Swedish carmaker Saab has been a division of General Motors ever since the automaker purchased a 50% stake in 1990 and the rest in 2000. With the collapse of the auto market, it has become a particularly weak division, selling less than 94,000 cars last year, down from a peak of 133,000 in 2006.
GM itself has been struggling to re-organize with government funds, and avoid bankruptcy. Part of its restructuring plans involve shedding Hummer, Saturn, and Saab. They have until March 31 to prove to the US government they are achieving these restructuring obligations.
Today in a major step in that direction, Saab’s board has announced that the company will become independent from GM and file for reorganization under the Swedish court.
They will provide a proposal to the court for plans to design, engineer, and manufacture future cars in Sweden. The Swedish government had refused to loan GM money and the source of funding for restructuring Saab at this point remains unclear.
So, if you were hoping for an electric Saab, your wait might have just gotten a little longer.
Press Release:
As a result of GM’s strategic review of the global Saab business the Saab Board announced today that it will file for reorganization under a self-managed Swedish court process to create a fully independent business entity that would be sustainable and suitable for investment.
The reorganization is a self-managed, Swedish legal process headed by an independent administrator appointed by the court who will work closely with the Saab management team. As part of the process, Saab will formulate its proposal for reorganization, which will include the concentration of design, engineering and manufacturing in Sweden. This proposal will be presented to creditors within three weeks of the filing. Pending court approval, the reorganization will be executed over a three-month period and will require independent funding to succeed.
“We explored and will continue to explore all available options for funding and/or selling Saab and it was determined a formal reorganization would be the best way to create a truly independent entity that is ready for investment,” said Jan Ake Jonsson, Managing Director for Saab Automobile. “With an all new 9-5, 9-3X and 9-4X all ready for launch over the next year and a half, Saab has an excellent foundation for strong growth, assuming we can get the funding to complete engineering, tooling and manage launch costs. Reorganization will give us the time and means that help get these products to market while minimizing the liquidity impact of Saab on GM.”
Funding for the restructured company will need to be secured during the reorganization process and will be sought from both public and private sources.
Saab will continue to operate as usual and in accordance with the formal reorganization process, with the Government providing some support during this period. The reorganization should have no impact on other GM operations. Details of the progress will be provided as milestones are achieved.
[UPDATE 10:00 AM EST - Swedish Court Approves Restructuring:]
After 20 years of foreign ownership, the future of Saab Automobile is once again in Swedish hands. On Friday, the Vänersborg District Court approved the request for a reorganization and restructuring which Saab’s representative submitted earlier in the morning.
“Today is the beginning of a new chapter in Saab’s history”, says Jan Åke Jonsson, Managing Director of Saab Automobile. “We are now recreating Saab Automobile as an independent unit. The road ahead will not be easy. Many have already suffered considerably as a result of the crisis in the automobile industry and sacrifices will be a part of our future, but after a period of tough decisions we will have laid the foundations for a new beginning.
“Saab has a trademark which is well established both in Sweden and internationally. We have a documented efficient production and we have a strong range of models in development. That is why we have chosen this road. The future will be tough, but the commitment which exists to support the Swedish automobile industry and Saab will help us in the arduous tasks which lie ahead of us.”
The work of piloting the new Saab Automobile into the future will be led by a group of three persons: the lawyer Guy Lofalk, whom the District Court has appointed as Administrator, the Managing Director Jan Åke Jonsson, and the international reorganization expert, Stephen Taylor.
The purpose of the company reorganization is to create a short-term stability that will make it possible to develop a long-term solution for Saab. The Swedish Company Reorganization Act says that an application shall not be approved unless there is reasonable cause to assume that the purpose of the reorganization will be achieved. In today’s decision, the District Court has found that such conditions exist.
“I can already say that I am impressed by the competence within Saab”, says Guy Lofalk, “and with three strong automobile models just around the corner it would be a waste not to try to find a long-term way forward.”
Source (GM)
This entry was posted on Friday, February 20th, 2009 at 6:48 am and is filed under Brand, Financial, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:02 am)Saab(GM owned) declared a chapter 11(re-organization) not a chapter 7(liquidation). This is only the beginning of the bankruptcies. I see several more car companies following suit soon.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:10 am)Good move on the part of GM and Saab. Perhaps Saab can find new life in Sweeden, or perhaps not, but the direction they are going gives Saab a chance. Contrary to the post, I think there still can be an electric Saab. Yes there is electricity in Sweden
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:22 am)Right RB,
In Germany too, here there are some fears that the financial problems of GM NA could badly impact Opel.
The next move will be worth to be observed, IMHO.
Regards
JC NPNS
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:25 am)I hope Sweden can really make something of Saab.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:26 am)GM dominance in europe is coming down. cmon GM make some electric cars and make profits and rebadge it in sweden and there u have it . u get the company back after few years,in the meantime no one should buy it.it should be with sweden govt.
by selling saab to some other company the company may face consumer backlash
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:35 am)Are the forth quarter results out yet?
How much was Saab valued at? Cause it’s worth zip to GM now.
Wonder who they can stick Hummer with?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:35 am)#1 blkstne Says:
This is only the beginning of the bankruptcies. I see several more car companies following suit soon.
—————
Unfortunately, it would not surprise me either.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:58 am)Born from jets,
Dead from debts.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:59 am)GM has gotten “too big to fail.” I had a college professor who wrote “The Bigness Complex,” which if I remember right, had a premise that the government had to intervene when a company got so large it started functioning as a government rather than a corporation (ie supplying health care, people relying on it for sustainability). My point is that the professor was right–all of the separate entities should be like Darwin’s theory, “survival of the fittest.” If it fails, the markets weed it out. Maybe my professor wasn’t a total nut afterall.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:04 am)Off Topic but a great interview with CPI.
… CPI’s Safety Reinforcing Separator (SRS) separator is 5x stronger than the industry norm and is more robust to debris migration as well as overcharges and they view this as a long term competitive advantage.
Cathode chemistry is one of the main variables in determining Li-ion battery performance with at least eight different sub chemistries being actively pursued within the industry. For the Volt, CPI is using manganese-spinel (LiMnO2) which features high stability and resistance to thermal runaway. “People frequently say they can handle cell safety issues with exterior circuitry but these cannot really help if something happens inside the cell,” Patil said.
Manganese is also abundant and low-cost and with the use of proprietary additives, CPI believes a calendar life of more than 15 years is achievable within a vehicle with proper design and operation….
“http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/02/profile-li-ion.html#more”
delete quote marks.
LJGTVWOTR
NO plug, NO sale.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:18 am)#10 good info, we will get more and more technoligy advanced then the cost will drop. and yes….NPNS!
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:25 am)One wonders about the terms of the separation of GM and Saab. How much did Saab take with them, in terms of assets, and in terms of debts? Do we have this information?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:31 am)Off Topic
Green Car has a great article on Lithium Batteries which includes lots of new information, at least to me.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/02/profile-li-ion.html#more
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:35 am)#10 NZDavid
Excellent link on CPI battery packs! Thank you.
Here is the direct link.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/02/profile-li-ion.html#more
Some tidbits worth mentioning (excerpts from article):
1) In previous Li-ion batteries, microscopic amounts of manufacturing debris that are undetectable in end-of-line testing have penetrated the separator and led to fires resulting from the characteristics of the chemistries of the materials used in the battery.
CPI’s Safety Reinforcing Separator (SRS) separator is 5x stronger than the industry norm and is more robust to debris migration as well as overcharges and they view this as a long term competitive advantage.
2) CPI believes a calendar life of more than 15 years is achievable within a vehicle with proper design and operation.
3) “All vehicle battery packs require cooling …in consumer electronics the battery is in the same environment as people and automatically temperature controlled.” For a traditional HEV pack it can be as simple as circulating air while for the “Volt, we had to go to liquid cooling because there isn’t enough room” for air cooling.
4) For frigid climates like the Minnesota and Canada pack warming can be integrated with the overnight charging for a PHEV.
5) Although repair plans will vary by car manufacturer, it is likely for the initial PHEV programs servicing a battery pack at a dealer would be limited to pack swapping.
6) We delivered 50 packs to GM last year and delivering close to 400 packs this year. Although it is being done on a prototype line we are emulating the processes that will be used in high volume production.
7) CPI’s long term goal to produce the cells in the US once they get a critical mass of business.
Compared with today’s NiMH batteries deployed in hybrids, the LG Chem lithium polymer batteries deliver the same power with 30% less weight, 50% less volume and 10% greater efficiency.
9) Second, the AT application is sized for a 70% depth of discharge, the gap between minimum and maximum charge levels, which allows space on the high end for regenerative braking and space on the low end to provide enough power for charge sustaining operation.
10) All four of these items together justify a 2.5x premium for the AT application (or approximately $ 1,000/available kWh) compared to the $350/stated kWh of a CE system, CPI says.
11) One of the issues with the acceptance of pure EVs is if you want to provide a 100-mile range…you end up putting so much battery in that it ends up being used only 10% of the time or less and yet you are saddling the customer with that cost
12) even something as simple as being able to drop the battery pack out and put a new one in is a challenge because these high power connectors aren’t designed to be disconnected and reconnected on a regular basis.
13) That is why to me the plug in or range extended hybrid is a good stepping stone because it tries to balance the value equation with providing the amount of battery that would be used 80% of the time but addressing this range issue and the emotional issue of running out of battery
14) As the technology gets fixed, the anode is more of an issue related to fast charge. Right now that is not that big of a deal because most houses don’t have the electrical infrastructure to support a 10 minute fast charge … it would bring down the neighborhood … but as PHEVs proliferate there will be a need for fast charging at service stations and highway rest stops then the anode will play a role.
—————————————-
A lot of great info in this article.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:36 am)Saab,sob,s.o.b.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:36 am)Another Saab story. So sad.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:41 am)#10 NZDavid Says: Off Topic but a great interview with CPI.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/02/profile-li-ion.html
—————————————————————————————-
Yes. Great article. Thanks for the link.
Here are my favorite parts:
On battery cost:
From a historical perspective over the past 17-18 years the cost has come down by a factor of 15x. In the next 5-10 years we should be able to come down by an incremental 2-4x and we will have to do that to accelerate the penetration of the technology.
On battery range:
…if you want to provide a 100-mile range…you end up putting so much battery in that it ends up being used only 10% of the time or less and yet you are saddling the customer with that cost…
That is why to me the plug in or range extended hybrid is a good stepping stone because it tries to balance the value equation with providing the amount of battery that would be used 80% of the time but addressing this range issue and the emotional issue of running out of battery with a relatively small and inexpensive engine and generator. People will start to feel comfortable and realize forty miles isn’t that bad … and re-evaluate their expectations for range.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:52 am)Another couple excerpts from the CPI link:
1) the AT application is sized for a 70% depth of discharge, the gap between minimum and maximum charge levels, which allows space on the high end for regenerative braking and space on the low end to provide enough power for charge sustaining operation.
