puts the market of buyers for the Volt as people making a minimum of $111k per year with $37k in savings to spend.

Of course the debt focused, live above your means society is what drives most car purchases, but given the average income in the US is $30k per year, only a fraction of people can really afford this car.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:49 pm

The first big problem is OnStar. If they “Have” to do it via OnStar that means there is no option to NOT sign up for shltty OnStar. If this is so, then kiss my purchase goodbye.

Second, GM will only replace any battery new or old for the same capacity that wil give you the 40 mile AER. NO more No less. There’s no reason for them to replace with a battery that gives you more. It’s more $$$ in their pockets, not yours. Battery cost will go down but your capacity will not increase. So don’t hold your breath on anything more than OEM specs.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:54 pm

fyi, there is still an ICE in the car folks. Engine Oil and other maintenance will still be required all on top of the Firmware maint. There won’t be less to do but more to do but less frequent.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:56 pm

Here’s more on what I mentioned….
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/12/gm-will-update-the-chevy-volt-throughout-its-life-cycle/

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:01 pm

#67 Jim I Says: “Don’t forget about the +/- billion dollars GM spent on R&D for this project. And the costs for the new manufacturing plant. Those costs have to be considered. So for the first few years, GM will not really make any profit on these vehicles, especially when the volumes are not that high to start…”
————————————————————————————–
You’re talking about non-recurring costs. This issue is common to any new design. The assumption is that after you sell a certain number of units, the non-recurring costs are paid off, and the project as a whole is profitable. The more units you sell, the faster the non-recurring costs are paid off. That’s the normal model.

But this assumes that the recurring cost to make each car is less than the selling price. When the Prius first came out, Toyota actually lost money on every Prius they sold. Their recurring cost was actually more than the selling price. They were essentially subsidizing sales to seed the market. After a year or two, Prius recurring costs went down significantly. Probably around 2005, the non-recurring costs were paid off, and the Prius project as a whole became profitable.

The question is: Are GM’s recurring costs on the Volt higher than the selling price? If so, expect to see 10,000 Volts a year or less for the first 2-3 years, until recurring costs come down.

On the other hand, if Volt recurring costs (including dealer overhead) start off lower than selling price, each Volt sold will make GM’s cash flow more positive. In this case, we could see 100,000 or more Volts in the 3rd model year.

(Quote)
Altazi Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:07 pm

Re: fredevad # 69: “the goal of a successful business model is to create a need for recurring business.”

This is OK if we’re talking about something like a pizza parlor. They make me a good pizza, and I will continue to come back for more. I don’t NEED the pizza, I just WANT the pizza.

I don’t like fees for things like OnStar as a model for recurring business. Make OnStar available to all buyers without any monthly fee. Free would be nice, but even a nominal “pay for use” option would be acceptable. I DO NOT want to be stuck with yet another annoying monthly fee for something that I might not even use. I go out of my way to avoid things that have monthly fees associated.

If you are talking about a firmware patch, why should I have to pay for this? Patches are released to fix things that they didn’t get right the first time.

What would really suck: GM releases the Volt, and later releases firmware that magically improves the AER. Something like this should be available for free, because it implies that they didn’t do their best job the first time.

If you are talking about some kind of firmware upgrade, I wouldn’t pay for this unless I received some additional feature or benefit. The cost would need to be proportional to the incremental benefit.

Ideally, it would be best if we could just download the firmware patch or upgrade object code from GM and store it on a USB flash drive. Plug the flash drive into the Volt, follow a few simple instructions that appear on the screen, and your upgrade is complete. No muss, no fuss, no special equipment needed – not counting the Internet-connected computer and the USB flash drive.

The boot code in the ECU (or whatever is handling this in the Volt) should authenticate the object code before programming, and verify the results upon completion. Even if some kind of failure occurs during the reflash process, the Volt should always be drivable afterward.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:11 pm

Talking about theoretical pricing over the past 2 years, (with hardly a peep out of GM) never gets old.

/yawn

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:12 pm

#78 CaptJackSparrow Says:
“There’s no reason for them to replace with a battery that gives you more. It’s more $$$ in their pockets, not yours. Battery cost will go down but your capacity will not increase.”

I totally agree, and that’s how I’d like it to be. Getting the battery cost down and hopefully also the overall cost, making it more affordable for everyone, seems to me to be the best approach for mass adoption, which GM has said is the goal.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:13 pm

Hi Dave G #53 You said,
Battery technology has been improving at an average rate of 9% a year.

————
I have heard this statistic before. I am wondering though if there has ever been a push to get batteries to do what is being attempted today. I can’t help but wonder if the 9% yearly improvement rate will go much higher because of the EV push.

Your thoughts?

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:14 pm

An article on the overcapacity of the automotive industry

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/11/too-many-cars-not-enough-marke/

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:17 pm

Autoblog has pictures from the Chicago autoshow with “Transformer Jolt” – ie) a blue Volt

It is just a shell, but still…there it is.

They also have the Transformer-ish trailer with the Volt, Corvette Concept, Best, etc. zipping around…worth a looksie:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/11/chicago-2009-gm-transforms-volt-into-jolt-beat-into-skids-tra/

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:25 pm

Couple of media images for Transformers:

Jolt/blue volt:
http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/X09SV_CH015.jpg?download=050365

http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/X09SV_CH014.jpg?download=050355

Concept Corvette(Stingray):
http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/X09SV_CH017.jpg?download=050352

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

@82 Altazi-

What I was trying to point out is that I think GM (and other automakers) want to drive business back to the dealership, even if it is for a “free” firmware update, or a “free” 36 (I mean 35) point inspection, or a “free” whatever. The more a customer visits for the free teaser stuff, the more chance you have to sell something else (can’t sell something to someone that isn’t there).

I agree though, I don’t want to pay for a service like OnStar that I’ll never use. Of course you know what will happen – they’ll tease us with a “free” one year/6 month/3 month subscription with the purchase of a new Chevy Volt, just like Norton does with their anti-virus updates.

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

Looks like Transformers 2 will be a Chevy comercial. I guess Mini Coooper did ithe same thing with the Italian Job. I wonder if the Deceptacons will be Toyotas.