2) First, CE pricing is based on the beginning-of-life capacity whereas AT pricing is based upon end-of-life capacity and even for a highly durable chemistry the ratio of end-of-life to beginning-of-life is 75%.
———————————
Therefore, it may be that at beginning of life, GM will use 50% of the battery pack capacity, or 8 kwh, while at the end of life, the total battery pack capacity diminishes to 16*.75 or 12 kwh, at which time GM will use about 70% of this capacity or 8.4 kwh.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:18 am)Problem: Too much supply and not enough demand.
Solution: Reduce supply or lower it’s cost until it meets demand.
Throwing more debt or taxpayer bailouts at something does NOT decrease it’s cost or it’s demand.
Here is a short paper on the subject for those who wish to learn simple economics:
Jaguar (the car) Inflation
by Robert R. Prechter, Jr.
http://mises.org/story/3329
An MP3 audio file of this article, read by Dr. Floy Lilley, is available for download.
http://mises.org/MultiMedia/mp3/audioarticles/3329_Prechter.mp3
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:18 am)Does anyone know…
Can a Company just “spin-off” divisions and call them bankrupt? That is how I’m reading this. But if it was that easy, wouldn’t GM being doing this sort of thing with all of its suffering divisions, i.e. Hummer, Saturn, Pontiac as well?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:19 am)From what I recall, last year there were 2 wealthy brothers from India that were reportedly interested in purchasing Hummer, and at the time GM said no. Unfortunate for them.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:23 am)There may be some positive things left for Saturn afterall. Here is a letter e-mailed from Saturn General Manager Jill Ladjiak to Saturn customers:
Dear loyal customer:
From our very beginning, Saturn has always sought a better way. We pioneered no-hassle, no-haggle shopping, built dent-resistant cars, set a new benchmark for customer service and forged a unique relationship with our retailers, workers and customers. From the beginning, Saturn was launched as a “Different Kind of Car Company.”
Well, here we go again.
You may have read that General Motors delivered a plan to the U.S. government that outlined the corporation’s plan for long-term viability.In that plan, GM stated that Saturn would work with its retailers to investigate options for the future of the Saturn Brand. We said that all ideas were on the table and we meant it.
Today, we confirmed that Saturn and GM would further investigate one of those options: a spin-off of an independent Saturn Distribution Corporation.
The Saturn Distribution Corporation already exists as an indirect subsidiary of GM. It’s the entity with which our retailers currently have their franchise agreement. An independent Saturn would still have its great retailers, and it would continue to source current products from GM through 2011. If successful, SDC at that point would source products from other manufacturers.
The goal-from a product perspective-would be to find future vehicles that match the Saturn Brand: fuel-efficient, safe, reliable and affordable. From a retailing perspective, we would build on our core strength of unmatched customer service. The same hassle-free experience that is a hallmark of the brand could be taken to even higher levels.
While this process proceeds, we will continue to do what we have always done best: sell great vehicles and take care of our customers. We have a fresh portfolio of award-winning, fuel-efficient vehicles and a network of retailers that is second to none. And our new vehicles are still backed by a 100,000-mile/5-year (whichever comes first) Transferable Powertrain Limited Warranty. When you add Roadside Assistance and Courtesy Transportation programs, we believe it is the industry’s best overall coverage. It is coverage that GM and Saturn will continue to firmly stand behind, and GM will support the continued availability of Saturn parts and service as needed.
This is an exciting time at the Saturn Brand, and I have to confess, it feels a bit like it did back in the 1980s when the original Saturn project was being developed. As loyal Saturn owners and enthusiasts, I know you support this brand, and you can believe we are working toward a vibrant future. Difficult times sometimes yield the most innovative solutions, and those who are willing to take on the challenge will emerge victorious. Stay tuned.
Sincerely,
[http://www.saturnevents.com/email2182009/Jill-Lajdziak.gif]
Jill Lajdziak
General Manager, Saturn
For more information, visit gmfactsandfiction.com
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:24 am)HUZZAH!
1 down….XXX to go.
Points to Sweden on this one.
Industry Minister Maud Olofsson told Swedish news agency TT it was “very hard to say what our role will be.” On Wednesday, Olofsson rejected GM’s plea for state funding for Saab, saying it was up to the U.S. automaker to save the brand.
“… support in the form of money is not on the agenda,” Industry Ministry spokesman Hakan Lind said.
—————————-
Ironic moment for GM…trying to sping the bankruptcy as the best thing to do for Saab (and its future sale to alien beings from another planet who are clueless about the auto business)…but not themselves:
“We explored and will continue to explore all available options for funding and/or selling Saab and it was determined a formal restructuring would be the best way to create a truly independent entity that is ready for investment,” Saab’s managing director, Jan Ake Jonsson, said in a statement.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090220/eu_sweden_saab.html
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:29 am)#18 BillR1 Says: Therefore, it may be that at beginning of life, GM will use 50% of the battery pack capacity, or 8 kWh, while at the end of life, the total battery pack capacity diminishes to 16*.75 or 12 kWh, at which time GM will use about 70% of this capacity or 8.4 kWh.
————————————————————————————–
Right. This is how I read it as well. The software in the battery pack will make 8 kWh of usable energy available throughout the 10-year warranty, and perhaps beyond.
The point at which the gas engine turns on is called the Customer Depletion Point, or CDP. GM hasn’t given us a name for the point at which the Volt’s plug-in charger stops charging, so I’ll make up the name Customer Replenish Point, or CRP.
So maybe GM plays around with the CDP and CRP as the battery ages, perhaps like this:
Years ……. Total kWh ……. CDP ……. CRP ……. Usable kWh
0 (New) …… 16 ……………. 30% …….. 80% ……. 8 kWh
10 …………. 13.3 ………….. 25% …….. 85% ……. 8 kWh
15 …………. 12 ……………. 22% …….. 88% ……. 8 kWh
Note that GM defines end-of-life at 10 years or 150,000 miles, while the CPI article said the battery pack may have 75% of it’s original energy storage after 15 years.
http://gm-volt.com/2008/10/30/the-chevy-volts-all-electric-range-aer-will-be-40-miles-both-at-beginning-and-end-of-life/
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:42 am)statik (#23) is absolutely right yet again.
GM will NEVER seek bankruptcy reorganization as long as corrupt Statist politicians redistribute corporate welfare which they stole from productive (successful) taxpayers.
As long as the unsuccessful take from the successful thus rewarding failure while punishing success, the pool of the successful will decrease while the pool of the unsuccessful impoverished will increase. Redistribution is ONE of the great evils of Statism.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:42 am)#3 Jean-Charles Jacquemin said:
In Germany too, here there are some fears that the financial problems of GM NA could badly impact Opel.
The next move will be worth to be observed, IMHO.
====================================
Indeed. As a matter of fact, those Opel fears materialized in a very real way only a few hours ago.
After Saab did its dance of death, Opel came out and said it was going to need a lot more than the hypothetical 1.8 Euro loan guarantees (that it already does not have, lol), maybe up to twice that amount.
http://www.manager-magazin.de/unternehmen/artikel/0,2828,608894,00.html
en anglais:
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINWEA831820090220?rpc=44
I don’t know how many of us follow ‘euro-zone’ happenings, but the likelihood that the German gov’t gives up any money with GM still owning Opel…is remote, at best.
Side note on Opel: It is really bad/further complicated because GM actually owes (and is overdue to pay) a billion Euros to Opel.
The bankruptcy of Saab may be the opening of the flood gates, and the house of cards may be falling.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:55 am)#6 NZDavid said:
Are the forth quarter results out yet?
How much was Saab valued at? Cause it’s worth zip to GM now.
Wonder who they can stick Hummer with?
======================================
Isn’t that a million dollar question…where is Q4?
As for Saab. I don’t think Saab had much of a book value to GM, I know they cleared off a lot of assets from them a couple years back.
NZ, you are right to say Saab worth nothing now, actually it is now a even bigger cash drain as GM has said that it will guarantee the part suppliers of Saab get paid, and they will inject liquidity to try and get it to become a stand alone company.
However, what GM really means by saying that it is going to backstop Saab through this process is: “This happened hella quick, and we were unprepared because some suppliers cut us off cold-turkey, and stopped shipping to us a couple days ago. Our problem is that we need stuff Saab (and its suppliers) does/makes for our other brands…and as soon as we strip out all the necessary processes and good parts of Saab…we will be leaving it dead on the side of the road”
HUMMER certainly won’t be sold off. It is the worst of all the brands. The only reason it survives is that GM can’t afford to shut it down/pay off the dealers (although they have been trying their hardest to muscle/starve the dealers out). As soon as GM gets its next ‘tranche’ (still a fabulous word) from the gov’t , you can bet a portion of that goes immediately to closing the brand. (Who knows, maybe their is a nickel or two left from the last payment to do it now).
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:11 am)Statik (#26) said:
“The bankruptcy of Saab may be the opening of the flood gates, and the house of cards may be falling.”
The taller the house of cards, the bigger the mess when if falls.
What does this say about all the bailouts and Porkzilla, Obama’s newly signed “depression” package?
It’s going to be one hell of a mess when that Pile of Sh!t collapses and now he’s getting ready build the house of cards even larger with Porkzilla round II, III, IV etc.
Oh, the pain, the pain….
(I loved the Dr. Smith character in “Lost in Space”. Seems appropriate now.)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:21 am)I want one of these!
James Bond-style jetpack powered by high-pressure water invented
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4640262/James-Bond-style-jetpack-powered-by-high-pressure-water-invented.html
Here’s the website
http://www.jetlev-flyer.com/
(I know it’s off topic, but I couldn’t resist)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:24 am)GM should have gotten rid of Saab many years ago. Saab has been a constant drain on GM for many years. Another bad mistake by GM. Can we blame the UAW for this one too? Just joking.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:31 am)#10 NZDavid & #13 Van – Great cite to an informative article!
But like Dave G I found the issue of range to be interesting, though I was going in a different direction. Rather than thinking GM will have a complex formula based on battery age (how would you know if you can replace modules during its life?), my assumption is that the car will simply monitor the kWh used — which is easy to measure. IOW at EOL more of the pack will be used than at the beginning of life.
This implies a that at the beginning of life range is greater than 40 miles. GM has said this in different contexts so this isn’t surprising, but the interview gives more some more specifics, presumably about the CPI pack which will be used in the Volt.
So how might that work? If the battery pack has 75% of its energy and a 40 mile range at EOL, it would have a range of 53 miles at beginning of life. If it had 80% at EOL the range would be 50 miles at beginning of life. doubt it would be that dramatic but we could see a range in the upper forties.
The residual value is also interesting. If a battery retained even 50% of its value after 15 years this would make the battery much less costly. However, this seems unlikely in that he’s predicting cost drops for the technology. IOW if the cost of the pack halves over ten years, can a pack carrying 75% of the energy retain 50% of its value at the end of that period. Seems unlikely.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:42 am)#10 NZDavid
#13 van
#14 BillR1
#17 DaveG
#31 DonC
Hey! You guys take your Volt/battery talk off my bankruptcy thread! (j/k)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:42 am)Saab..eh. I wont miss them. I have some friends that love Saab. Their cars looked funny to me at the Detroit Auto Show. They may be suitable for Skandinavian/European people, but I would feel awkward driving any of them.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:44 am)Now Next Hummer : I think they can be stand alone with manufacturing from AMC. They can also start with a chapter11 and be the a specialized SUV company or off road company. They can make arrangements with GE and start with a Diesel-electric power train and come with a high mpg Hummer.
They may get an all world market very soon than any other brand because of the name and presence in movies/forces.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:47 am)As a SAAB owner I’m glad the Sweeds are taking over again. They are great cars that routinely last 250-300,000 miles and it’s sad and pathetic that GM couldn’t make them profitable. Acutally maybe that’s why they couldn’t make money on them, they last too long.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:50 am)#25 Tim Says: “As long as the unsuccessful take from the successful thus rewarding failure while punishing success, the pool of the successful will decrease while the pool of the unsuccessful impoverished will increase.”
————————————————————————————–
Successful businesses have always provided the basis for loans.
The auto bailout is a loan. And like any loan, GM has to prove they can pay it back. If GM can’t prove some way of paying back this loan by March 31st, then the government will call the loan, and GM will go bankrupt. Keep in mind that GM’s debt to U.S. taxpayers has priority over all other debts, so if GM goes Chapter 7, then the government is first-in-line for payment when GM’s assets are sold.
In other words, the U.S. government is taking reasonable steps to avoid the collapse of the American automobile industry, but the government is also doing everything possible to insure that money will be paid back.
By the way, this is exactly how it worked for the Chrysler bailout in the 80s. All of that money was paid back, and Chrysler emerged as a stronger company (for a while).
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:54 am)Saab used to be different and then it just turned into another version of a standard GM platform.
Spin all the GM brands off by themselves or at least Chevy-Caddy and Buick-GMc-Pontiac. Split the plants up between them. Chevy-Cadyy stays under GM while the other three become a ‘BGP’ company. Saturn will thrive and given 5 years will be a major player, because Tesla will use them to sell their cars.
I am just sick my kids and their kids having to pay all this government spending crap just to stop a more difficult than usual recession. I love GM, but like in sports, sometimes your team needs to implode/explode before it gets better.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:55 am)#31 DonC Says: This implies a that at the beginning of life range is greater than 40 miles. GM has said this in different contexts so this isn’t surprising, …
If the battery pack has 75% of its energy and a 40 mile range at EOL, it would have a range of 53 miles at beginning of life.
————————————————————————————–
The Chevy Volt’s All Electric Range Will be 40 Miles Both at Beginning and End of Life
http://gm-volt.com/2008/10/30/the-chevy-volts-all-electric-range-aer-will-be-40-miles-both-at-beginning-and-end-of-life/
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:57 am)If the LG battery has 75% of its capacity at 15 years, then it would have more capacity at 10 years, say 83%. So the usable capacity would be 70% of that, or 58.1% of 16 KWh which works out to 9.3 KWh of usable capacity. So why does GM propose to use only 8, rather than 9 or even 10?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:59 am)#20 Schmeltz
GM’s other divisions, except Saturn, are closely bound up in the corporation and can’t be simply dropped out. Saturn is somewhat different. It is operated as a separate division like SAAB. I don’t know about Hummer, but it is probably loosely associated like Saturn and SAAB. I would think all of the older car and truck lines are one big lump inside the corporation whereas GM’s newer “divisions” are probably not as tightly integrated. I am guessing somewhat on this.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:02 am)SAAB was a lame acquisition to start with. I have always said they should sell it. However these days, with pretty much every car company worth zero, hacking off a dead limb to save yourself seems like a pretty good idea.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:14 am)I’m sure the Swedes will have a sense of national pride to get their company back into Swedish hands.
Pride in one’s own products… funny how you don’t see that in America.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:17 am)This comes off as essentially a massive write down for GM. 1) invest in SAAB, buy half of SAAB, buy all of SAAB, invest more in SAAB, pour in good money after bad, walk away.
Volt battery range in +- 40 miles. Not 53 or 34. 16 kWh pack has enough energy for nearly 80 miles under ideal conditions when new. Firmware limits AER. After 15 years capacity will limit AER. Not designed to use x or x-y kWh, but to get 40 mile AER.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:25 am)In related news GMs stock price is .05 from its all time low – ever. 1.70. Never thought I would see this day. R.I.P. GM
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:26 am)On battery range:
…If you want to provide a 100-mile range…you end up putting so much battery in that it ends up being used only 10% of the time or less and yet you are saddling the customer with that cost
———–
This is a personal thing. My commute is 101 miles round trip.
I would use the entire 100 mile range. But as someone said,
I’m in the 20% of the market. The other 80% will most likely not use it.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:26 am)38 Dave G Says:
February 20th, 2009 at 10:55 am
#31 DonC Says: This implies a that at the beginning of life range is greater than 40 miles. GM has said this in different contexts so this isn’t surprising, …
If the battery pack has 75% of its energy and a 40 mile range at EOL, it would have a range of 53 miles at beginning of life.
————————————————————————————–
The Chevy Volt’s All Electric Range Will be 40 Miles Both at Beginning and End of Life
==============
I always saw it stated “At least 40 miles AER”. So I dont see a problem in it getting 48 AER in the beginning and 40 AER at the end.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:28 am)More competition for the Volt is coming soon.
Chery just announced the S18, a plugin hybrid that will go 93 miles on battery alone (more than twice the range of the Volt).
And don’t forget BYD has already become the maker of the first mass-produced plugin hybrid. The Volt may already be too late as the Chinese companies are seriously spanking it NOW.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:28 am)Jeffhre (#43) said”
“This comes off as essentially a massive write down for GM. 1) invest in SAAB, buy half of SAAB, buy all of SAAB, invest more in SAAB, pour in good money after bad, walk away.”
Let’s use this logic to look at the bigger problem and fix your sentance which should read…
“This comes off as essentially a massive write down for the US Gov’t. 1) invest in failed companies, buy half of failed companies, buy all of failed companies, invest more in failed companies, pour in good money after bad, walk away bankrupt.”
There, that’s more like the whole truth.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:29 am)#39 Van Says:
February 20th, 2009 at 10:57 am
If the LG battery has 75% of its capacity at 15 years, then it would have more capacity at 10 years, say 83%. So the usable capacity would be 70% of that, or 58.1% of 16 KWh which works out to 9.3 KWh of usable capacity. So why does GM propose to use only 8, rather than 9 or even 10?
================
Because by using only 8, that is how you get that longevity.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:30 am)#40 N. RILEY:
The part of this announcement that worries me is that GM is spinning off SAAB before they even have the meeting with Congress on March 31. Maybe what Statik said earlier in that “The bankruptcy of Saab may be the opening of the flood gates, and the house of cards may be falling”–could be very true. We all know GM needs to shed these loser divisions, but it is just the fact that it is happening before another pending round of bailouts that is scary. Perhaps GM knows already they can’t keep this ship afloat no matter what they do, and are trying to pave the way for an “orderly” Gov’t. Sponsored Bankruptcy (credit to Statik for that nomenclature).
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:38 am)Good luck to the Swedes getting Saab profitable again. If you look at their sales in the last 4 or 5 months, they’re doing TERRIBLY right now. With the global auto market so competitive, and now with the economy tightening everyone’s budget, they really have their work cut out for them.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:39 am)Off topic – for Tim
Problem I have with corporate welfare is not yours. I Don’t mind taking from the haves, spreading the wealth around, so long as a greater good is served – collective projects that are good for the nation as a whole,i.e.,interstate roads, internet (developed with taxpayer dollars), aerospace for defense, now the EV(should go forward with taxpayer help), generosity to the neediest of our citizens, projects too big for the private sector to handle can go forward. My problem is with corporate welfare coupled to globalization., With this globalization scam, the corporations have betrayed the US taxpayer. They take the tax monies, or the fruits of the money-research-product, then high-tail it to the LDCs to capitalize on it(low-wage jobs in the LDCs, exorbinate salaries for corporate CEOs, leaving the US taxpayer holding an empty bag- an 800 billion dollar trade deficit last year alone, lost jobs. Seems to me this is the Achilles heel of globalization. It is sustainable only to the degree Americans are willing to watch their jobs flow offshore, are willing to watch the Ceos of transnationals grow fabulously wealthy at their expense, to the degree that the US can endure these hugh trade deficits.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:47 am)#38 Dave G
So while Kruse talked about a SOC estimator he’s really saying the battery pack can self-report its capacity. Otherwise there is no way to retain a set range since doing that will require using different percentages of the battery pack over time.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:48 am)Tim
Basically correct. Except at this point the government is only writing the check and not empowered to pull the trigger until March 17th, and continues to pour in money so that your last word, bankruptcy, though in terms of solvency is correct is currently not happening functionally. Summary Wagoner and the board call the shots, government pays and says nothing until 3/17.
Schmeltz
How does doing what they say they have to do before 3/17 become more frightening than anything else?
#46
k-dawg ” . So I dont see a problem in it getting 48 AER in the beginning and 40 AER at the end.”
__________________
I don’t see the problem with fairy dust, unicorns and magical incantations, but so far, unless I back my wishes and dreams with a few thousand pounds of steel, rubber and glass, they haven’t gotten me to work in the mornings, hehe.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:55 am)#32 Statik — Yes, your’e right. We have hijacked AN ACTUAL BANKRUPTCY thread. It’s usually the other way round, eh?
#45 Rashiid – “This is a personal thing. My commute is 101 miles round trip”
It’s not that one last mile, it’s the 100 before that. You are definitely at the 90% for range. it really is the 80/20 rule. Maybe your employer will let you plug in at work.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:57 am)So does this mean that GM is paying Saab’s suppliers with US Gov’t bailout $$? Where else would they get it? And this preserves US jobs how?
#36 Dave G.:
Naw, this is America. You don’t have to prove that you can pay back the loan. That’s why our real estate market is such a gold mine.
#42 Gary:
Amen. We shoot ourselves in the foot every day.