(Quote)
old man Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

Regarding software updates. I do not think we will have to visit the dealer for the vast majority of these updates. GM should, and I ASSUME are wanting this car to be perceived as tops in reliabilty. Frequent trips to the dealer would kill that perspective. So would a mandated subscription for On Star. I think we will recieve On Star for updates as part of the car price. If you want the other features of On Star after the first year or so it will have a cost.

Dealers could make money if updates come out that are specific to an individuals driving routine. An example might be that I drive to work a total of 42 miles and 30 of it is on the interstate while the remaider are city streets. During that trip the I C E starts and stops 5 times. I might be able to get a software update that would allow the I C E to start once and deliver enough charge to the battery that I would finish the trip with the battery.

Any way I look at the update process leaves the dealer out of the loop MOST of the time. GM will be counting on word of mouth advertising.

(Quote)
fredevad Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:33 pm

statik – That is awesome! Thanks for the links.

Unfortunately though, it looks like someone else got to drive a Volt before Lyle – the stunt drivers for the movie.

(Quote)
Eric Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:33 pm

I don’t understand why in the future Volt’s(Gen2 and later) that GM doesn’t what to extend the AER driving range. As the batteries improve, the predescribed area they have allowed in the car will result in longer AER miles. Plus the price on the same amount of batteries they purchase per car will drop also. The 40 miles AER is a good start, but this car would be used for more than just driving to wrk. As I understand it, the reason for starting this project was to reduce our dependence on forgien oil.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 1:53 pm

@Eric 93
“I don’t understand why in the future Volt’s(Gen2 and later) that GM doesn’t what to extend the AER driving range.”

Dude, it’s all about the Mighty (not so mighty now) dollar. The specs for the car you purchased will and always will be 40 miles AER. That’s what YOU purchased, not a 60 mile AER. That way when battery tech is improved and reduced physically and price is brought down, it’s more $$$ for GM. That’s all it boils down to. If Bat Tech improves, reduces in size/weight you get a smaller Bat, they calculate how much of the bat you need then figure in what is required for the 40 AER and BOOM! they now have a smaller bat for your Volt but profit the rest.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

#93 Eric Says: “I don’t understand why in the future Volt’s (Gen2 and later) that GM doesn’t what to extend the AER driving range… As I understand it, the reason for starting this project was to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”
————————————————————————————–
Your assumption is here that more AER would significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Let’s take a look at that:

Here’s how much gas each car would use with a typical yearly driving pattern:
Vehicle ……………… Gallons per year
Volt w/ 100 AER ……. 21
Volt w/ 60 AER ….….. 23
Volt w/ 40 AER ….….. 37
Prius PHEV-10 ….….. 182
Prius HEV …………… 228
Vue HEV ……………. 380
20 MPG car ………… 570

So the assumption that more AER would significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil is basically false. It may save a little, but not anything significant. It would be much better to get more people driving EREV-40s, so reducing cost is key.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:14 pm

#59 van says “I think $12,000 for the pack including its management system is a better estimate than $10,000,”

I have no idea what the pack costs but several reference points suggests your estimate is very high. First is Tesla’s battery pack replacement program. For $12K Tesla is promising you a new pack in seven years. Assuming a 5% discount, that means Tesla expects to make money selling a 56 kWh pack for around $16k. You’d think a GM pack which is only 16 kWh, is much less complex, and is produced in much greater volumes would have to be about a fifth of this. http://gm-volt.com/2009/02/11/breaking-teslato-receive-350-million-in-goverment-loans-to-build-model-s-sedan-and-will-unveil-it-march-26/

Second is the A123 contract with the USABC where it agrees to deliver a pack equivalent in the Volt pack for $3400 for a volume of 100K units per year. http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/05/usabc-finalizes.html

Third we know that EnerDel is selling a battery pack to Th!nk in low volumes at a price which pencils out to $8500 to $9600 for a pack equal in size to what you’d find in the Volt. http://gm-volt.com/2008/07/05/update-enerdels-chairman-on-the-cost-of-the-thnk-lithium-ion-battery-pack/

Given that the Volt will be the first time any battery manufacturer will be able to obtain some economies of scale, and there are some to be had, it seems to me that it’s likely the Volt battery will cost between $5000 and $7500 and that even $10K is too high an estimate.

IMHO of course.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:19 pm

statik (#83):

“Talking about theoretical pricing over the past 2 years, (with hardly a peep out of GM) never gets old.”

If you’re really bored, I guess we could start a hydrogen thread …

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:20 pm

#94 CaptJackSparrow

It is not always about the dollar. Some consumers may AER want bragging rights and would be willing to pay more for a 60-mile AER.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:22 pm

#85 Rashiid Amul Says: “I can’t help but wonder if the 9% yearly improvement rate will go much higher because of the EV push. Your thoughts?”
————————————————————————————–
I believe EVs will quickly push Li/Ion chemistry variants to dramatically lower costs, perhaps 1/3 of what they are today within 6 years. But energy density improvements will probably be much slower, like 9% a year. So I think batteries will stay big and heavy for a while, but they will be much cheaper.

I believe EEStor is real, but I doubt they will be cost competitive. The purity levels required are just way too high. It’s like silicon chips. The source material is sand – it’s literally dirt cheap, but due to the purity levels required, silicon wafers are very expensive.

(Quote)
TALLPALL Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:25 pm

Like i posted before.. 40 mile EREV is great, and would do me and the other 80%. I too would prefer a lower cost. But when they can, would it make sense for GM to offer a lager AER 60 mile for EXTRA $$$$$. Plus increased profit for them???

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:27 pm

statik (#83):“Talking about theoretical pricing over the past 2 years, (with hardly a peep out of GM) never gets old.”
————–
#98 Jackson said:
If you’re really bored, I guess we could start a hydrogen thread …
————–

But what would GM price this hydrogen car at?

/ah, sweet bliss
(apparently, you know my buttons all too well, lol)

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:27 pm

#97 Jackson Says: “If you’re really bored, I guess we could start a hydrogen thread …”
————————————————————————————–
(low pitched growling noise)…

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:30 pm

#98 ThombDbhomb Says: “Some consumers may want AER bragging rights and would be willing to pay more for a 60-mile AER.”
————————————————————————————–
This is the first sensible thing I’ve heard about higher AER. It’s an emotional bragging rights issue. It has little to do with saving gas.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:31 pm

#99 Dave G said:

“I believe EEStor is real, but I doubt they will be cost competitive…”
==========================

Oh no you didn’t!

/It is time to stop posting on this thread now Dave. Lie low and pray there is some kind of server failure that loses this thread to history forever, hehe.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

@ThombDbhomb 98
“It is not always about the dollar. Some consumers may AER want bragging rights and would be willing to pay more for a 60-mile AER.”

Completely agree with you as I would be one of them to pay more for the 60 AER. However, as I understand research, dev and reliability testing, the chances of getting something more than 40 AER is nill. They would need to do the same testing as they did with the bat pack that get’s 40 AER, adjusted for 60 of course, and that’s a friggin long process. Thermal dynamics testing, accelerated life cycle testing, full charge discharge cycle test adjusted/Limited SOC cycle test…….and so forth. I would say 18months of testing AFTER a design is approved.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

#98 ThombDbhomb Says: “Some consumers may want AER bragging rights and would be willing to pay more for a 60-mile AER.”
————————————
Personally, I don’t want to use gas at all. That is the statement I want to make when I ‘way overpay’ common sense economics for being a early adopter of EVs…and I’m willing to put up with the inconveniences/challenges that a full BEV would present to me.

/but I’ll take the first 40 without gas..because it is a pantload better than what I can get now (which is nothing)

A 60 (or greater) AER would be nicer, but that wouldn’t factor much into my decision to buy or not…if I had the choice between:

A) 40 mile E-REV
B) 60 mile E-REV for $5,000 more
C) 60 mile full BEV

I would take the full BEV, then the 40 mile AER, and the 60 AER last…just me though.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:40 pm

#96 DonC Says: “I have no idea what the pack costs but several reference points suggests your estimate is very high. First is Tesla’s battery pack replacement program…”
————————————————————————————–
Tesla actually published the cost of their battery pack at $23K back in 2007. That’s a 53kwh pack. If you scale that to the Volt’s 16kwh, it would correspond to just under $7000.

Also, I would assume Tesla’s packs are costing them less today than they did 2 years ago.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:42 pm

#104 statik,
Hey, you said it was getting boring

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:45 pm

@Dave G 99

Dude, EEStore has never produced anything, just theories and plans. Nothing even to test against for R&D purposes. He11, nobody has even seen anything from them. Zenn hasn’t seen Jack from them nor has Lockheed.
The worst part is I can’t seem to find their website. I Google it and only articles about them but no home page.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:53 pm

Well, here’s their website…
http://eestor.us/

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

#109 CaptJackSparrow Says:

Dude, EEStore has never produced anything, just theories and plans. Nothing even to test against for R&D purposes. He11, nobody has even seen anything from them. Zenn hasn’t seen Jack from them nor has Lockheed.
The worst part is I can’t seem to find their website. I Google it and only articles about them but no home page.

=============================
Here it is, enjoy:

http://eestor.us

EDIT: You got a little quickness in you Captain–beat me to it, lol.

(Quote)
ccombs Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:02 pm

Thank goodness Gm is aiming first at reducing cost and battery size, and only after a while will they try to increase range. Very smart.

And I agree with #28- I think the battery will be quite easy to replace- just need to disconnect it and drop it. Soooo much easier than an engine or really any other car component. That said, I think the point of the battery management technology is that you won’t have to replace it, unless you want to keep it way past 150K miles (and let’s face it, most people spending 40k on a car won’t). I do see a huge market for used Volts with new batteries, however. If you put a battery with the same size as the current one in a used Volt 10 years from now, you will get amazing performance and range.

(Quote)
TALLPALL Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

Check this out…

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/12/video-red-bull-racing-preview-of-its-new-kers-equipped-f1-car/#continued

Totally irrelevant i know, but a damn good video

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:18 pm

I’ve posted this before (as others have too), I would like a spare battery, already charging in my garage, that i can swap myself. That way i can quick change it (somehow), if i need more AER. I wont go into how this can be implemented at gas stations. But since we’re talking about swapping batteries, I thought I’d bring this up again.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:18 pm

I Love this modular/software update feature.

At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, ‘If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.’

In response to Bill’s comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics (and I just love this part ):

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash……..
twice a day.

2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy! a new car.

3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.

4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive – but would run on only five percent of the roads.

6. The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single ‘This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation’ warning light.

7. The airbag system would ask ‘Are you sure?’ before deploying.

8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.

9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.

10. You’d have to press the ‘Start’ button to turn the engine off.

Funny Stuff!

(Quote)
RB Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:30 pm

#67 Jim I says
Don’t forget about the +/- billion dollars GM spent on R&D for this project. And the costs for the new manufacturing plant. Those costs have to be considered. So for the first few years, GM will not really make any profit on these vehicles, especially when the volumes are not that high to start…
————————————————————

GM will place the billion dollars on its books as an asset, just as if it was a building. GM will write down the value of the asset over time, taking into account how long the asset can be used and how many vehicles it can be expected to affect.

So if GM expects to use Voltec in a million cars each year over a 10 year period, that is 10 million cars in all. The “charge” to each car for use of the asset is then only $100.

The above is the right and proper way to do accounting for the kind of development GM is doing. One can argue about how many vehicles over how long a time, and indeed judgments necessarily are involved. It will not be the case, however, that each of the first 10K Volts is “charged” 1B/10K = $100,000 dollars.

That is, I think Volt will be profitable for GM from the first unit out the door. It will not earn as much because initial volume will be relatively low. The question is, for how long will initial volume be sustained?

(Quote)
Vegasguy Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:31 pm

I hope it runs Linux and not Windows!
Maybe the software will be open source.

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:33 pm

#112 You are only the second guy on this thread to make any sense at all.
Peace be with you.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:42 pm

I suspect there will be several iterations of battery tech / system design before they get a design cheap enough for a BEV. In spite of how cheap the batteries might become, if they are NOT rapid recharge, then you will NOT sell many (10,000’s) BEV’s.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:43 pm

ccombs (#112):

“and only after a while will they try to increase range.”