#47 Johnny Suzuki:
There is a good post on the Chery on our sister
blog “allcarselectric.com”. My sense was that it is a pure BEV though. Maybe a PHEV in the future? But with a 93 mile range and 74 mph (freeway legal) top speed, it is a real glimpse of the future. You are totally right that, if those things show up here, at the price point the Chinese seem to be able to hit, it will be one more big step toward game over.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:57 am)It’s a race to the bottom. Tim’s bottom. Timaaayyy!!!
Right bear arms:
mariasdietblog picture above right. So wrong.
GM’s Greatest Hits:
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1658545_1658544_1658540,00.html (Holy Hell!! lol)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (11:58 am)D.. (#52) said:
“I Don’t mind taking (stealing) from the haves, spreading the wealth around (to buy support from the unproductive), so long as a greater good (my ego) is served – collective (we are Borg, you will be assimilated) projects that are good (Statist opinion) for the nation as a whole,…” “My problem is with corporate welfare coupled to globalization (so you CAN be partially pregnant).
So you think it’s OK to steal as long as you give it to your neighbors, but it’s wrong to steal and ship the booty across town. Typical liberal/progressive/statist/socialist double-standard B.S.
Why don’t you just open a pawn shop and tell your “customers” “Hey, buddy… shhhh, theft is wrong, but I won’t tell anyone as long as you’re happy being a thief (liberals love happy) and give me some of the stuff you’ve stolen.”
You’re OK with that? Maybe America deserves what it’s getting…
For what we are about to receive may be all be thankful to liberals.
LIBERALISM IS A SIN
Englished and Adapted from the Spanish of Roman Catholic Priest,
Dr. Don Felix Sarda Y Salvany
By Conde B. Pallen, Ph.D., LL.D.
http://www.liberalismisasin.com/index.htm
Look at when the book was written!
(Yes, I realize that most of you are well programmed by gov’t schools and only care about the socialist-statist agenda and dogma that D. is puking up so you won’t read it and probably lack the ability to understand it anyway but I have to try.)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:08 pm)Rashiid Amul. “This is a personal thing. My commute is 101 miles round trip.I would use the entire 100 mile range. But as someone said,I’m in the 20% of the market. The other 80% will most likely not use it.”
_______________
If your employer lets you plug in wouldn’t that save you something like 15,000 20,000 gas powered miles a year?
I was thinking, yeah I know it’s dangerous, this probably won’t apply to you because I believe you said you keep you cars longer, but if instead of trading their cars in every couple years, they increased their EREV battery capacity every few years, then folks not in the 78% 40 mile commute range may be better served. Something similar to the A123 based conversions for plug in Toyotas.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:15 pm)Psst, Tim, my little alterboy, don’t let’m read this:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/Appendix6.htm
Don’t forget to drop off those magazines at the prison for me today.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:25 pm)Father can’t spell altar.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:28 pm)Jeffhre (#59)
Both points are good ones. If Rashiid drives 50-miles each way in his Voltec car and if he can plug-in at for a few hours while he works, only 20% of his commute will be on gasoline.
I believe that that as e-storage tech improves the old packs which are still good can be trade-in for the newer packs. The old packs can be sold to power plants for load leveling, industry or home for back-up power or used in serial-electric boats, etc.
Then again, Rashiid may be better off just buying an electric car with a 150-mile range and keeping his old ICE car, renting a hybrid or taking public transportation and renting an electric car at his destination for those occasional long trips.
We need highway capable EVs with 150-mile range.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:33 pm)In the news today on MSNBC: Ray LaHood (DOT Secretary) wants to implement a mileage tax for the highway fund to make sure all of you hybrid-driving tax cheats don’t get off too easy! Just in case you thought you’d be escaping the gas tax with a Volt….
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:33 pm)#34 unni Says: Now Next Hummer : I think they can be stand alone… They can also start with a chapter11 and be the a specialized SUV company or off road company. They can make arrangements with GE and start with a Diesel-electric power train and come with a high mpg Hummer.
————————————————————————————–
Yes, this would be great. Hummer is probably the best off-road vehicle out there, and it is certainly well-known. Hummer should survive as a niche vehicle for frequent off-road use.
The main problem with Hummer is that it somehow got to be popular with people who never drive off-road, which just makes it an expensive gas hog. But for the small percentage of people who actually use Hummers as they were intended, it’s a great car.
With this in mind, I don’t think Hummer should try to build a Diesel-electric power train, as their true niche market customers would be apt to be away from electricity for long periods, and the small amount of people who drive off-road wouldn’t make a big difference in our oil consumption anyway.
Bottom line: People should start recognizing SUVs for what they are – Off-Road Vehicles. That’s what SUVs are made for. If you never go off-road, then an SUV is just a big waste.
People who want something with more room for passengers and/or cargo should buy a Micro-Van, Sport-Wagon, or Mini-Van. That’s what they’re made for. These vehicles have all of the interior space of a comparable SUV, but without the extra expense and efficiency losses necessary for driving off-road.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:34 pm)Chevy Volt wins environmental prize at Festival Automobile International
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/20/chevy-volt-wins-environmental-prize-at-festival-automobile-inter/
Read the first comment on the page…..lol
We’re all comedians!
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:35 pm)Thanks K-dawg @ 49, but I suspect the incremental loss in battery life from going from 8 to 10 on a 16 KWh battery would not significantly affect the 25% loss over 15 years, because I suspect that number is based on full DOD cycles.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:39 pm)#57 – Thanks for the link to Time Magazine’s “50 Worst Cars”. I almost wet my pants I was laughing so hard at just the first page. My wife drives an Aztek; public enemy number 1. The first paragraph of the Time article is priceless:
“I was in the audience at the Detroit auto show the day GM unveiled the Pontiac Aztek and I will never forget the gasp that audience made. Holy hell! This car could not have been more instantly hated if it had a Swastika tattoo on its forehead.”
LOL. The Pontiac Aztek; the Charles Manson of automobiles.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:46 pm)@Dave G 64
“Bottom line: People should start recognizing SUVs for what they are – Off-Road Vehicles. That’s what SUVs are made for. If you never go off-road, then an SUV is just a big waste.”
CAN I GET AN AMEN FOR “Dave G”!!!!
I know it’s not anyone’s place to say what vehicle one SHOULD drive but phuk man, why the hell does a 90lb woman need to drive their two kids 45lbs and 60lbs to school in a bigs as$ SUV? Then commute to work? I don’t know how many times I see that every morning.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:46 pm)off topic-
Tim, My larger point was, America is gonna be forced to pull the plug on taxpayer funded R and D, and this would be tragic in the face of global warming, if US citizens don’t benefit in some way from this research -eg increased job opportunities manufacturing batteries for the EV, manufacturing engines for the volt, manufacturing PV panels. Corporate offshoring of jobs gotta end. (maybe it’s already happening)(maybe it’s a small point);-)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (12:48 pm)#39 Van
I suspect GM is fixing it at 40 AER because noone wants to see their capacity drop a few percent each year. That makes it feel defective.
____________________________________________________________
Didn’t Obama talk about following the Swedish model for bank reform?
Why don’t we follow the Swedish model and let companies go bankrupt? If little bitty Sweden can let Saab go through it, couldn’t the U.S, who has SEVEN major automaker here let 1 or 2 go through it? I hate to say it, but those Swedes have bigger balls than us.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:00 pm)#45 Rashiid Amul Says: This is a personal thing. My commute is 101 miles round trip.
I would use the entire 100 mile range. But as someone said,
I’m in the 20% of the market. The other 80% will most likely not use it.
————————————————————————————–
Hi Rashiid,
I believe we spoke before about plugging in at work. Without a real car in your possession, it’s probably better not to ask right now. But early in 2011, plug-ins should be catching on, and once people find out you have a Volt, they may even approach you about it.
In the end, I think more than half the people with longer commutes will find a way to plug in at work.
By the way, if your yearly driving pattern is:
• 30 days at 8 miles per day
• 50 days at 16 miles per day
• 240 days at 101 miles per day
• 30 days at 60 miles per day
• 3 days at 450 miles per day
you would use:
Car …………………………………. Gallons per Year
Volt (plug in work & home) ……… 123
Volt (plug in home only) …………. 329
50 MPG car ……………………….. 569
40 MPG car ……………………….. 711
30 MPG car ……………………….. 948
20 MPG car ……………………….. 1422
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:14 pm)D (#69) said:
“Corporate offshoring of jobs gotta end.”
I agree that offshoring is a terrible tragedy but the only way to stop it is for the US to have a better business climate than our competitors. The Statists in Congress have given us one of the highest corporate tax rates, and most regulated business environments in the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world
How is that competitive? How will that end offshoring?
“Well, there should be a law…”
That’s why corporations are offshoring!!!!!
“The audacity of hope.” “Change, we can count on.”
What a crock!
If MORE of the SAME = CHANGE, I HOPE we can survive. It doesn’t seem possible.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:21 pm)Nice chart Dave G. @71. Finding a plug-in at work may not be as hard as we expect either. I was walking out to my car the other night and I noticed a car plugged into one of the light posts in our parking lot. They were plugging in an engine block heater, and probably at 110v not 220v. So not the quickest voltage for recharging a Volt, but quick enough for a full work day. But if you would have asked me if I had access to a plug-in at work last summer, I would have said, “nope.”
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:22 pm)Dave G
Car …………………………………. Gallons per Year
Volt (plug in work & home) ……… 123
Volt (plug in home only) …………. 329
50 MPG car ……………………….. 569
40 MPG car ……………………….. 711
30 MPG car ……………………….. 948
20 MPG car ……………………….. 1422
__________________
Without plugging in at work Volt would save about 620 gallons of fuel over a car that gets 30 mpg?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:23 pm)#67 Jim
I remember visiting the Buick stand at the Chicago Auto Show back in the mid-’90’s and seeing their new station wagon. Holy hell! The back end looked like that guy from Monty Python’s Meaning of Life. One thin mint and it explodes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlfcF1I5e_g
http://www.stationwagon.com/gallery/1996_Buick_Roadmaster.html
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:32 pm)Hi Cautious Fan @ 70,
Yes, I suspect GM is fixing the SOC window at 8 to keep the performance constant over the 10 year life. But what I am suggesting is that they could achieve that goal with a 9 or possibly a 10 KWh window.
The Volt range is now usually stated as follows, “up to 40 miles.” The actual miles normal drivers will attain will be about 32 miles (4 miles per KWh). Hence, if they shift the window from 8 to 10, far more of us will attain “up to 40 miles.”
I have been putting forth this pure speculation for some time, and will continue until independent drivers report the actual performance. If the 8 actually delivered the goods, I suspect Lyle would have been given the car to evaluate already.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:37 pm)@Van 39
Actual Volt battery SOC availability…
0 – - – - – - – - – - 100
Controlled window of “Safe Zone” / “Operating Range” as defined by GM…
- – - 0 – - – - -100 – -
30% 85%
So basically you are only using 55% of the actual capacity of the bat pack. This ensures the cells never reach the breakdown threshold.