If I understand the overall message they’re putting out now, there will NEVER be a Voltec propelled vehicle which gets more than an AER of 40 … until prices drop enough to put out a full-fledged BEV.

I think there is room for something in between; I call it an AREV, for Augmented (rather than Extended) Range Electric Vehicle.

Once batteries get as small and cheap as GM is hoping, someone will greatly increase the AER from Voltec levels and stick on a relatively small engine; not to sustain a state of charge, but to extend it.

If you know you’re going to drive an extended distance, you’d simply turn the engine on once you’ve started out. The full AER would be preserved unless you’re racing up Pike’s Peak or passing semi’s. If you’re just on your way back and forth to work, the engine might start itself when you still have 10 miles of AER left; which could pad it out nearly to the original 60 miles (say). This effectively solves “range anxiety.”

A smaller engine means lower cost and more space for batteries, but the real enabler will be reduced battery cost. The pack for an AREV would still cost considerably less than for a BEV.

It won’t be GM trying this, apparently … at first. If it turns out, after actual Volt-driver experiences, that there’s no overwhelmingly critical reason to maintain SOC under all conditions, GM may find themselves behind the curve, again.

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:45 pm

Volkswagen & Toshiba are working on an electric car now
More players….

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE51B5WW20090212

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:50 pm

Dave G 102

You beat me to it. rrrrrrrr.

(Quote)
Sam Y Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:59 pm

Hey guys & gals,

Here’s my 2 cents worth. First, the AER (all-electric range) issue. I echo the previous post saying that if we have 60 mile AER VOLT, gas going stale would become more significant. Personally, I’d rather see Gen 2 VOLT have 40 mile AER with much better performance & power all with a better price tag…how about 0-60 in less than 5-6 seconds with MSRP less than $30,000 before rebates? That would get the blood pumping & make it a big hit for everyone; people who want the performance, good price, Green-car, latest tech., not to mention $$ saved monthly on gas bills.
Second, I don’t think GM will abandon its dealers by making updates available throgh OnStar. Like someone said previously, there’s the bandwidth capacity issue, technically. Also, an average Joe like myself do NOT want a full OnStar membership, and fork out extra $$. I’m sure that they want to save money by using existing dealership infrastructures to do the upgrades. Reasons being many but mainly 1) it does not alienate average joes (& janes) since everyone is used to going somewhere for oil changes/maintenance; 2) keeps and in fact, bring more business for their dealers since VOLT can only be updated/maintenanced from GM dealerships (goodbye, Lube-X, Mr.Lube, etc.) which will help them out immensely in the long-term; 3) GM saves a lot of $$ not having to create a new method of delivering these updates to its customers (e.g. update OnStar).

Any thoughts?

(Quote)
chevonly Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:14 pm

GM just doesn’t get it, my boss just got his Acura out of the shop it was in for a full week, to make a long story short by the time he got done they charged him almost 2 grand, part of the fantastic service was to replace all of the dash lights and charge him 7 bucks a pop for them, that alone was over 150 bucks. NO WONDER AMERICANS THINK JAPANEESE CARS ARE SO GREAT???? The dealers talk them into these service plans and replace parts that do not even fail??? What in the hell am I missing here I never spent that much money on any American car I ever owned and they had three times as many miles on them as his car has. Well Comrade I give up I can only conclude his dealership is putting something in the free coffee. He is still in love with the car sorry I have to go puke now. HAVE A GREAT DAY

(Quote)
old man Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:24 pm

#123

There are several reasons why I believe the updates will not usually include the dealer. One of the main reasons is in the title of this post,”can and will FREQUENTLY be updated. I can assure you a car that needs to be taken to the dealer for frequent updates will soon be refered to by the owner as that damn things needs another@@#$ update. It happens at least once every @##$% month.
GM will bypass the dealer to keep anything like that from happening!
IMHO

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:25 pm

@chevonly 124
“The dealers talk them into these service plans and replace parts that do not even fail???”

I assume the dealers are here in the US and the employees are American as well? What’s the point again?

As for american cars, I have a 2002 Ford Explorer. Transmission died at 120K and rebuilt at $3200, Rear power window just dropped and broke and $520 later, rear climate control makes clicking noise and the entire rear AC module needed to be replace with $780 later. Last week the E-Brake broke and now I can’t even drive the phukin car to get it fixed because the busted pieces are jammed between the mid drum of the rotor and makes a pounding noise on each rear whhel.

Strangely the only thing that was on any maintenance plan was the rear brakes/e-brake.
So, you want to by my American car?

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:39 pm

#117 Vegasguy Says: “I hope it runs Linux and not Windows!
Maybe the software will be open source.”
————————————————————————————–
It may run something like VxWorks. Remember, this is FIRMWARE, not software.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:42 pm

@Dave G 127

It’s going to run in HEX!!!
OK, technically it will be Binary.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:44 pm

#111 Statik

“EDIT: You got a little quickness in you Captain–beat me to it, lol.”
——————-

That’s why he is a Captain.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:59 pm

My expectation for a reduced battery size in later versions of the Volt will be to increase passenger space to 5 passengers. Plus a smaller battery would allow GM to fit the Voltec power train into other cars without reducing passenger space. The battery is the primary part of the Voltec drive train that can be expected to be reduced in any real size. Adding room for an additional passenger while maintaining the 40 miles AER would be great.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:59 pm

#121 k-dawg Says: “Volkswagen & Toshiba are working on an electric car now…
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE51B5WW20090212
————————————————————————————–
The article closes with this:

“Most global carmakers are rushing to roll out affordable vehicles designed to run solely on electricity stored in a lithium-ion battery.

General Motors has staked its reputation on bringing the Chevrolet Volt to the market late next year, using lithium-ion battery cells from South Korea’s LG Chem Ltd to drive 40 miles on a single charge.”

No wonder most people are still confused about the Volt. Misinformation seems to be everywhere.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 5:03 pm

As far as the “operating system software” is concerned, I fell pretty sure it will not be a PC style operating system developed by Microsoft. Their track record removes them from consideration, in my opinion. Maybe GM will tell us what “language” will control the Volt, but I kinda doubt it.

As far as software updates are concerned, I believe OnStar will be used initially without the requirement of a subscription to gain access to updates. Only makes sense. GM is not Microsoft, after all. But it will be an interesting subject matter to “discuss” as we find more out about it.

Thanks, Lyle. Good subject matter this week.

(Quote)
Texas Tea Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 5:24 pm

Black GOLD is trading for $34.41/barrel at 4:39 PM EST.

There needs to be some criminal investigations. At these prices Gasoline should be around $1.30 at the pump!

There is a possible conspiracy in the refinery business at work here. Somebody needs to put a bounty on their heads and sick DOG – The Bounty Hunter after’em.

(Quote)
Igor Ivanosovic Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 5:33 pm

Firmware upgrade should be owner driven. Some owners may not need the new “features”. Also some companies have been known to eliminate previous features during a so-called upgrade. Also very important to get all the geeks onboard with a BETA program. And suicidal gearheads may want to signup for the GM’s ALPHA program. An app store would be nice, could be modeled after aPpLe’s uber successful iPhone store.

(Quote)
Aspherical Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 5:37 pm

Forget software. Just operate on punch cards and mail them to buyers when they are updated.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 5:38 pm

No OnStar!

If an update is needed, use the owners home wireless LAN.
Remember the fiasco with the OnStar upgrade where many GM and other vehicles were “Depricated” because the vehicles they owned was not compatable with the new version of the “OnStar” technology.

(Quote)
Rog Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 6:03 pm

GM talks and talks, but has anyone seen a Volt? I mean one that actually drives down the road. I haven’t even seen a film of one. I think it is all hype.

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 6:27 pm

Updates to refine and improve all functions in the Volt could be as easily done as driving over to a GM parts Department to get a can of wax for your Volt. The radio could be programmed to automatically request updating through the Frequency Control Module in the Controller Area Network and have it done before you close the door to go in to get your can of wax. *At no charge*. GM would want your new Volt to be as consistently perfect as is possible, since the only constant in the universe is change, and, since better ideas get suggested constantly to GM, software updating is the finest way to get all the improvements.
Dan Petit Austin TX.

(Quote)
Luke Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 6:39 pm

Dave G @ 58,

I’ve written code for embedded systems before. There are big differences, yes, but writing code for an embedded processor that doesn’t have an operating system isn’t alien, if you’re fluent in C and can understand a little assembly. The hard part, though, isn’t getting the firmware-image loaded — the hard part is making your program interact with real-world hardware Correctly. But it’s Hard Work, not black magic.

Of course, for anything like the Volt, the car’s ECU and other computers are likely to be running a Real Time embedded operating system along the lines of VXWorks (http://www.windriver.com/) or some of the specially hacked-up Linux kernels that are provided for embedded systems developers — it takes a lot of the headache out of managing threads. Anyway, you’ve got a point — but there’s a *lot* more to it than your comment implies.

Also, I wasn’t suggesting that you install Ubuntu in your car — I was suggesting that the guy who was tired of Windows BSOD’ing on him might install it on his computer. Though the problem that he is seeing easily could be caused by a bad memory module, a buggy 3rd-party device driver, or a bug/design flay in Windows.

It’s also likely that, if you don’t use a Debian-ish Linux distribution, the “apt-get update” reference (and all of the oh-so-appropriate emotional and technological baggage that comes along with it) might not have had the same effect on you as on the guy who first made the reference. I apologize for the unreserved geek-out in that respect — and having worked as a sysadmin (and occasionally a developer) for a long time, I should be consistently conscious of the various computer-related skill-levels in my audience. I was quite markedly inconsistent between my comments.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 6:45 pm

#139 Luke,
See post #127.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 6:53 pm

#137 Rog Says: “GM talks and talks, but has anyone seen a Volt? I mean one that actually drives down the road. I haven’t even seen a film of one. I think it is all hype.”
————————————————————————————–
I guess you haven’t heard, but the first Volts go on sale Nov 2010.

Any new car that is developed from scratch take 3-5 years. This is the same across for car makers. GM started the production Volt design in March 2007. So Nov 2010 is only 3.5 years. that’s a quick schedule, particularly for the first car of it’s type. Lots of long hours on this project.

What makes it seem like its taking so long is that GM announced it very early. Usually, car makers don’t announce production cars until they are much closer to release.

(Quote)
Mark Z Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 6:54 pm

My Segway needed several firmware updates. They are not user upgradeable and Segway reads the usage history during each update. The remote computer attached to the Segway communicates to a centralized database for authorization to prevent theft by checking stored key codes and serial numbers.

Whatever method is used for the VOLT, checksum and verification will be needed to insure that every bit gets transferred and installed correctly. If GM wants to study the history stored in the computer without OnStar, using an internet connection does make sense.

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:18 pm

hi Mark X #141,

“Could future charging cables include an internet connection?”

________________________________

Be careful what you wish for. Not everyone wants to be connected to a location database 24/7.

Three years ago I had a coworker loose his job because he didn’t realize the company truck he was driving had a GPS tracking unit added to the engine compartment. He had been suspect of occasionally wondering during “working” hours so the boss stuck a magnet attached tracking under the hood. As expected, he wondered off his assigned route to visit with a friend and was fired.

There recently was a nationally covered missing child case in the news. The cell company knew that the owner of the mother’s cell phone had traveled to a wooded area near her home (at a specific time and date). Two cell towers were able to vector in her location via data base print out. Without court review, the cell company quickly handed her location information to the authorities.

The youth of today just don’t realize what being free feels like. It’s now “normal” to have your every move tracked. My guess is that 9 of 10 here carry a cell phone or use OnStar. If a “be free again” movement started today, it wouldn’t have a chance. We are paying to be tracked.

You ready for a brave new world? http://www.huxley.net/bnw/index.html

=D~

(Quote)
noel park Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:37 pm

Onstar works for me. I seem to remember nasaman saying that the Onstar nav. system is excellent and just as good as, or better than, the optional at extra cost one. Beats driving down to the dealer every !@#$%^ month (borrowed) and being subjected to their pitches (also borrowed).