Somewhere in the BMS there are algorithms that allow the “Operating Range” to slightly migrate from one end of the SOC spectrum to the other, depending on stress, climate conditions and age of cells but only to a certain extent.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:40 pm)And so why isn’t the Volt in this Gala?
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/20/the-greening-of-the-oscars-continues-with-the-2010-toyota-prius/
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:43 pm)Van, the folks that keep asking this seem to be fixated on kWh. The goal is 40 miles AER not a kWh window. 16kWh is an expensive way to get 40 mile AER but allows end of warranty 40 mile AER to avoid liability and replacement costs. Look back over GM announcements, everything is geared to reaching 40 mile AER.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:46 pm)Saab is the winner here. Now that they have taken control of their destiny, I don’t doubt they will strive to excel in the new reality in automobile design, pure electric.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (1:57 pm)I was under the impression bankruptcy meant you don’t have control of your destiny. I’m going to play kickity kick ball now.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:00 pm)As of 2:00 PM Eastern time, GM stock is dropping through the floor! Geez–Down 19%—Ouch! What the heck is going on???
When do we panic?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:02 pm)@Van.
Hey Van, do you or anyone know anything more about the Generator of the Volt?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:06 pm)Schmeltz:
It’s too late to panic. C and BAC are being crushed today and taking the whole dow with them. I really see our ecomomy going over a cliff into total free fall. GM will not recover from this, as well a number of other huge companies.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:08 pm)Jeffhre @79
I am OK with this 40 AER…my one-way commute is 37 miles and I believe that my company will allow charging at work. I am even somewhat confident that they will install a surface mounted 110V outlet on the building right in front of where I park.
My main concern is the charging cycles. Will this cut the battery life in ½? Will it void the warrantee?
I know this topic has been raised in the past, but I don’t know that we ever reached any consensus regarding this specific issue.
Capt:
Who is this “RB” telling me that I’ll get one of the 1st five Blue Volts?
Where’s my Blue Volt?!!! (WMBV)
Man, I want my Blue Volt!!!
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:10 pm)Car …………………………………. Gallons per Year
Volt (plug in work & home) ……… 123
Volt (plug in home only) …………. 329
50 MPG car ……………………….. 569
________________________________
That 50 MPG estimation doesn’t reflect real-world data at all. The formula needs adjustment.
Here’s 5 years of actual miles/gallons 2004 Prius data, using only E10 for fuel and enduring Minnesota winters:
23,317 … 472
19,814 … 404
20,369 … 431
23,701 … 495
19,962 … 433
And of course, the new model will use less fuel.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:23 pm)#86 john1701a Says: That 50 MPG estimation doesn’t reflect real-world data at all. The formula needs adjustment. Here’s 5 years of actual miles/gallons 2004 Prius data…
————————————————————————————–
The yearly driving pattern in post #71 reflects Rashiid Amul’s 101 mile daily commute. Together with driving on other days, that totals 28,430 miles per year. At 50 MPG, that’s 569 gallons per year.
Looking at your yearly mileage, you drive less than Rashiid, so you obviously would use less gas.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:24 pm)@David K (CT) 85
“Who is this “RB” telling me that I’ll get one of the 1st five Blue Volts?”
He’s one of the more “Politically Correct” long time Volt supporters here. I cover the lower end of the spectrum, someone has to.
It looks like you and I are a few of the fortunate ones where our employers would construct a charging post for us. I asked mine and they whole heartedly said yes and to let them know asap so others can see the Vehicle. I think they just want to be able to show they support such a movement.
As for home, i’d have to get an extension out of my trailer home to the car…….lol
I’ll take my Volt with No Generator, No ICE, ShAkEn not StirreD…
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:28 pm)Hi Captain, I only “know” what I have read. But my understanding, based again on filling in the blanks with speculation, is that the 1.4 ICE will operate the 53 KW generator at 3 operating levels. Operating level 1 will be about 8 KW, level two will be about 24 KW, and level 3 will be about 48 KW.
The ICE will start when the SOC reaches 30% and stabilize at 8 KW output. If the SOC rises to 35%, the ICE will shutdown. If on the other hand, the demand due say to high speed, exceeds 8 KW, then when the SOC decreases to 27%, the ICE will throttle up to the 24 KW level. This is more than enough to recover the SOC to about 30%, at which time the ICE will throttle back to the 8 KW level.
In the event of a sustained high demand, high speed up hill for example, and the SOC is not maintained at level two, then when the SOC reaches 25%, the ICE will throttle up to level 3, which is maximum output. This will sustain high speed operation over any expected grade found on the Interstate system.
This speculation is consistent with everything I have read, and would be totally unnecessary if independent drivers were given an opportunity to evaluate the Volt say from Bakersfield California to LA.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:30 pm)Capt @88
I’m OK with your end of the spectrum.
Any thoughts on the Battery cylcle/warrantee issue?
Where’e my Blue Volt?!!! (5th one?)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:37 pm)back to volt stuff :
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/20/chevy-volt-wins-environmental-prize-at-festival-automobile-inter/
Chevy Volt wins environmental prize at Festival Automobile International
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:40 pm)#42 Gary
“Pride in one’s own products… funny how you don’t see that in America.”
————————-
The problem with Americans is that we don’t have any brand loyalty to our own country’s products. Absolutely none. Until we can take more pride in our own products and start buying them over foreign products the U.S. will continue on the down slope of national decline. This lack of loyalty and buying strictly based on lowest price are some of the primary reasons we are losing jobs overseas. That and business greed to make cheaper products overseas but still sell them here as though they were produced here at higher cost. Somehow we never receive truly lower prices at the sales counter because of global business, just cheaper made products.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:41 pm)#82 Schmeltz:
Well I think that statik called it above. Investors think that the first card just fell out of the house.
statik:
If you ever get to LA, I guess the least I could do is take you out to dinner. I was really tempted to buy some GM last summer, when Volt fever was ramping up and the stock hit about $8, just to show some solidarity. Your determined reality therapy saved me from myself. So there’s a few thousand that didn’t go down the drain.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:43 pm)#86 john1701a – The complaint about the EPA estimates is that they overestimate the mileage. You’re suggesting that the EPA underestimates the mileage. While the new adjustments to the Urban and Highway cycles have eliminated about half the underestimation, the estimates are still about 8% – 10% too high.
IOW your real world data is idiosyncratic and can’t be generalized.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:43 pm)#93 N Riley:
I said amen to Gary, and I say it to you as well.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:43 pm)that totals 28,430 miles per year
__________________________
Notice the problem caused by not including that. It’s what supports the formula. Exclusion leads to assumptions & misunderstandings. Do your best to avoid circumstances which allow that.
And in this case, that large annual distance implies lots of highway miles. If people drive more of a mix, they will likely have different results.
Being vague is the first rule in greenwashing. So, you want to do everything you can to not be associated with practices such as that. Take the advice seriously.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:48 pm)@Van 89
Thanks for the speculated data. I’m been looking at some numbers and can’t seem to find how the Volt will manage certain scenarios.
For instance, long freeway drive up I5 the “Grape Vine” to LA.
Obviously by the time you hit the Grape Vine you’ll have expelled the 40 AER. Now the 53KW Genset can only produce at the most 71.08HP…
53KW = 53000W / 745.6 = 71.08HP
Where 1HP = 745.6W
So that tells me that from the Battery it will need to produce an additional 78.9HP (58.8356KW) to get the full 150HP to get me up the hills. So at some point the battery WILL reach below the safe 30% SOC of the REAL value.
What happens after that?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:52 pm)#74 Jeffhre Says: Without plugging in at work Volt would save about 620 gallons of fuel over a car that gets 30 mpg?
————————————————————————————–
With the yearly driving pattern in post #71, yes.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:53 pm)#90 Dave K (CT),
Here’s your Blue Volt in this video:
http://gmtv.feedroom.com/
Under channels, click on “Chevrolet”, then click on “Chevy Transformers Vehicles Premiere”.
Enjoy.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:54 pm)Expect the Dow to go back to the pre-1980’s level (1,000 or lower) before this is all over.
We’ve only just begun the slide which will last the next 18 months or so:
1) Mortgage bubble (tip of the iceberg)
2) Credit Card debt bubble
2) Commercial R.E. Bubble
4) Treasury Bond Bubble
5) Death of the fiat US $Dollar (Hyperinflation)
The “liberals” in congress keep throwing debt/gasoline on the fire and WE’RE the marshmallows.
The NeoCons-fascists and Democratic-Socialist have the audacity to hope that we can “change” into a Second World Socialist State….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_World
anyway, may as well fiddle.
How about those Volts?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (2:56 pm)#82 Schmeltz said:
As of 2:00 PM Eastern time, GM stock is dropping through the floor! Geez–Down 19%—Ouch! What the heck is going on???
When do we panic?
==============================================
It is going to zero.
There should really be any panic about it though, it has been heading that way for about a decade…and has been on a steady track down for the last 2 years.
74 year low today…not many more years left to beat I’m afraid.
“GM shares hit a low of $1.52 in early afternoon trading, before rebounding to $1.82 later in the session. The low matched a record set on July 26, 1934, according to the Center for Research in Security Prices at the University of Chicago.”
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090220/na_us_gm_stock.html
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:00 pm)BillR1 @99
Yes, thanks I’ve seen the video before (enjoyed watching it once again)…I think the Blue Volt looks great.
Where’s my Blue Volt?!!!
Again…Man, I want my Blue Volt!!! (It’s going to be a long two plus years)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:03 pm)#96 john1701a Says: Exclusion leads to assumptions & misunderstandings. Do your best to avoid circumstances which allow that.
————————————————————————————–
I put the 240 days at 101 miles per day in bold text on the original post #71. How much more plain can I be? I get the feeling that no matter what I say, you are going to try to nitpick or bash it. Try saying something positive once in a while.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:10 pm)#93 noel park said:
statik:
If you ever get to LA, I guess the least I could do is take you out to dinner. I was really tempted to buy some GM last summer, when Volt fever was ramping up and the stock hit about $8, just to show some solidarity. Your determined reality therapy saved me from myself. So there’s a few thousand that didn’t go down the drain.
====================================
I never turn down a free meal, lol. Next time I’m in LA I’ll take you up on that. (Be warned, I’ll be putting some of your home state’s Santana DVX on your tab. In a related note: How ridiculous is it that Carlos Santana has a wine?)
http://www.boozebros.com/istar.asp?a=6&id=41435
Seriously though, I’m glad you didn’t lose any money. Sometimes when we are close to a project like this, or it is near and dear to our hearts, it is easy to be seduced. Points to you for staying away. My own personal ‘first’ rule is never invest in something you believe in (or with someone you like). It is hard enough to have clarity and then make the right decision without having a bias on top.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:12 pm)David K
Li Ions don’t care if you charge a little or a lot if you stay in the range of charge GM plans for a new battery pack. You can add up the total amount of charge (cumulative for expected length of owning the car) and divide by capacity of the pack to figure the number of full charge cycles.