KISS. Come on, all of us high rollers who can afford a $40K Volt can afford $9.95/month for Onstar. My wife will love it.

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:41 pm

Off Topic–

Where’s the F3DM REVIEW? This EREV’s been on sale for almost 2 months now.

Anyone know how to get a hold of this article without paying the full one year subscription ($219 US)?

F3DM: Exceptional acceleration; handling requires fine-tune
http://www.chinaautosourcing.com/pub/CARArticle.aspx?ID=65

( China Automotive Review)

(Quote)
Dave B Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:50 pm

I’m with everyone that says “NO” to OnStar. I don’t want to be locked into a monthly fee simply for “updates” when I could just tie-in to a wireless wi-fi connection. That’s my preference GM!

(Quote)
noel park Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 7:55 pm

#142 Dave K.:

Yeah, did you see the story about the rental car outfit that checks for speeding via the GPS system. It’s in the fine print of the contract. If you go from point A to point B faster than the speed limit would allow, they penailize you $X.

Pretty soon we won’t need the Highway Patrol any more. Just track you through the cell towers or the satellite and the computer mails out the speeding tickets untouched by human hands. LOL (I think).

Other than the speeding issue, they could die of boredom tracking me, hehehe. Actually, I think it’s like the NSA eavesdropping on millions of phone calls. It’s all just mostly white noise, because they don’t have the bodies to listen anyway. Let alone the language skills.

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:09 pm

hi noel park #146,

“eavesdropping”

___________________________

24/7 tracking seems innocent enough at face value. “If you never do anything wrong, then what’s the problem?”.

Say you are (unknowingly) in a divorce procedure. And you are being faithful. You later realize that It’s your spouse who wants to be with another. Your spouse takes your cell phone and places it at a ladies address for a few hours as you are asleep. The divorce court evidence shows that you are sneaking out to a ladies house thus proving her case.

You may as well get a fishing pole and move to Mexico. You will loose everything.

This is where we are now.

And as you say. Convenience features such as automatic toll pay leave us naked to technology.

I was recently ‘caught on camera’ as I did my job. Everyone involved in the camera footage was within legal rights as to what they were doing. But, unknowingly to us, a passer by called in a complaint to what she ‘perceived’ as being illegal. The digital footage from the surveillance camera was examined by authorities. I was then under the gun to explain myself and prove innocence to an authority. Even though I am innocent, I now carry a black mark.

Is this what we want?

=D~

(Quote)
noel park Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:21 pm

#142 Dave K.:

Although I guess the computer kicks out certain key words. Maybe if you say Volt they flag you as a suspicious character. Hanging out with bad associates, don’t you know. Maybe strange acronyms such as:

LJGTVWOTR!! NPNS! DBNGCMEMEV

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:30 pm

hi noel park #148,

“certain key words”

____________________-

I would be able to laugh if it happened to someone else. You’ll see when it’s your turn.

=D~

(Quote)
TALLPALL Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:32 pm

# 146 noel parc.

Yeah, did you see the story about the rental car outfit that checks for speeding via the GPS system. It’s in the fine print of the contract. If you go from point A to point B faster than the speed limit would allow, they penailize you $X.

Pretty soon we won’t need the Highway Patrol any more. Just track you through the cell towers or the satellite and the computer mails out the speeding tickets untouched by human hands. LOL (I think).

__________________________

Noel

LOL – You won’t be laughing when the tracker speed camera finally shows up in the US.

I moved to the US 2 years ago from England. There are at least 10 -20 speed cameras in every town and city in the UK. If your speeding as you pass by them, they take a photo and the computer mails out the speeding ticket + 3 points on your license, untouched by human hands! sound familiar!!!!

That was bad enough, but now they have cameras constantely monitoring you at 2 set points of the Highway, say 5 – 10 miles apart between 2 exits. and they monitor your AVERAGE speed between the 2. And if it is over the limit – VOILA in 2 day’s you receive your ticket and points. It is a friggin nightmare.

All we have over here is the odd stealth Sheriff parked up with his radar gun.

Just wait………….

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:36 pm

#150 Tallpall,

To protect, to serve, to revenue . . .
———————
Red light cameras too good for their own good?
Some cities rethink devices as drivers pay heed, reducing fine revenue
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970/

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:44 pm

I’ll take Buford T. Justice over big brother anyday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfGgorajsro&feature=related

(Quote)
TALLPALL Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:46 pm

Carcus

Dallas lawmakers originally estimated gross revenue of $15 million from their 62 cameras this fiscal year, which ends June 30. But City Manager Mary Suhm estimated last week that the city would fall short by more than $4 million.

So last week, the city turned off about a quarter of the least profitable cameras, saying it couldn’t justify the cost of running them.

____________________

So they are saying that they only made $11 million from 62 cameras. Are they on something… come on.

$11 Mill from 62 cameras = $177 grand each. How much do they think it costs to run each one????

I’ll buy into 1 or 2 if they will let me..

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 8:58 pm

Speed radar cameras are only going to get more popular as local/state tax bases are eroded through unemployment and rapidly deflating real estate prices.

/everyone is looking to make that extra dollar

(Quote)
theflew Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:05 pm

Let’s be real OnStar will be used. They already use it for diagnostics. Cars are phoning home all the time to send oil life, mileage, etc…. The already do downloads in the form of minutes and routing instructions. Sending firmware wouln’t be any harder. And as someone said they wouldn’t have to charge for OnStar if all it was used for is fireware upgrades. It just wrapped in the cost of the Volt.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:07 pm

Side note that has nothing to do with the Volt or cars but might be of interest to some posters.

The DOW made a crazy rebound today, 250 points in the last half hour or so (I say DOW instead of the more significant S&P rebound of 30 points because it is more widely recognized…although ridiculously outdated and useless).

More importantly it moved on the news that the gov’t may directly intervene and subsidize ‘troubled homeowners’ directly in the latest stimulus package. Things like lowering rates on distressed mortgages and those on the verge of foreclosure.

This would seem to get to the heart of the matter, which is to attempt to stabilize the real estate market…which seems to be origin (and still main detriment) to the lack of confidence/weakness of the US economy. Might be a little late at this point…but I’m sure it is welcome news to more than a few people that post here who are in trouble (and also good news for the rest who ’stayed put’ and are not so keen on seeing the value of their house drop by 25% a year).

/could have put in a floor at 808 (S&P)/7,693 (DOW)

To DonC (my high finance buddy, lol)
I picked up a little GE @ $11.25 and RY (Royal Bank) @ $23.75 to try and play the bounce…in other words, after almost a year and a half of being liquid…I’m getting my toes back in the water, this is the news I wanted to see

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:07 pm

#153 Tallpall,

“I’ll buy into 1 or 2 if they will let me..”
_______________________________________

I here ya.

If you buy any, just make sure they don’t put up a road sign saying:

“The next 2 miles of traffic cameras sponsored by Tallpall”

Your house could end up looking like the morning after halloween almost every day.

http://flickr.com/photos/absoblogginlutely/60377676/

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 9:52 pm

hi carcus1 #152,

“I’ll take Buford T. Justice over big brother any day.”

_____________________________

I sped through a 30 mph posted intersection at 45 mph. It was through an amber signal light to boot. I soon saw a police car behind me with his lights flashing (no siren). I pulled over at what happened to be a funeral monument stone cutter business.

“So what’s the hurry?

“Well officer, I have two boxes of hot pizza on my back seat and was trying to get home before they got cold”

“You been drinking?”

“No sir”

“You need to slow down. If you keep it up you may need one of these monuments. Understand that?

“Yes sir, thanks”.

_____________________________

I was driving a 302 ford V8 Maverick Grabber with headers, hijacker shocks, super mag 60’s, mini turbo charger, and exhaust dumps.

Ah, the days of freedom and good ol’ boy justice.

=D~

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:01 pm

Shlt, if OnStar is required I’ll Jam the Signal indefinately. I will find a way.

(Quote)
John Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:08 pm

#150

We do have that many places in the US already.

#154
“Speed radar cameras are only going to get more popular as local/state tax bases are eroded through unemployment and rapidly deflating real estate prices.”

Not necessarily, was visiting friends in Phoenix where speed cameras blanket almost every road and freeway. There are 2 ballot intiatives coming up to get rid of them with overwhelming support, as well as the legislature moving to get rid of them all on their own. In other words, their days are numbered out there.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:27 pm

#156 statik

O M G. You’re more optimistic than I am!

I just think the banks are going to be a bigger deal than most realize. It’s at least another trillion. That by itself would be bad enough, but the problem is that if the DA banks keep doing stuff like the bonuses then it’s going to be very hard to get any support to make the tough decisions, because those decisions will end up nationalizing some banks and costing the taxpayers a bundle.

Till we do that we’re going to just slowly slide. I was hoping for bolder action but maybe the plan is to first quell the outrage before starting the heavy lifting. The FDIC and Treasury have started real audits as of today. That’s the first step — making clear how bad things really are. To me that’s more important than the foreclosure business, though that’s welcome.

I’m playing the long bounce. Like 20 years …. LOL

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 12th, 2009 at 11:50 pm

hi Don C #161,

“…was hoping for bolder action…”

____________________________

The feeling I get is the U.S. government is trying to feed buzz words to the public to test which are able to produce a pop in the market. As the market slid today the government slipped us the ever popular “significant progress being made” carrot. And many jumped on it.

Will the government ever come clean and just tell it like it is?

“We have been troubled by wide spread corruption and have ruined the bond of faith between elected officials and the American citizen. We have spent huge amounts of your tax dollars to prop up greedy corrupt sleaze bag money managers. We did this because many of us used to work for them directly. For this we apologize. So now we ask for a renewed trust going forward. The money we print on our ink presses is meaningless. We need some of your real hard earned dollars to again support our financial system and get us off this slippery slope of decline.”

I would have trouble getting back in even after a confession. Trust is based on what has happened not on what is promised. I believe we just have to slug it out, day by day, for better or worse, until the system self stabilizes to a realistic level.

=D~

(Quote)
Casey Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 12:06 am

Big Brother is watching us but nobody is watching them, not even the press and that is what the press is for

Dave G, where do you play music? I play in Coos Bay Oregon.

NO PLUG NO SALE, JGTVWOTR, DBNGCMEMEV, (my house) =D~~~(my volt) ———— ========STOP THE BAILOUTS======

(Quote)
unni Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 12:47 am

started reading “Build your own electric Vehicle” .Let me come up with educated comments from now .The book says with Li-ion battery 180-200 miles range is possible.

On volt updates : I expected it, I believe there will an appstrore from GM for Volt , where i can purchase different skins for my displays ( ex: my speedometer will have a skin which i like ) . a wifi interface for the car to browse appstore from the center console and a normal webpage to browse appstore from my PC. Wondering when GM will be releasing the “skin developers guide” for volt.

Again another expectation is GM may get all the reports from the cars and tune the cars according to the data they get and give new firmwares/updates( and expect jail breaks or pirate firmwares also ).

Only updates through onstar when the car is really malfunctioning and should be slow.

The third expectation is Battery to ultra capacitors. I wish if somebody develop an ultracapacotor takes 2 minutes to charge,fully, runs 200 miles in one charge and has only costs less than $1000 – may be its possible.in initial time the ultracapacitor need to hold charge for max 5 days, every 5 days you use or not, you have to charge : translates to a lot electric pumps .

Nice future

(Quote)
I Like Electric cars Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 1:35 am

I hope that GM is not lying to all of us! They already did so about the EV-1! Who killed the electric car! What in the world is he trying to say? Why in the WHOLE world would you want to spend money on upgrading a battery if it still gets same range? Is the person who is saying this knows what he is talking about? IT IS NONSENSE!
It is a good a idea to buy a “home car”. Car that makes jobs! Weber notes that the next generation plans are to keep the 40 mile electric range but lower battery cost. Weber said “My goal is not to go from 40 to 60 (miles) in the next generation vehicles. My expectation is that the battery is equally capable, but they are half the size and half the cost of the batteries that go into the car right now.”