The Tesla site quotes OEM definition of a depleted battery as the capacity to hold only 50% of the rated charge. Lo and behold GM is using about twice the capacity required now to hit a 40 mile AER at the end of life. If you are using the battery for two times the daily AER of the plug in once a day crowd, I would imagine you would hit warranty limitations twice as soon, unless someone else sees a reasonable way around it, miles are easy to keep track of with digital processing and are what GM risk analysts are comfortable working with.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:18 pm)101 Statik
“It is going to zero.”
Which makes all of our daily speculations about the Volt pretty academic. We will never see our Volts produced.
Reminds me of the band playing on the deck of the Titanic as the ship slowly sinks.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:23 pm)Statik 104
The auto business seems like a bad long term up side investment just about any time. Huge capital needs all the time that will never allow them to just coast and bask in ROI. Antsy shareholders that want miracles right now creating a guaranteed climate of trashing the long term for any possible gains right now.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:24 pm)#89 Van Says: But my understanding, based again on filling in the blanks with speculation, is that the 1.4 ICE will operate the 53 KW generator at 3 operating levels. Operating level 1 will be about 8 KW, level two will be about 24 KW, and level 3 will be about 48 KW.
The ICE will start when the SOC reaches 30% and stabilize at 8 KW output. If the SOC rises to 35%, the ICE will shutdown. If on the other hand, the demand due say to high speed, exceeds 8 KW, then when the SOC decreases to 27%, the ICE will throttle up to the 24 KW level.
————————————————————————————–
From what I understand, the ICE/genset constantly varies its output to match the power used by the electric motor as closely as possible. This minimizes the amount of charging/discharging on the battery when the range extender is running. This has two major advantages:
1) Electrical->Chemical->Electrical conversions have some efficiency losses.
2) Charging/discharging increases wear on the battery.
Yes, GM has said the ICE will run at a few fixed RPMs, but remember that the power output of a constant RPM gas engine can vary greatly. For example, let’s say you’re driving a regular gas engine car in the highest gear at 60 MPH. Now you start an uphill grade. To keep going 60 MPH, you press on the accelerator. The gas engine is still in the highest gear, running at the same RPM as before, but the power output is much more.
I would guess there a low fixed RPM that can vary output from 1kW to 20kW, another medium RPM that can vary from 15kW to 40 kW, and a high RPM that varies from 30kW to 53kW. I would also guess the 30% SOC on the battery only varies a percent or so under normal driving conditions.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:34 pm)#58 Tim
Interesting link. Especially Chapter 15. Basically says that if you are a liberal you are a sinner. That is Catholic thinking before the Church was filled with liberals and became a progressive church. I wonder what the Pope thinks of this book today?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:39 pm)GM starts going bankrupt around the edges and franctically tries to shuffle off dead pieces. They already seem to be starting to stiff suppliers and now seem to want to stiff creditors.
So far (in order of deadness):
Saab
Hummer
Saturn
Pontiac
(I’m sure I’m missing stuff)
From Bloomberg:
“Saab has struggled since GM bought half of the automaker in 1990 from Investor AB, the Wallenberg family’s publicly traded holding company. The company only reported an annual profit once in the last 20 years. In Sweden, it ranks behind Volvo Cars, Volkswagen AG and Toyota Motors Co. in popularity.
GM took full control of Saab in 2000. GM has set March 31 for deciding on all its European divisions’ future as the Detroit-based carmaker seeks as much as $16.6 billion in new U.S. federal loans. The U.S. company will end financial support for Saab by Jan. 1. ”
What’s strong?
Buick, on global sales. Give the world a blingy, small profit Voltec Buick, a small profit small Voltec pickup truck, a break even high performance electric enthusiast vehicle using world platforms, cut everything (99% of the company) else and GM would be a beautiful, successful gem. Best of luck to it. Alternate visions wlecome from the board.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:40 pm)54Jeffhre Says:
I don’t see the problem with fairy dust, unicorns and magical incantations, but so far, unless I back my wishes and dreams with a few thousand pounds of steel, rubber and glass, they haven’t gotten me to work in the mornings, hehe.
————–
So what is your point in regard to AER?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:41 pm)As long as we’re guessing: prepackaged bankruptcy, with the government providing DIP financing. Current stockholders wiped out. Bondholders, union, etc. become new stkhldrs. Big downsizing, but Volt program continues, because of all the gov. help. Some Chinese co. buys china buick (and Jeep). Opel and Vauxhall spun off to Deutschland and James Bond, respectively. GM renamed Phoenix Of Southland (POS) and moves HQ and manufacturing to Deep South. Saturn prospers as importer of Chindian vehicles.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:43 pm)Oh, and Michigan becomes the least-visited amusement park, with areas like Ghost Town, Knife a Honky Town, Arsonville and Echo Park.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:44 pm)#97 CaptJackSparrow Says: …the Battery will need to produce an additional 78.9HP to get the full 150HP to get me up the hills. So at some point the battery WILL reach below the safe 30% SOC of the REAL value.
What happens after that?
————————————————————————————–
Yes, the battery can get quite a bit below 30% on very long steep hills, if you drive over 60 MPH.
http://gm-volt.com/2008/09/02/the-pikes-peak-question-chevy-volt-and-the-infinite-hill/
If you only do this occasionally, it’s not a big deal. If you frequently drive very long steep uphill grades faster than 60 MPH, you will likely wear out the battery sooner than 10 years, which means GM will have to replace it.
But how many people drive long steep mountain grades on a daily basis? Maybe 3%? Probably less. And of those, how many average more than 60 MPH? Most steep mountain passes have lots of curves. So basically, you have way less than 1% of the population that drive like a madmen over long steep mountain passes on a daily basis. With this in mind, it’s probably worth it for GM to replace those batteries after 5 years and be done with this issue.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:44 pm)#104 statik:
This is California man. Everybody who is anybody has a wine! You just subdivide some agricultural property up into 5 acre “ranchettes”, and bingo, everybody has a vineyard. For the rest of us, there are businesses who will print up your label and slap it on some bottles of generic wine.
#106 larry:
Cheer up, maybe the Volt can somehow emerge out of the rubble after the Government Directed Bankruptcy (GDB, with apologies to statik). I am convinced that it is in the overriding national interest to build something like the Volt, for the many reasons bloggers here have repeatedly put forward. So maybe the G can make this a priority for the DB. At least I hope so.
If Ford can do a BEV Focus, how about a BEV Aveo? Cheap and dirty, KISS, and just get it done. Actually, there are some guys in Flagstaff, AZ who are building BEV Aveos, for something like $25K. Lead acid batteries and 60 mile range. Imagine what they could do with the lithium ions.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:45 pm)66 Van Says:
Thanks K-dawg @ 49, but I suspect the incremental loss in battery life from going from 8 to 10 on a 16 KWh battery would not significantly affect the 25% loss over 15 years, because I suspect that number is based on full DOD cycles.
——————-
Maybe they chose 8kwh because that is what is required to move the Volt 40 miles all electric? Why use more and possibly have to increase the battery or decrease its life prematurely? The CDP and SOC haven’t been offcially announced yet from GM. All speculation at this point. Im an electrical engineer, but not a battery engineer.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:47 pm)k-dawg 111
40
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:50 pm)#68 CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 20th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
@Dave G 64
“Bottom line: People should start recognizing SUVs for what they are – Off-Road Vehicles. That’s what SUVs are made for. If you never go off-road, then an SUV is just a big waste.”
CAN I GET AN AMEN FOR “Dave G”!!!!
I know it’s not anyone’s place to say what vehicle one SHOULD drive but phuk man, why the hell does a 90lb woman need to drive their two kids 45lbs and 60lbs to school in a bigs as$ SUV? Then commute to work? I don’t know how many times I see that every morning
================
They come in really handy on the road when there’s also 2ft of snow also on the road. Also nice to haul large objects. Also nice to tow large objects.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (3:54 pm)#73 MarkinWI Says:
February 20th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Nice chart Dave G. @71. Finding a plug-in at work may not be as hard as we expect either. I was walking out to my car the other night and I noticed a car plugged into one of the light posts in our parking lot. They were plugging in an engine block heater, and probably at 110v not 220v. So not the quickest voltage for recharging a Volt, but quick enough for a full work day. But if you would have asked me if I had access to a plug-in at work last summer, I would have said, “nope.”
==========
Yeah, its funny, I find myself scanning for plugs everywhere for when the day comes I actually own a plug in vehicle. Sort of like at the aiport, and everyone is scanning for a place to plug in their lap-tops.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:12 pm)#97 CaptJackSparrow Says:
February 20th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
@Van 89
Thanks for the speculated data. I’m been looking at some numbers and can’t seem to find how the Volt will manage certain scenarios.
For instance, long freeway drive up I5 the “Grape Vine” to LA.
Obviously by the time you hit the Grape Vine you’ll have expelled the 40 AER. Now the 53KW Genset can only produce at the most 71.08HP…
53KW = 53000W / 745.6 = 71.08HP
Where 1HP = 745.6W
So that tells me that from the Battery it will need to produce an additional 78.9HP (58.8356KW) to get the full 150HP to get me up the hills. So at some point the battery WILL reach below the safe 30% SOC of the REAL value.
What happens after that?
============
I cant remember the thread, but wasnt this discussed and an engineer from GM said it could dip below 30% when necessary, and after reaching level ground, the battery would be recharged to 30% by the motor, until plugged in again to reach 80%.
I’m just shooting from memory.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:13 pm)#72 Tim Says: The Statists in Congress have given us one of the highest corporate tax rates…
————————————————————————————–
While this is technically accurate, its very deceiving.
Yes, the U.S. has high cooperate tax rates, but it also has the most cooperate tax breaks and loopholes. So on balance, the U.S. offers a very competitive business tax climate.
The main weakness in the U.S. business climate is high wages. High wages also lead to high costs for real estate. These are the things that drive down profits and cause executives to look at offshoring.
Note that, in a normal free market environment, off shoring is historically temporary, because the country that produces goods and services will increase their relative wealth and wages over time as well. Japan is a perfect example of this.
But with China, you don’t really have a free market. China has a Communist government that artificially manipulates their currency to be much weaker than the dollar, making importing from and offshoring to China continue to be profitable. This issue as the biggest time-bomb of our era.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:16 pm)#120 k-dawg Says: I cant remember the thread, but wasnt this discussed and an engineer from GM said it could dip below 30% when necessary, and after reaching level ground, the battery would be recharged to 30% by the motor…
————————————————————————————–
http://gm-volt.com/2008/09/02/the-pikes-peak-question-chevy-volt-and-the-infinite-hill/
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:17 pm)Way off topic but i find this funny
———
#104 Statik
How ridiculous is it that Carlos Santana has a wine?
——–
And there’s Cabo Wabo from Sammy Hagar
And now Kid Rock is coming out w/a beer.
(what will they call it .. maybe Kid Rolling Rock?)
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:40 pm)Hmm….
GM actually had an EV Van before the EV1…
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/20/video-new-charging-post-juices-old-electric-gmc-van/
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:50 pm)#108 Dave G Says:
…, but remember that the power output of a constant RPM gas engine can vary greatly. …
————
I’m not a gear-head, but if the RPM is constant, and the power is changing.. then you’re torque has to be changing??
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:51 pm)@Dave G 122
Thanks for the link!
So I gather at some point the system will disconnect the battery and you will be running on the 53KW (71.08HP Max) Genset.
OK, good to know that there is a cut off point to the bat drain.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:57 pm)Hi K-dawg @ 120 and Capt Jack @ 97,
Lets take the example where the ICE throttles up to full power, putting out about 48 KW and the hill is so steep combined with vehicle speed that the demand is 60 KW. Initially, the battery would continue to supply the difference, and the SOC would decrease below say 25%. At some point the battery would be unable to supply 12 KW and speed would fall off. Just like when you drive up the grape-vine in a heavily loaded eco-box. I used to drive a Volks bug and you simply floor board it and make best possible speed. No big deal.
Now lets say it takes 21 KW to power the Volt on level ground at 60 MPH. So it seems like 48 is enough to do the job. Yes, if four people are in the car and the AC is at max, you are going to over near the truck lane with the beetles but such an experience will be the exception, not the rule. Bottom line, this is a non-problem.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (4:59 pm)Dumping Saab may be a death blow to the company simply because they use GM sourced parts. I know they are ‘Made in Sweeden’ BUT the V6 engine in the 9.5 is a G.M. product, and I bet all the automatic transmissions are too. The 4 cyl engine is still an original Saab design but the SUV Saab isn’t even a Saab at all but a re-badged Mitsubushi (I think).
There is a base 2008 Saab 9.3 with a manual transmission at a dealer near by. I wonder if I can get it for about 5 grand. I wonder if 5 grand is too much?
Is 5 grand too much for a new car even if its an orphan??????
Please, somebody tell me, I need a deal!
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:00 pm)@k-dawg 125
“I’m not a gear-head, but if the RPM is constant, and the power is changing.. then you’re torque has to be changing??”
In a normal Vehicle this is true. But this is the Volt and the design is to be powered by electricity. Electricity flows from the least resistance. So in the scenario of your torque, if the RPM goes up or down it really only affects how much energy is available for the motor from the combination of the Genset and Battery. And, if there is not enough coming out of the motor it calls on the battery for the additional to maintain torque. The battery is then used as a buffer for energy to maintain torque intill the ICE’s RPM is adjusted to meet the energy requirement.
That’s my theory….
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:02 pm)#125 k-dawg Says: I’m not a gear-head, but if the RPM is constant, and the power is changing.. then you’re torque has to be changing??
————————————————————————————–
Yes. I don’t know all the details, but torque is related to power.
For example, look at those big diesel generators. They all run constant RPM, but the load varies greatly. When they are under a heavy load, they have a deeper, throaty type of sound, even though the RPM pitch is the same.
Or when you pedal a bicycle uphill, the pedals may be moving at the same RPM speed as on level ground, but it takes a lot more torque/power to pedal uphill.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:04 pm)Hi Dave G @ 108, yes power could vary at constant RPM, but if the field current is fixed, generator output will vary with RPM, or so it seems to me. I think the battery and generator are connected in parallel so that both supply whatever the drive motor calls for. So as the drive motor load increases at constant speed, going up hill so to speak, the difference will be supplied by the battery.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:06 pm)#126 CaptJackSparrow Says: So I gather at some point the system will disconnect the battery and you will be running on the 53KW (71.08HP Max) Genset.
————————————————————————————–
I don’t think the battery is disconnected, it’s just that most or all of the electricity flows directly from the ICE/genset to the electric motor, like diagram #2 here:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/Volt_Electrical_Block_Diagram.jpg
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:15 pm)#106 larry says about share price going toward zero “Which makes all of our daily speculations about the Volt pretty academic. We will never see our Volts produced.”
————————————————————–
Yes we will, either by GM (if sufficient bailouts received) or by its successor company, post-bankruptcy. The Volt is a hot property, and it will get built.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:25 pm)#131 Van Says: …yes power could vary at constant RPM, but if the field current is fixed, generator output will vary with RPM, or so it seems to me. I think the battery and generator are connected in parallel so that both supply whatever the drive motor calls for. So as the drive motor load increases at constant speed, going up hill so to speak, the difference will be supplied by the battery.
————————————————————————————–
I don’t know all the details, but I believe the generator field current naturally varies with the difference in voltage. So when the electric motor draws more power, I would guess the voltage on the common DC bus would go a little lower, which would increase the field current on the generator, which would slow down the engine slightly, which would cause the software to increase the ICE fuel mixture in order to keep the RPM constant. I would also guess the control software can measure how much current is flowing in and out of the battery. But again, I don’t know all of the details, only that GM has said the control software will vary the ICE/genset output to meet the demands of the motor as closely as possible.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:31 pm)@Dave G 132
“I don’t think the battery is disconnected, it’s just that most or all of the electricity flows directly from the ICE/genset to the electric motor,”
I guess I should’ve typed what I meant….lol
)
Yeah, What dave G said
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (5:56 pm)@Dave G
“increase the field current on the generator, which would slow down the engine slightly,”
This is called “Lenz Law” and is the primary opposiing Magnetic flux aginst the torque being used to turn the stator which is the force you feel/use for “Regenerative Braking”.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (6:03 pm)Hi Dave G, in two separate posts you have said that GM has said the control software will vary the ICE/genset output to meet the demands of the motor as closely as possible. Can you provide a link to that article?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (6:04 pm)Vehicle Mileage Tax has come up again. They have to find a way to get funding for transportation maintenance. They’re looking to GPS for this.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29298315
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (6:06 pm)#128 solo2500nt asks
“Is 5 grand too much for a new car even if its an orphan?????”
———————–
No, it is a very good price. If you can get it, take it. There is a risk, but it is well compensated by the price.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (6:33 pm)#133 RB:
I sure hope you’re right. It seems to me that, if there is to be a Government Directed Bankruptcy – GDB – (right statik?), that the G ought to be able to structure it to make this happen. After all, it will be more $Billions of our money furnishing the financing for same. I believe that it is in the urgent national interest to LJGTVWOTR!!, for all of the many reasons bloggers have put forward here.
#112 & #113 Timaaayy!!!:
Too true to be funny, as my old Daddy always used to say.
Don’t worry about Michigan though. They always have the “Service Economy” to fall back on. Get a job at the amusement park, LOL.
I wonder if we can just write one state off, kind of like Saab or Hummer? “going bankrupt around the edges”, to steal a phrase from Misleading title at #110. I wonder who’s next? Ohio has a lot of GM plants, right? Maybe we could sell them to China.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (6:53 pm)#137 Van Says: Hi Dave G, in two separate posts you have said that GM has said the control software will vary the ICE/genset output to meet the demands of the motor as closely as possible. Can you provide a link to that article?
————————————————————————————–
GM first mentioned this 18 months ago here:
http://gm-volt.com/2007/08/29/latest-chevy-volt-battery-pack-and-generator-details-and-clarifications/
The engine’s job will be to maintain the battery at a SOC of 30%, and will do so by continuously matching the average power requirement of the car once it is turned on.
I’m pretty sure they mentioned this again but I don’t have those links handy.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (6:58 pm)#140 noel park
Michigan’s the Saudia Arabia of freshwater. Could sell it to all those thirsty Arizonians and Southern Californians. AND create new land in the process. Win-win!
I’m gonna sell my Niagara Falls vacation home before it’s too late, and buy, um, everything offshore from Traverse City. Timaaayyy Town!!!
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:18 pm)#140 noel park
“Maybe we could sell them [Ohio] to China.”
Nope, already owned by the Japs. We could give’m Indiana, and tell’m it’s Colorado.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:27 pm)#138 CaptJackSparrow Says: Vehicle Mileage Tax has come up again. They have to find a way to get funding for transportation maintenance. They’re looking to GPS for this.
————————————————————————————–
I also picked this up on CNN:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/20/transportation-dept-obama-will-not-pursue-mileage-tax/
Taxing by the mile is a horrible idea. Thank god Obama opposes it. Its much better to increase taxes on gasoline and electricity. Besides the obvious concerns over privacy, taxing by the mile will tend to discourage conservation by decreasing the motivations for:
a) buying more fuel efficient vehicles
b) driving more conservatively (slower accelerating, not rushing to a stop light, etc.)
c) maintaining your vehicle (tire pressure, engine tune-ups, etc.)
The point is that people can do many things to reduce their own fuel consumption, and these things are all beneficial to the economy, national security, and the environment. By using income taxes to fund road and bridge work, we’re essentially subsidizing foreign oil. It’s much better to use gas taxes like they do in Europe.
Besides, the whole idea of expanding the role of government and increasing taxes goes totally against Republican principals, so it’s quite amusing to have a Republican transportation secretary promoting it and a Democratic president opposing it.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:27 pm)It may work much like an Onan RV genset. The one in my old Winnebago is a 4 kilowatt. (I overhauled all the electronics in it at 2000 hours, and am closely familiar with the power profile.)
It runs at a steady-state of 1800 rpms to maintain the 55 to 60 cycles per second. There is a voltage regulator which feeds the armature brush set that sends more power to the rotating field to produce a greater required wattage output while maintaining the voltage between 110 and 124 volts. Although there is an old fashioned carburetor, the throttle is driven by a governor which increases the torque (increasing volumetric efficiency) to anticipate the increased wattage load via an increase in the field strength sent into the brushes then into the armature. The formulation (and quality) of the gasoline makes a difference to the peak available voltage under full load. (Use “TOP TIER” gasoline in your Volt only.)
I strictly use Shell 87 in it, which does not go stale, even after a year in the relatively dry South as long as you keep the tank full so that it doesn’t “breathe” in as much moist air.
(Basically, I re-purposed my Winnebago into a stationary office for 85 bucks a month ’storage fee’ so it doesn’t use much gas each year, to do limited computing at lunchtime between am/pm shop training seminars I teach. It has a small 150 watt solar power system).
Anyway, the Volt Gen technology may likely be no more complicated than the 4kw Onan, but highly specific training will be needed for the techs that will service it.
Dan Petit Austin TX
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:46 pm)#141 Dave G,
“The engine’s job will be to maintain the battery at a SOC of 30%, and will do so by continuously matching the average power requirement of the car once it is turned on.”
I think the key word here is “average”.
It is possible to modulate the output of the ICE, just vary the throttle like a normal engine (restricts airflow). Although this works, it results in lower efficiency as the internal pressures in the engine are reduced.
A small home generator would work in this manner. The governor controls the speed of the engine by controlling the throttle. As the load on the generator is changed (your furnace switches on, for instance) the generator loads down and the governor senses the lower speed and opens the throttle to maintain a constant speed.
Another way to control load is with engine speed. At 1500 rpm, an ICE at full throttle will have less output than at say 3600 rpm. So I believe that GM will use controls to operate the engine at several distinct engine speeds (with full open throttle). Some power modulation can be accomplished with VVT so that the engine flows less air and fuel.
So the Volt’s ECM will trend the power consumption in the Volt, and determine which engine speed will provide the “average” power draw. During this time, there will be some battery charging, and some battery discharging, but the overall SOC should stay near a constant value. In some instances (sitting in traffic), the ICE will shutdown.
So I don’t believe GM will use the throttle much to control the ICE genset, as it will reduce efficiency. Instead, they will use computer control to determine the ICE speed that is necessary to provide “average” power. Some small variations in output can likely be had by modulating the VVT.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:51 pm)It has been stated by others that the Generator will be an “Induction Generator” as opposed to a PMG. Does anyone know any different?
I’ve been curious of the Generator from day 1.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:52 pm)#140 noel park said:
I sure hope you’re right. It seems to me that, if there is to be a Government Directed Bankruptcy – GDB – (right statik?), that the G ought to be able to structure it to make this happen. After all, it will be more $Billions of our money furnishing the financing for same. I believe that it is in the urgent national interest to LJGTVWOTR!!, for all of the many reasons bloggers have put forward here.
——————————–
Close…my tagline is GSB-(or ‘Government Sponsored Bankruptcy)’, the US gov’t is going out of its way to avoid the nationalization stigma…especially today with all the bank problems around the world.
Which incidently (the banking scare) is beating the tar out of my ‘dipping my toe in the water’ project last week. I picked up a little RY and GE. Glad I only moved 2% of the portfolio out of cash and not 5%…I was thinking about dollar costing them today, but apparently I’m a big puss, and I’m just going to let it ride.
=============================
=============================
#123 k-dawg said:
Way off topic but i find this funny:
Statik said, “How ridiculous is it that Carlos Santana has a wine?”
———————-
Yeah, I don’t know, I think I’m getting punch drunk or something waiting for action. I’ve been a little off centre (note Canadian spelling) lately, glad someone is tolerating my tangents, lol.
/have a good one
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (7:55 pm)It’s over guys and gals. It’s been a wonderful dream, perhaps to be reliazed sometime in the future but it won’t be from GM. Time to shut her down, turn out the lights and lock the doors!
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:08 pm)@Dave G 64
“Bottom line: People should start recognizing SUVs for what they are – Off-Road Vehicles. That’s what SUVs are made for.”
HA-HA-HA-HA! I haven’t laughed that hard in a loong time.
1. 95% of SUVs in US have never been off of pavement, usually carry less than 10% (one person, driving) of their interior capacity and usually tow 0 pounds (100% air). Full sized SUV were originally designed for marketing to women as giant wombs to carry the tot in. Small SUVs are designed for urban, commercial use.
2. Go to yu-toob and look at all the new Hummers breaking axles going up slightly rough inclines, getting wedged between large spaces and failing to negotiate broad curves on the first several tries.
3. What true off road (not the sissy stuff that some Hummers do) requires is great off the line torque for technical sections and lots of quiet to sneak up on your next 12 point buck. What gives you that? Electric drive. Just look at the high performance off road electric dirt motorcycles in production now.
4. The obvious conclusion: a small, light electric off road (high low end torque, low top speed) pickup truck with a range extender (or portable diesel generator) option for the thumb suckers. Camping and hunting will improve 200% immediately.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:19 pm)@ Timaaayyy!!! 112
“Some Chinese co. buys china buick (and Jeep)”
Oooooohhhhh…If it’s BYD, they can blend the Volt with their already produced EREV F3 DM, make the buick a Voltec and do the EV version of the Jeep that Chrysler already did a concept of, throw in the Dodge EV (electric Lotus Europa) and Bing! We have a new global winner with a great product mix from the start, all electric drive.
Drooling commences…
In the meantime, do I have to move to China to buy the BYD F3 DM?
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:32 pm)Looking good, Billy Ray!:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090220/ap_on_bi_ge/gm_stock
“Analysts have said that regardless of whether the automaker receives additional government help or ultimately files for bankruptcy protection, its shares are close to worthless. [duh!]
Joseph C. Amaturo of Buckingham Research Group [who?] said Thursday that a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing at the automaker would be in the best interest[s] of everyone, especially the American taxpayer. [and the Japs, Chinese, Germans, Koreans, Indians, and whatever you call the people on Lost]
In a note to [the three remaining] investors, he backed his “Underperform” rating for the GM and cut his price target (target? Oh, so now it’s a goal?] to $0 from $1 [attached to the note was his resume, poor bugger, as now he has no stock to follow].
Amaturo called GM’s restructuring plan “worthless” because it doesn’t reduce the company’s debt, eliminate its legacy costs or make its labor agreements more competitive [other than that, things look promising; do they own any of Lake Huron?].
Also on Friday, GM’s Swedish-based subsidiary Saab went into court protection from creditors [uh, what dumbas_ lent to them?] so that the unit can be spun off or sold [to someone who can finally appreciate their 4 cylinder turbo approach].”
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:44 pm)151 Misleading title
“In the meantime, do I have to move to China to buy the BYD F3 DM?”
Nope, but you’ll have to go there to get it serviced.
I wonder if the most valuable part of GM will be Saturn’s ability (eventually) to sell anything they want. You could get your BYD Buffet A1 then. Let the bidding begin.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (8:56 pm)For starters loose the commercial “Born from Jets”
Very Lame….
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:18 pm)Does anyone know…
Can a Company just “spin-off” divisions and call them bankrupt? That is how I’m reading this. But if it was that easy, wouldn’t GM being doing this sort of thing with all of its suffering divisions, i.e. Hummer, Saturn, Pontiac as well?
========================================
I am currently working for a company that has similar issues. You can hold a subsidiary as a separate legal entity with its own balance sheet. For foreign subsidiaries this is often mandatory to comply with host country requirements.
You can still operate it as an integral part of the business, and even publish your financial statements in consolidated form. But when you sell debt (borrow money), it is made clear whether the local subsidiary or the parent is taking on the debt. Because the parent’s debt is secured by the assets of the parent, you cannot simply transfer parent debt to a sub just before spinning it off.
I hope that helps.
I hope that helps.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:27 pm)To live another day….
Time for some philosophy, since reality really bites.
If your like me (I hope your not, but I think I am sharing this with many in the same position), your life savings are tied up mostly in Mutual funds, stocks, and a few bonds. I have decided that I am no longer worried about where the market goes. I have no control over it, and if it bottoms, it bottoms.
Time to get priorities straight. I am not an overly religious guy, but things are rough, but as long as I can pay my bills, feed my family, and smile, than all is well. I have decided to stop worrying that I am losing it all. I can never loose it all, unless someone takes what is really important, which is family.
Hey, this is not my typical post, but I just felt the need to post it.
Take care, relax, and enjoy what you have around yourself.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:28 pm)Capt Jack. Yes I saw the whole mileage tax thing. I don’t think it will come to pass soon because of the cost of implementation and the rampant fraud the program would generate. For current vehicles, a ‘tracking box’ would have to be installed, who pays for it? A savvy individual could then just remove the ‘tracking box’ or wire a switch to kill its power, dramatically reducing reported mileage.
Older cars, like classic cars have 6 volt electrical systems, probably won’t work with a the 12 volt Police State watch box.
This whole tracking thing is in our not to distant future however, the government just forces the automakers to build in the tracking software into an existing engine management computer thus making it (almost) tamper proof. Since the government will soon own the automakers anyway, the legislation to make it happen is almost guaranteed.
With the automaker supplied tax meter built into your engine’s black box, they can tax BOTH fuel consumption AND mileage with ease. A highway tax based on mileage, and a carbon tax based on fuel burn. They can even tax your electric car based on electricity consumed to charge it.
Smart, them government fellers!
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:48 pm)In the Land of Barack, we already have a partial mileage tax system. They call it a toll road. Image, pay-as-you-go. Repression! Repression!
Can’t wait for the speed governors. Our last governor was so fair.
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:51 pm)Several years ago, I went to the A123systems.com site before buying a “developer’s pack” of 6 small Lithium Ion nano-phosphate cells. I studied the graphs that were there at the time regarding that chemistry. At that time, they had only released data that showed a retention of 97 percent of capacity after (I believe it was) 1,000 complete charge/discharge cycles at 100% DOD.
There was no data regarding a more narrow 30% to 85% operational DOD range at that time (since Voltec specs did not yet exist). Since then I had heard that the performance of that chemistry had been tested at 5,000 cycles, which would generally equate to about 15 years with one charge-discharge cycle per day, (but without the DOD mentioned).
I wonder what the new rectangular shape format would do, and what the specs are on those?
Dan Petit Austin TX
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (9:57 pm)hi JEC #156,
“I have decided to stop worrying…”
____________________________
Good move. I divert with music, RC planes (fly~crash~rebuild~fly), Amtrak rides (to nowhere and back), Motorcycle riding, and looking at pretty girls. Yes it’s true my finger is married, but my eyes are single.
Here are two recent RC creations. These are German made by Multiplex. They are plain white and gray when stock:
“Air Canada”
http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/easy%20star%20015.jpg
“Zebra Star”
http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/zebra%20star%20004.jpg
=D~
(Quote)
Feb 20th, 2009 (10:31 pm)Dave K
Thanks. I try to keep busy in my man-cave. I had an addition put on a few years back, and I got to chance to build my dream cave in the basement. The first floor is for the wife, but the basement was MINE!
It took me well over a year to complete, but I enjoyed every minute, learning all the basic trade skills (rough carpentry, electrical, plumbing, drywall, tile work, finish carpentry).
It comes complete with full bath and is wired wall to wall power, for all my toys. Tinkering in the cave keeps me sane.
I used to do model rocketry, but its been a while. Those RC’s make me think it is time to break out the glue and get at it again.
Thanks for the pic’s!
(Quote)
Feb 21st, 2009 (12:04 am)hi Broken axles #150,
“People should start recognizing SUVs for what they are – Off-Road Vehicles”
______________________________
I disagree. Rugged looks, 7″-8″ of ground clearance, hauling capacity, firm