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 1:58 am

business forecast 2009:

Gas prices will rise again as soon as the economy regains its footing and demand turns up. Kiplinger’s predicts that oil will reach $110 a barrel again in 2010 — up from a recent $40 a barrel. And car makers are committed by last year’s energy legislation to improve average fuel economy of both trucks and cars to 35 mpg by 2020. The standard now is 27.5 mpg for cars and 23.1 mpg for trucks. So smaller cars, hybrids and electric vehicles will account for a larger percentage of sales.

=D~

(Quote)
Casey Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 2:04 am

Dave K, Oil has been around $33 to $34 per barrel the last few days and gas at the pump here in Coos Bay Or has been around $2.10 a gal. I think some one is gouging us again

NO PLUG, NO SALE, JGTVWOTR, DBNGCMEMEV, (my house) =D~~~(my volt)————————-STOP THE BAILOUTS———————-

(Quote)
Dave K. =D~ Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 2:39 am

hi Casey #167,

“… here in Coos Bay Or has been around $2.10 a gal”

_________________________

We have seen a 1 to 6 cent per gallon decline here in Southern California. Prices range from $2.33-$2.48 for premium.

=D~

(Quote)
Darius Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 2:47 am

I think that series hybrid option will be viable in cold climate for ever and will be not exchange to full electric. The reason is that it makes no sense heating your car with electricity when it is -10 C. Your car will very quickly run off the juice in case of full electric. Vice versa – in California full electric should be equipped with roof solar panels.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 6:55 am

Casey #167 says,
Oil has been around $33 to $34 per barrel the last few days and gas at the pump here in Coos Bay Or has been around $2.10 a gal. I think some one is gouging us again

——–
I think so also. Gas here as been climbing steadily. I have seen as high as $2.09 a gal.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 9:02 am

#154 Statik said:
“Speed radar cameras are only going to get more popular as local/state tax bases are eroded through unemployment and rapidly deflating real estate prices.”

——————-
#160 John said:
Not necessarily, was visiting friends in Phoenix where speed cameras blanket almost every road and freeway. There are 2 ballot intiatives coming up to get rid of them with overwhelming support, as well as the legislature moving to get rid of them all on their own. In other words, their days are numbered out there.
==========================
Think we are on the same side of the coin here. The municipalities/state want the revenues and they are throwing them up…and the people (naturally) hate the thiings and try to get them pulled down.

(Quote)
Van Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 9:13 am

Hi DonC @ 96, there may be some pointers that point to a lower cost, but there are other pointers that point a higher cost. Your first link includes the line that the current replacement cost of the Tesla battery is three times that much, referring to the $12,000 up front offer. Which appears to be a bet on future cost reduction. $36,000 for a 53KWh battery works out to about $680 per KWh, or about $10,900 for a 16 KWh pack, ignoring economy of scale. So I conclude this points to about $12,000, not $10,000. And certainly not $7000.

The second link refers to a development contract where A123 received about 12 million dollars to try to develop a battery within 3 years that would cost less than $300 per KWh. Again a future battery that costs a little less than half the current cost. And there is no guarantee A123 will reach that goal in 3 years. And this price ($4500 for a 16 vice 12 KWh battery) does not include the pack and battery management cost.

The third link promised what was not delivered. A November, 2008 story said the Think costs 28,000 and on top of that you have to lease the battery for $183 per month. Over ten years, that means the battery costs $21,000 assuming none of the battery pack costs are embedded in the $28,000 car price. In any event, the $21,000 works out to $750 per KWh, exactly matching my $12,000 figure.

(Quote)
statik Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 9:17 am

#161 DonC said:

O M G. You’re more optimistic than I am!

I just think the banks are going to be a bigger deal than most realize. It’s at least another trillion. That by itself would be bad enough, but the problem is that if the DA banks keep doing stuff like the bonuses then it’s going to be very hard to get any support to make the tough decisions, because those decisions will end up nationalizing some banks and costing the taxpayers a bundle.

Till we do that we’re going to just slowly slide. I was hoping for bolder action but maybe the plan is to first quell the outrage before starting the heavy lifting. The FDIC and Treasury have started real audits as of today. That’s the first step — making clear how bad things really are. To me that’s more important than the foreclosure business, though that’s welcome.

I’m playing the long bounce. Like 20 years …. LOL
=======================
I think there is more pain down the line for sure…just looking for a little short term bounce, maybe pick up 10-15% and get out again.

I think we have more pain to coming…specifically the credit card industry. There has to be major, MAJOR losses coming down the pipe. A lot of people had a big house, with a big mortgage…and a ton of credit. You have to believe that those people who now can’t pay the mortgage are just kiting their debt with credit cards.

Might be a trillion of debt to be written off there…and it barely hits the radar. All those banks guys are in front of congress and they aren’t saying a peep.

(Quote)
unni Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 11:34 am

After some reading : Modular upgrade means its changing the motor, control board etc. Its not only software. Means if we find a better electric motor or power distribution system, battery etc we can just replace the older one.

(Quote)
57paf Says:
February 13th, 2009 at 3:01 pm

If the Gen 2 batteries are smaller, perhaps the transmission hump could be made smaller and accommodate a third rear middle seat for occassional use? Nothing as wide as the back seat of a Coupe DeVille, but something for short trips when you have all the kids. Increasing seating to 5 (or 4 1/2) can really help increase the utility of the Volt. And if the Gen 2 batteries are ready by 2013, perhaps the same body pan and seating can be adopted by the Cadillac Converj.

(Quote)
T e c Z i l l a » Software-Updates für das Elektroauto Says:
February 14th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Derick George Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 11:06 pm

i was just wondering if you continuously charge the battery every night, like some people do in laptops, it kills the batter much faster and it does not last as long running on only battery power…will the volt be the same way? I dont want to buy a car that rocks at first but the more you charge it the less long the battery will last. and does anyone know the lifetime of the battery?…keep in mind these are two different questions…the over all lifetime, and will it stay at 40 miles per charge over time or will it decrease??

(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

Chevy Volts Can and Will be Frequently Updated

178 Responses to “Chevy Volts Can and Will be Frequently Updated”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts