A Chevy Volt article appears in the Washington Post today. Questioned is whether the Volt will be sufficient to resuscitate GM or whether it is too expensive and its competition too fierce.
An Obama administration official gave the first word of what the Task Force on Autos though of their Volt prototype test drive, “The Volt certainly shows promise, but it is no panacea for what ails GM in the near term.”
At a price possibly close to $40,000 it is proposed that the car is too expensive for most people. Not mentioned is the $7500 tax credit already approved for the first 500,000 buyers of the car. Bob Lutz is quoted as saying “Over time the costs will come down and be competitive with conventional cars, although right now that’s not the case.”
Lutz is also quoted as saying Cadillac could have been the first brand to get this technology. He said “Doing it in a Cadillac would have made it financially easier to do, but on the other hand we wanted something that’s boldly applicable, Our big 5 million-unit global path is Chevrolet. With the Volt we can sell it around the world.”
My favorite part of the report is how it is mentioned that the Volt has “inspired a legion of fans.” Apparently there is a popular Volt news website with over 47,000 people signed up as being interested in buying the car. Id love to check it out, but the url wasn’t mentioned.
Source (Washington Post)
This entry was posted on Saturday, March 14th, 2009 at 8:48 am and is filed under Public Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Mar 14th, 2009 (8:51 am)A Google search wouldn’t be too tough.
If they REALLY wanted to find out about this ‘fan site’. It doesn’t appear they really wanted to say too much positive about GM. Typical.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:00 am)Mark my works – GM will rule the automotive world again.
America has a tradition of pulling itself out difficult times with new technology and the Chevy Volt will be the one to pull GM and America out of this one.
GO GM!
GO VOLT!
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:08 am)The Cruse is allmost as important as the Volt for GM.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:11 am)With 10,000 units in a year and a half from now? I don’t think so!
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:21 am)Please try to realize how big this is.
Remember the Rome wasn’t built in a day, and what we are seeing here with the Volt technology is no less than the reconstruction of the whole automobile universe. A entirely new paradigm is being created.
It will take time and patience.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:22 am)The 40 miles of all-electric range together with the gas/E85 range exender is what sold me. Even though I plan on using the range extender very little, the fact that it’s there changes the whole ballgame.
I’ll take mine with 3 olives, a teaspoon of oilive juice, shaken not stirred… Cheers!
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:23 am)my thoughts are
agreed its god but ,, its not the end all be all
especially short term
if gm can survive long enough thats a big if
the new battery discovery and electifcation of cars stays on course…
gm wil be in a good position.. when that time comes…
if it stays with the volt .. short term volt isnt a winner.. yet..
balancing act will be a hard find…
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:24 am)Just like Warren Brown’s “review” of the Cobalt SS two weeks ago in the Washington Post. Nothing mentioned that it “holds the record” for its class around the Nurburgring; – AND – gets a 30 mpg highway rating to boot! It “blows away” its foreign competitors in performance without a doubt (and proven by a Fall 2008 Car & Driver test at VIR for all to see). And he can’t even “research” and mention/report these facts? Hopefully the Volt (and Cruze) will be released on-time and begin the long process of rebuilding GM.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:25 am)Lyle, Did I read that right? The Washington post reported:
Apparently there is a popular Volt news website with over 47,000 people signed up as being interested in buying the car. Id love to check it out, but the url wasn’t mentioned.
I just searched the internet with the phrase ‘CHEVY VOLT’, this web sight was the 3′rd one listed. This is Washington post professional journalism at it’s best.
Had the subject matter been about some terrorist who was released from Gitmo posting his diary, the URL would be printed in BOLD LETTERS.
Same if the car had been a Toyota instead of a Chevy.
Another fine piece of journalism from the Washington post.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:26 am)(previous) thread tells me, evs are coming down the pike sooner rather than later. And GM had better get busy working on a pure EV. An Aptera-like, think-like commuter vehicle for a coupla passengers, with a QUICK-CHARGING 100 mile, plus or minus,range/charge battery will suit a big chunk of the population, will get many of us where we need to go most of the time. more than the volt, likely. .. One problem yet to be worked out with pure EV?- How to keep the battery at optimal working temperature in hot or cold climates? Cheers.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:36 am)“The Volt certainly shows promise, but it is no panacea for what ails GM in the near term.”
I have to agree with the last part, though I take exception to the understated “showing promise” part.
All the negative Nells, who have boldly stated that the Volt is a publicity stunt, have now changed their story to, “but Pius, Think, Byd, golf carts, etc., are all better, and the Volt at $40,000 will never sell.
Every way you look at it, the Volt is the right design at the right time. It’s too early in battery development for pure electrics. And a PHEV parallel hybrid, while great compared to current technology, wastes gas, when compared to the Volt.
Second gen Volt will be more priced for the masses and will boldly go where GM should be going (provided they become lean and mean as well).
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:43 am)Congratulations, Lyle, on owning the “popular Volt news website with over 47,000 people signed up as being interested in buying the car”!!!
Regarding GM’s costs for the early production-volume Volts, I remain convinced that there’s strong evidence they’ll be able to make huge profits on the Volt from the very beginning in 2010. First, because the DOE & CPI studies on Li-Ion battery costs show the battery’s materials costs are MUCH less than GM has implied. Second, because we now know GM will be doing the actual battery assemby & testing in a high-volume, automated factory built for the purpose. Third, because battery assembly/test inherently lends itself to being highly automated — GM must certainly have a task force of manufacturing engineering specialists assigned to minimize production costs. …..And fourth, because it’s just good marketing strategy to “under promise & over-deliver” (….i.e. to create advance expectations of high selling prices, then introduce the Volt at MSRPs MUCH lower than expected).
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:46 am)Sorry to be a downer..but…in a word…”no”
Perhaps Nissan will buy the voltec program on the cheap in the summer…when the innevitable happens.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:49 am)The Volt gives GM hope.
It will get people into the showroom.
It will help sell more Cruzes.
Most importantly, it will reduce my fuel use during the week to zero.
Will it make GM profitable? In the short term, he11 no.
LJGTVWOTR
NO, plug, NO sale.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:52 am)As I have stated many times, if GM can survive this extremely bad time for auto makers in general, and if they can get the price down to compete with an I C E only car, they will have trouble making them fast enough. I firmly believe that the E-REV concept is right for nearly all family cars. I am assumming the battery size will come down enough to allow normal size passenger compartments. And in time pure EV type autos will become a strong option.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:56 am)______________________________________________________
From Lyle’s above news post:
“My favorite part of the report is how it is mentioned that the Volt has “inspired a legion of fans.” Apparently there is a popular Volt news website with over 47,000 people signed up as being interested in buying the car. Id love to check it out, but the url wasn’t mentioned”.
—
Take it as a complement Lyle; The Washington Post has identified you as a news source competitor to them.
Traditional newspapers are financially upside down in large part because the average person no longer is dependent on newspapers for news and classifieds listing which are the corner stones of print newspapers. Daily newspapers have identified their competitors as:
1. Alternative Online Classifieds: Such as Craig’s List.
2. Independent News Blog Sites: Such as GM-VOLT.COM
For this reason, it has become an unwritten policy at many traditional newsprint newsrooms to not disclose (direct) their readership to independent news blog sites such as GM-VOLT.COM. If a news blog site somehow makes news and therefore is part of the story (such as in this case) they will find a way to include you in the story without directing its readership to your news blog site. What I find fascinating about this is that the independent news blog sites that have become the most popular (such as this site) have a completely opposite policy.
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Energy = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________
Mar 14th, 2009 (10:06 am)They need to think outside the box. The Volt isn’t here to save GM, it’s here to save America…
No longer will we be held hostage by the likes of Ahmadinejad, Chavez and the OPEC cartel.
Mar 14th, 2009 (10:08 am)Congratulations to Lyle and Nassaman (#13). Lyle always does a great job of getting the news. Too bad the Washington Post can’t do as well. Maybe they should hire Lyle.
Massaman has the facts right on all counts. GM knows what they are doing with the Volt and, when it actually comes out, I don’t believe that the price will be that bad. I’m expecting it to be about $38,000 which, with the $7500 rebate, brings it down to about $30,000. High, but not prohibitive. We’ll see.
Anyway. GO VOLT! GO GM!
Mar 14th, 2009 (10:11 am)#13 nasaman.
I’m with you on this. To get expectations for a Volt in the $30,000 or lower range and then come out with it at a price of $40,000 would be a disaster.
Let ‘em expect $40,000 and let them/us be all happily surprised by the lower than expected price.
Go Volt
Mar 14th, 2009 (10:30 am)GM said they don’t need the $2 billion for March now. Maybe things really are changing at GM …. OR they made things sound worse then they actually are to get some low, low, low interest loans.
Mar 14th, 2009 (11:15 am)If anybody finds that website, let me know, will ya? I’d be really interested.
The fact that the Volt is not a panacea for the troubles of GM has been painfully clear to all of us for months and years. It is a beacon of hope however, that the company can still be rescued and viable. If not for the promise of the Volt, and of this “mystery website”, I would have given up a long time ago.
I have said 100 times that the engineering talent is there, if the “management” types can only start making intelligent product line decisions.
#15 old man:
Boy are you positive this AM! Thanks, I needed that.
#16 CDAVIS:
Your comment really struck home with me. I scanned over the headlines on the Yahoo news page before coming here. Same old same old.
I was thinking as I brought up “the mystery site” that it is amazing how much more interesting and topical this site is most days than the traditional news. When I saw your comment, I really had to smile.
Amen!
Mar 14th, 2009 (11:45 am)Lyle,
LOL for being coy …
Mar 14th, 2009 (11:50 am)Happy Pi Day! (3/14 1:59:26)
The Volt production isn’t going to be very high, but the Voltec ™(sm)(R) has the potential to be the standard for personal vehicles for the next 100 years.
Mar 14th, 2009 (11:53 am)The idea that GM needs to be jump started by an electric car tickles my fancy, but not my logic (or lack thereof as the case might be.) GM is losing 20% on every car it sells. Selling more Volts would seem to just increase the rate of loss. What GM needs is a business plan that sells reliable vehicles for a profit. How come the design and assembly of the Japanese cars built in America are more reliable than GM cars?
The only answer I have seen is denial, the claim that GM cars are just as reliable, but public perception is lagging current reality. Fiddlesticks.
Mar 14th, 2009 (11:55 am)You guys have already plowed this field many times. The Washington post people should do a little more homework before they pontificate.
The Volt is a “green halo” car for GM. It is a money loser for sure for several years but it should create a positive buzz around the Chevy name.
The question is, can GM get enough other good cars in the showroom to sell as alternatives for those who will not be able to buy the Volt. We will see.
GM should have the Cruze and Malibu and a very efficient 7 passenger vehicle that does not wiegh over 4000 Lbs. I am about ready to replace my 98 Olds Silhoette van (about 3900 Lbs, 8 passengers, 25 rated highway (my trip computer shows 25-26 on trips)) and what I find in the dealership is the traverse (about 4900 Lbs). It is beautiful but it is huge and heavy. Probably not the right direction to go in.
Mar 14th, 2009 (11:58 am)#23 Lurtz:
Too many engineers here, LOL. It makes you stop and think though. ONly 7 more years to the REAL Pi Day (3/14/16). I wonder what happens then? Maybe that’s the real Y2K!
As to Voltec, well said.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:00 pm)Volt word still spreading. The April issue of Discover Magazine (Science & Technology) has a one page article about the Volt. Couple of statements might be a little off the mark but still it is publicity.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:00 pm)There was a very positive review of the Chevy Cobalt XFE in the Wall Street Journal today, calling it “tops among non-hybrids”.
P.S. Noel Park — I’m not an engineer, I’m the furthest thing from it. I’m an artist!
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:02 pm)#24 Van:
We own 4 modern Chevrolet vehicles, 1995 – 2006. They are dead reliable.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:07 pm)Nuclear boy#25 -” It is beautiful but it is huge and heavy.( but) Probably not the right direction to go in.”
Right. Not. http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/lord-stern-on-global-warming-its-even-worse-than-i-thought-1643957.html
thanks
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:08 pm)Unfortunately the Volt will not save GM. Its far too ‘niche’ of a car, and in too small numbers. In fact if the Volt does anything, its more of a liability to the company in terms of cost and profit margins.
They need sweeping changes to their whole lineup and radical cost cutting measures to be saved.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:17 pm)Hey Lyle … nice bit of sarcasm. LOL..
I’ve told my wife for a number of years that my mid-life crisis car is going to need a plug.
I’m hoping that if GM survives and the Volt “arrives” on time, that GM will put the Voltec platform into the Chevy Orlando, as with young kids – it would be better suited to my needs.
I haven’t heard of any kind of similar tax credits being offered in Canada (yet), although some provinces are moving towards large credits or sales tax exclusions – nothing like $7500, though. Hopefully, GM can wangle something from the current (conservative) federal government …
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:19 pm)Hi Noel, offering anecdotal evidence to counter vast statistical evidence complied by multiple evaluators seems to me mere denial. Why not address the fact that GM lags Ford, Honda, and Toyota. Did not CR list the Aveo as one of the worst cars?
I can offer anecdotal evidence too. My grandson was very disappointed when he road in my 1996 Avalon, because the car seemed way better than his one year old Cobalt which was in the shop for a clutch.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:32 pm)#33 Van said:
Why not address the fact that GM lags Ford, Honda, and Toyota. Did not CR list the Aveo as one of the worst cars?
—
I decided to check the Consumer Reports (CR) ratings for Chevrolet vehicles. The trend for most vehicle models from 1999-2008 is that in 1999 most rated “poor” to “fair”, where in 2008 most rated “good”. This matches what has been reported by many – that the quality of Chevrolet vehicles has improved dramatically of the past few years.
You are correct that according to CR, other manufacturers score better … but other manufactures are not developing the Volt.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:35 pm)On the CR site, Land Rover seems to score the very worst – with “poor” for all vehicles models/years reviewed.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:43 pm)If Chevy becomes the GM Brand to ‘electrify’ its entire lineup of vehicles over the next 10 years, that could be an image jumpstarter.
I’d like to see a Corvette with the electric motor system you guys talked about yesterday with enough torque to snap the driveshaft from a standing start!
Very cool.
Mar 14th, 2009 (12:56 pm)#28 Lurtz:
Sorry. My mother always says, “Don’t judge others by yourself”, LOL.
The XFE is a shining example of what can be achieved by not so terribly expensive development. Too bad they don’t have an automatic that will give similar results. I might be able to get my wife into one. If they had taken a fraction of the money they spent on the Hummmer, SSR, GTO and G8, jut to name a few, and spent it on developing an effective 6 speed automatic for the Cobalt XFE, they would at least have some powerful fuel economy bragging rights. Maybe it’s not to late.
#30 D.:
Thanks for the very important, if terrifying, link. Don’t worry though, it’s just Al Gore’s fantasy. I mean who is this guy? A professor at the London School of Economics? What the !@#$% does he know? Denial is alive and well. It will save us from the horrors of reality.
And I agree with you and nuclearboy at #25.
#33 Van:
I know lots of people who “know” that Toyota, Honda, et al, have better quality and reliability. It’s all anecdotal. They heard it from somebody else. Not one in 100 has ever read any kind of study on the relative reliability. They just “know” it.
I am offering my own experience just to point out that “It ain’t necessarily so.” I don’t claim that 4 vehicles form a statistically significant population. Is my experience some kind of a fluke? I doubt it.
Mar 14th, 2009 (1:07 pm)I was thinking same lines as Lutz because Cadi can bare the charges – a $60k cadi is fine with voltec, but a 40k Chevy is too high.Volt – 2 which has cheaper battery and ground up designed ICE for erev and more optimized software can be the chevy brand.Cadi even can give it as an upgrade to cadi owners because they already paid you the premium. But now not way back, Chevy needs volt now
. Going back on it will introduce people to go away.
Volt will save GM : Not for sure
Global competitive cars –
innovation – in the box and out of the box
Service network improvements
Quality products – built for purpose
Continuous improvements every year.
Proactive call backs / corrections –
Long sighted vision than bridge visions
Thinking a magic of product and finance than finance only driving the company.
Making faith belts
Volt is an indication of GM is trying for these.
Mar 14th, 2009 (1:12 pm)The Volt is great car but If GM is going to sell it for $40K the car will be a nonstarter, people will not spend that much on a non luxury sedan, even with gas at $4.00 a gal.
Consider that China is going to be selling a Plug-in hybrid due to be introdused in the US 2010 or 2011, around the same time as the Volt. It is better than the Chevy volt in that that you can go 60 miles on the battery before the gas engine will kick in but most of all its MUCH MUCH more affordable at $25K to $30K than $40K for the Volt. The problem that this Chinese car faces is quality of its construction and how safe the car will be. Right now it’s being sold in China so hopefully by the time the car is sold in the US they will fixed these problems.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/01/13/detroit-2009-byds-plug-in-hybrids-the-f3dm-and-f6dm/
I have not seen any specks for the Prius plug-in, but if they are going to sell it for the same price ($40K) it’s going to have the same problem as GM.
Mar 14th, 2009 (1:28 pm)#33 Van – Thanks for the chuckle. So… you took your son out of an entry level Chevy, put him in the highest end Toyota, and are surprised that he liked the Toyota? I sure hope you realize that if the situation were reversed, and you took him out of a Toyota Yaris and put him into a top end Malibu, he’d say “man, those Toyotas sure are junk.” Overall, it’s a pretty poor example of the point you are trying to make.
Mar 14th, 2009 (1:35 pm)Will the Chevy Volt Jump-Start GM? Jump-start might not be the appropriate analogy. Defibrillate?
Mar 14th, 2009 (1:41 pm)Can ‘t stand people knocking revolutionary technology in its first stage because- shocker- it is still more expensive than old hybrid technology. Why is everyone comparing this car to the insight/etc? It isn’t even in anywhere near the same league! I can’t wait till the price drops and these reporter-types are crowing about how they knew all along EREVs would be a success.
——-
Beginning to think only engineers should be allowed to write news about technical topics…maybe with help from some financial types like Statik. Except I am forgetting that we are illiterate…crap.
Mar 14th, 2009 (1:52 pm)What’s this BS talk of a $40K price tag? Weren’t we originally told a $30K? Or then a $35K? or a higher $38K? That’s just bad bull shlt talk WTF is going on.
@Robert Hopwood 39
“Consider that China is going to be selling a Plug-in hybrid due to be introdused in the US 2010 or 2011, around the same time as the Volt. It is better than the Chevy volt in that that you can go 60 miles on the battery before the gas engine will kick in but most of all its MUCH MUCH more affordable at $25K to $30K than $40K for the Volt.”
I’ve been keeping my eye on the BYD. They’re having to do some re-engineering to meet safety standards and a few other NA standards. When all is done, I think the BYD car will be at least $30K – $33K. OR……It will be less but since the Volt will cost so much more they will inflate the cost for a higher profit margin. I know I would, just me being greedy.
I’ll take my Volt No Generator, No ICE, Shaken not Stirred….
Mar 14th, 2009 (2:02 pm)Other than the reference to that great web site the article doesn’t offer too much news!
As for the Task Force, no one in their right mind would think that 10,000 cars can turn around a multi-billion dollar company. In the short run it won’t make much of a difference. Luckily for Volt fans and all those who believe that the electrification of transportation is critical to country’s national security and economic and environmental well-being, the Obama Administration isn’t overly concerned with the short term. They think long term, which is why, in addition to the financial mess, they’re concentrating on bringing the budget deficient down and in investing in exports, health care, education, and renewable energy. At the Business Roundtable this week Obama again talked about how electric cars would soon be rolling off US assembly lines but with batteries being made in Korea. The reference is fairly clear, and for someone careful with his words the message about intent seems reasonably unmistakable.
In this regard, while this was not discussed at all this week, probably because it’s good news (poking statik LOL), the pieces of a GM and Chrysler restructuring are beginning to fall into place. Ford announced that it has secured sufficient concessions from the UAW to limit the wage gap with the transplants ($55 versus $49) and expected the gap to vanish completely in two years. The GM agreement will not the be the same but the benchmarks are clearly evident.
Mar 14th, 2009 (2:11 pm)fyi, that tax credit does nothing for the loan you will be applying for on the Volt. Nor will it change your monthly payments on the loan you get on the Volt. Here’s what everyone should do with the year end tax credit when/if you get it back. Use it towards Solar panels for your home. In my case trailer home. Or just purchase a small subset just enough to charge the car from solar. Then of course you get breaks from the Govt and local State incentives. It’s a double whammy plus for you. You’re using a tax incentive to get more incentives all to allow you to charge your Volt by the Sun.
And I didn’t even need a beer to think that one up. =oP
I’ll take my Volt No Generator, No ICE, Shaken not Stirred….
Mar 14th, 2009 (2:23 pm)#28 Lurtz – That’s tops among GASOLINE-BURNING non-hybrids.
Still, kudos to GM for tweaking the Cobalt.
I’m not really seeing the journalistic incompetence or anti-GM bias in this article. Maybe some people here should become news writers. I think it reads well and presents GM’s Volt situation pretty clearly. This isn’t a technical expose on the Volt. It’s a summary of the Volt program’s purpose. Both Lyle and Lutz get a couple good quotes. The Volt gets some publicity, as does this site. GM is fighting an uphill battle with the Volt and with its general finances. I think the article portrays that pretty well.
P.S. I’m a different Jake than #31.
Mar 14th, 2009 (2:38 pm)#44 DonC:
A very nice and thoughtful comment. Thank you for it.
#46 Jake:
“Any ink is good ink.” Good point. Thanks.
Mar 14th, 2009 (3:01 pm)#44 says,
“..they’re (Obama’s administration) concentrating on bringing the budget deficient (sic) down…”
I don’t think there is a scintilla of evidence that that is takin place. In fact, Obama’s administration is doing quite the opposite. Go figure?!!!
Mar 14th, 2009 (3:15 pm)I like the passive aggression there Lyle.
——
As for the rest of it, I think we need to remember the basic principle of the auto business–”Sell cars at a profit” The Volt does not achieve this goal realistically at any point in the next 5-6 years…and GM only has enough cash to put change in the meter for another few weeks.
As for that wunder kind Bob Lutz’s quote (and I’m very thrilled to see his name in threads again) of, “Over time the costs will come down and be competitive with conventional cars, although right now that’s not the case.” There is another issue that comes up as prices come down and you see mass adoption…like you now have hordes of competition. Yeah, EVs can compete with regular cars…but probably not made by you.
So sure, your cost to build the Volt comes down $5,000 in 2014, but unfortunately you can’t sell it for $40,000 anymore, because there is 5 other auto manufactures selling their version of the ‘EV dream’ under $30,000…so the point is moot.
Mar 14th, 2009 (3:18 pm)There are countless scenarios in which pure electric vehicles just won’t cut it for most Americans. I leave you to think of some yourselves, but most of them involve RUNNING OUT OF JUICE AND BEING STRANDED WHILE WAITING FOR A TOW, or WORRYING
I think most if the people waiting for a pure electric vehicle are living in a fantasy world. Sure, soon you’ll be able to go buy a little electric car to scoot around you neighberhood and show your freinds how “green” you’ve become, but I’ll bet that you’ll have your real vehicle waiting faithfully back in your garage, ready to do the real tasks that are required by most of us.
I can envision pure electrics being popular in retirement communities, but even there those old folks will have to have a real car waiting to take them on vacations, or to visit the grandkids in the next state. A Chevy Volt would get them two for one: electric for short trips, range extended driving for everthing else.
Another pure electric scenario which is appropriate for us folks in the Northwest is what happens during a power outage? (We have them every year up here after windstorms). You can’t charge a pure electric, but the Volt with it’s range extender would get me to work the next day as usual, charge or no charge.
People with real jobs, families, and responsibilities simply cannot deal with the anxiety of not bing able to drive as usual, day or night. near or far,
Mar 14th, 2009 (3:27 pm)Sorry, that last post was at a computer that would not allow edits, and I clicked enter accidentally, but you get the idea.
Mar 14th, 2009 (3:30 pm)#39, Yes Govt has to put tax on imports ( this will make the game fair ) because the money diff comes from exploiting the poor people work and life standards.
In my opinion still there is a serail hybrid config which can be cheaper.
a cruze hybrid with 10 mile range battery , range extender and a plug . I dont know how much it converts to cost for the transmission etc.
So simple config with :
inwheel motors, 10 mile range battery/ultracapacitors, $17k serial hybrid, ground up ICE motor for EREV ( may be same with volt ) and a 200 mpg – cruze hybrid – i think still GM will make money from this config – no money loose like volt.
most stuff can reuse from volt, reduction of cost and optimzed for chevy brand.
Mar 14th, 2009 (3:45 pm)Statik #49
That’s an awful tall glass of pessimistic opinion your serving up as fact today. Not the idea that the Volt won’t budge GM’s bottom line for at least 4 years from now but anything beyond that is mostly speculation. The idea that there will be a BEV, PHEV, or EREV for less money than GM will be capable of profitably offering a comparable Voltec flavor is not nearly a given. Certainly their recent history is working against them, but the Voltec program goes mostly against this recent history. If they are indeed pushing innovation and are already progressing on Voltec II technology, then it may very well be ahead of the curve 5 years from now. Perhaps I’m just stuck in my naivete, but I do believe GM does actually “gets it” (or at least enough of “it”) with regards to the potential of Voltec. They have said and if they stay in business, I believe there will be at least one other Voltec in 5 years. Voltec will also be significantly cheaper by then. Your $5,000 may right but there is absolutely no way for any of us to have a good idea about how much less. Just based on potential battery, power electronics, and motors improvements alone $5000 seems a little lite. Time will tell and who knows, perhaps your comments will help motivate them to do more. Perhaps that’s your intent.
Mar 14th, 2009 (3:55 pm)Just goes to tell you how little investigative reporting there is these days at major newspapers. It is a lot easier to just post articles based on what you hear on TV, radio or read in other papers. Some reporters go so far as to report stories they read on the internet. And we know how much truth most of those stories are based on. It would not have taken but a couple more minutes to dig deeper into the Volt story and give a deeper report.
Mar 14th, 2009 (4:00 pm)______________________________________________________
Looks like motorcycles are also starting to migrate over to the EV side. Here is another electric motorcycle that will be coming out:
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/03/a-british-motor.html
______________________________________________________
Electric Motorcycles + Nuclear Energy = American Eneregy Independence!
______________________________________________________
Mar 14th, 2009 (4:24 pm)#45 CatJackSparrow Said:
Use it towards Solar panels for your home. In my case trailer home. Or just purchase a small subset just enough to charge the car from solar. Then of course you get breaks from the Govt and local State incentives.
—
That’s a great idea to maximize the incentives! I’ve been planning to add panels to my roof for a few years now. I just want to wait until I can buy panels at $1 per watt (3 to 5 years from now?).
Right now (at a cost of about $10 per watt) it would cost me $46,000 to have about 400W of power generation (with inverter, cables, panel mounts, etc.). With the low electrical rate that I pay (about $0.07/KWh), it would take 26 years to break even.
Just like how the cost of lithium batteries for cars need to come down to make EV’s realistically affordable, when the cost photo-electric (solar) panels comes down – I think that there will be mass adoption of the technology.
Mar 14th, 2009 (4:26 pm)Once again folks, Chevy Volt cost to build, $40,000. GM subsidy of 25%(half of what Toyota subsidized the early Prius with) brings the sticker price to $30,000. The $7,500 federal credit brings the Volt down to $22,500.
Gonna be great to see the several iterations of the Volt spring on the planet over the next three years!!
I would say, though that GM has already been jump started, with the Saturn Aura, the Cadillac CTS, the Chevy Malibu, the Buick Enclave, the Pontiac G8, the Saturn Outlook, the GMC Acadia, and the Chevy Traverse. Further jump starting begins in a few days with the launch of the Chevy Camaro, and then, again with the 30 MPG Equinox, the trendy 2010 Buick Lucurne and the edgy Cadillac SRX, all quality made, which will allow them to compete against the market.
Mar 14th, 2009 (4:32 pm)Not mentioned is the $7500 tax credit already approved for the first 500,000 buyers of the car.
_____________________________
That’s because reliance on it doesn’t inspire confidence. Gambling on a big price drop soon doesn’t either.
The credit is nice as a thank you for those consumers doing their part to help out. But the business itself shouldn’t depend on it for anything beyond introduction.
A technology intended to become a big chunk of annual production (at a profit), it must be able to reach a large market… hence the original target of “nicely under 30″.
SMTD
Mar 14th, 2009 (4:37 pm)#40, Jim in PA writes, “#33 Van – Thanks for the chuckle. So… you took your son out of an entry level Chevy, put him in the highest end Toyota, and are surprised that he liked the Toyota?”
Jim, you are not paying attention… The kid is impressed by the comparison of a THIRTEEN year old Toyota to his ONE year old Chevy – WHICH NEEDS A MAJOR REPAIR.
Mar 14th, 2009 (4:56 pm)#53 koz said:
Statik,
That’s an awful tall glass of pessimistic opinion your serving up as fact today. Not the idea that the Volt won’t budge GM’s bottom line for at least 4 years from now but anything beyond that is mostly speculation. The idea that there will be a BEV, PHEV, or EREV for less money than GM will be capable of profitably offering a comparable Voltec flavor is not nearly a given. Certainly their recent history is working against them, but the Voltec program goes mostly against this recent history. If they are indeed pushing innovation and are already progressing on Voltec II technology, then it may very well be ahead of the curve 5 years from now. Perhaps I’m just stuck in my naivete, but I do believe GM does actually “gets it” (or at least enough of “it”) with regards to the potential of Voltec. They have said and if they stay in business, I believe there will be at least one other Voltec in 5 years. Voltec will also be significantly cheaper by then. Your $5,000 may right but there is absolutely no way for any of us to have a good idea about how much less. Just based on potential battery, power electronics, and motors improvements alone $5000 seems a little lite. Time will tell and who knows, perhaps your comments will help motivate them to do more. Perhaps that’s your intent.
===============
It is just who I am, lol. What can I do?
I don’t really think I am serving up my opinion as fact. Facts are facts. The fact is that GM is not going to make money here, because…well, they said so. If I am the pessimist, then GM is certainly the quintessential optimist when they say something, so if they are saying that they can’t make money until they are deep into production…I’m probably guessing even that number is optimistic at best.
As for the $5,000…I was just throwing out a number there. The number itself was not really the point of the statement, it was just a example to point out that whatever this cost ‘savings’ are in the ‘future’…they will not go to GM’s bottom line (as Mr. pink tie) would have you believe.
If GM was creating this car in a vacuum, and they were the only guys producing it, like 3M does for post-it notes, then sure as costs came down they could translate that to profitability….however GM’s one and only advantage here is coming to NA market first/early (and they seem to be trying their best to mess that up as well). In 2015 (or whenever), when costs are coming down there are going to be lots of competitors getting those same benefits, and the price the market will bare will come down…then you get back into the ‘who can build the cheapest car’ scenario, and that is not GM’s forte. (unless of course…we had a much smaller/leaner/meaner, gov’t subsidized GM)
Mar 14th, 2009 (5:41 pm)I have to agree with the assessment of Statik. GM is a long way from producing a vehicle that is a magic bullet for them. They must sell the Vot, the Cruze, the Converj and several other vehicles at high numbers to generate the kind of cash needed. I hope they can do it. I intend to purchase one or two of these vehicles as they come out as my part in helping our ailing auto industry as well as to give me and my family a good line of vehicles to drive and enjoy.
Mar 14th, 2009 (5:43 pm)“Will the Volt Jump-start GM?”
I think possibly it can.
Getting GM back in the black is not only about selling the Volt. It’s about selling a diverse selection of vehicles for a large buying public with drastically varying needs.
The other day I went to my son’s baseball practice (they had to practice in the parking lot because there is still 1 to 2 feet of snow on the ground). From an informal survey, about 3/4 of the vehicles there were either trucks, vans, or SUV’s.
So, right now GM doesn’t have the best reputation, but that is because the buying public has been duped into believing that some imports offer better quality. I would agree with that assessment in smaller cars, as GM has not pursued this market, and lags behind (some of the reason for this is that smaller cars prevail in foreign markets like Europe and Japan).
However, in the SUV and truck market, GM has a strong portfolio. They just have gotten caught in an era of rapidly rising oil prices.
If GM can apply the BAS+ hybrid system with Li-Ion batteries to trucks and SUV’s, go to engines with direct injection (like the one in the 30 mpg Equinox), use 6 speed transmissions, and other fuel saving technologies like VVT, they may be able to make mid-size vehicles that get overall ~ 30 mpg, and full size ones that get ~ 25 mpg.
This will be their savior. The Volt will be the halo car that demonstrates GM’s ability to be a technological leader, and gets people to reconsider Chevy and GM. The Volt will be the most efficient no-compromise vehicle that you can buy.
So in effect, the Volt can “jump-start” GM and help to sell the Malibu, Cruze, Traverse, and other Chevy cars and trucks, as well as the other GM cousins, because people will associate the Volt, its technological leadership, and its efficiency with GM and thus gravitate towards it and other vehicles from the brand.
Down the road, more Voltec vehicles will only help to solidify this position.
Mar 14th, 2009 (5:44 pm)#44 DonC said:
In this regard, while this was not discussed at all this week, probably because it’s good news (poking statik LOL), the pieces of a GM and Chrysler restructuring are beginning to fall into place. Ford announced that it has secured sufficient concessions from the UAW to limit the wage gap with the transplants ($55 versus $49) and expected the gap to vanish completely in two years. The GM agreement will not the be the same but the benchmarks are clearly evident.
==========================
I really was not ducking the ‘good news’ Don, honest, lol…I was trying to cut back on the finance stuff, as Lyle seems to be working really hard at getting us some technical/development things to chew on.
I will comment on the news now, if you like.
Those who are saying things like ‘sufficient concessions’ are those who have benefit to say it. ie) the unions and the car companies. In Canada GM and the CAW came to a agreement (almost identical to the US deal with Ford), that they said, ‘were more than enough to justify the loans,’ but got widely panned by the gov’t and the media within moments of the announcement.
http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1470008
Chrysler actually threatened to leave Canada entirely if they didn’t get more concession from the CAW and their ‘darn bailout bucks’
http://blogs.wsj.com/bankruptcy/2009/03/12/chrysler-threatens-to-leave-canada/
Additionally, while you may believe some things have gone well in the US of late, their international outlook just got destroyed…as in obliterated yesturday. Basically all the Euro countries got together and had a little ‘pow-wow’ about GM’s future and their bailout ambitions yesturday…after the meeting they said that no one would take “unilateral measures without informing and coordinating with each other (ie the whole Europeon Commission)” and nothing about the actual proposal. In other words, GM now has to satisfy everybody, instead of just one or two. At best this would make the whole process just longer than actually producing the Volt…and makes their chances slim to none on success.
http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-autos/idUSTRE52C5KU20090313
In the big picture, what happened this week is that if the US gov’t chooses to bail out GM, it now has to not only bail it out domestically…but all over the world. (kinda like AIG, lol). Everyone else has said, “your viability plan is kindy sucky, and we won’t be giving you anymore cash”
As you have mentioned quite a bit, worker’s wages are not the biggest piece of this puzzle to start with, but I don’t think the UAW deal to eliminate ‘cost of living’ increases over the next three years and to ‘reduce’ benefits for the unemployed to 70% of full wages for 52 weeks, then another 52 weeks at 35% in lieu of the jobs bank is ‘getting it done’
I will say letting Ford cut it’s Veba payment in half (and filling the other half with stock) was a good concession, one that was very clearly set out by the gov’t and obtained…that is where all the ‘hourly math’ calculation numbers are obtained.
Sadly, I have lots of other bullet points, but I just can’t do it…maybe thats why I haven’t really been posting on it lately. Seems like the discussion is just so far gone…besides, we get to watch it play out in all its glory in the next two or three weeks. It is not like it can be stalled out indefinitely either, GM/Chrysler need more money or they are done…actually, I’m surprised at the lack of action at all on it, especially after the last fiasco/circus.
Of course, the auto task force just hired a bankruptcy lawyer, wonder what that could mean?
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN1346580320090313?rpc=44
He will be joining the team directly, and they still have “bankruptcy and restructuring lawyers at law firms Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP and Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, as well as turnaround specialists at investment bank Rothschild”
(long post…and I’m not proof reading or editing either, so I apologize for that, lol…going to grab some supper)
Mar 14th, 2009 (5:49 pm)I have been watching a Fox News story about the bail-out bills and the budget bills entitled “Two Trillion Dollars with a “T”". It is a very sobering thing to realize just how much money has been spent in less than 6 months with very little to show for it. Plus the fact that the president and congress plans to spend upwards of another 2 trillion dollars over the next 6 months. It is a real concern of mine that we are spending too much money without any real oversight over how it is spent. I think congress is doing a very bad job on this subject and Obama is not holding anyone to account. He has not keeping his promises to the American people. That concerns me very much. I am afraid we have exchanged one bad administration for another one, but one that is bent on spending us into a pile of debt that we will never be able to dig out of for many, many years.
Mar 14th, 2009 (6:25 pm)Off topic, but not really.
I just got back from test driving the second of my top two fuel economy picks. A ($24k) VW Jetta Tdi.
I’d driven a ($26k) 2009 Prius a few weeks earlier.
The verdict? VW Jetta was the winner, hands down. Even though I wanted to like the Prius better, I couldn’t. The VW was just much more fun to drive. The seats were more comfortable, it was quieter, more torque, faster, more solid, better steering response etc.. etc….
The point?
40G’s is a buttload of money to spend on a car. You better REALLY enjoy driving it. . . and without a volt to test drive, none of us really knows what we’re talking about.
That’s reality.
Mar 14th, 2009 (6:51 pm)GM needs to full court press the advertising. If the VHS tape can beat the Beta Max, anything is possible. Good design, engineering coupled with an excellent marketing (Toyota and Honda are very good at this) could make this a success during Phase one.
Go Volt. Pull an iPod. The next car I buy I want this tech in it. Granted I also want hydrogen and solar power for my house, but dream large I say.
Mar 14th, 2009 (6:58 pm)Voltec technologies being incorporated into the majority of GM vehicles are certainly worth investments in the measured and directed ways that the advisers recommend. Since the investment values are actually pegged against less personal cash of Americans going into petroleum out of country and thus remaining to circulate or stay in America, accounting-buffs might do the arithmetic to see to what extent going electric will help the country in general as E-REV and BEV numbers increase.
From my direct experience and financial perspectives regarding long-term ownership feasibility:
In the long run (above 100,000 miles) as far as ICE servicing is concerned, additional benefits of far lower Voltec ICE maintenance, no Automatic Transmission overhauls (anytime after 65,000 miles if you had skipped fluid changes and, at the same time, the 12 volt battery is too weak to properly run the transmission solenoids), 3 brake jobs prevented by120,000 miles, coolant flushes, and, I am estimating only one synthetic oil change per year for 95% of Voltec ICE due to low run-times.
So, yes, while there would be about 3 more years between now and then, I think that most advisers to the President know that major business changes most often do not begin to yield returns for 3 to 4 years after initial seed investment. But the investment is also in the green evolution and electric motoring changeover, which makes the funding of these changes very easily justified.
Day-to-day and month-to-month and even year-to-year expectations as to hard-money “returns” just do not make sense here, as it takes a new way to think about all this “in the abstract” where if every you had committed to being highly “far-sighted” and “far-forward-thinking” about anything, it is the Volt.
Otherwise, it just seems to me that some may be allowing their own failings or frustrations to be personified and inaccurately displaced as a projection of what is really
the environment “selecting”
those worthwhile efficiencies for survival,
whether it be a division of GM,
a plant failing to grow somewhere, or,
our own inefficiencies which we must strip-away quickly
before we get ourselves into deeper inefficiencies.
Ironically, GM is lucky to be in this situation at just the time when the Voltec technologies must be brought forward to market, and, all parties relating to GM must do their best to strip away inefficiencies in order to efficiently move forward. Also ironically, other OEM’s might not be as well held to be refined to efficiencies, and thus, might just end up being not as competitive after all. Tough times call for tough measures, but the final outcome will be exceptional:
**************
* The Volt. *
**************
Dan Petit Austin TX
Mar 14th, 2009 (7:00 pm)$40,000 dollars for a volt is to expensive. If it’s going to have any chance of making it it will need to be priced between $25,000 and $30,000. The tax credit may help people to buy the volt in that price range which in turn might give the project time for cost reductions to take affect. But in the end if the overall cost reductions doesn’t get the volt’s price under $30,000 in 4 to 5 years they may as well stop now and wait for some kind of battery break through that will reduce the cost.
Mar 14th, 2009 (7:33 pm)Just a random ‘GM thing’:
Did you enjoy the GM facts and fiction website?
If you answered yes, then you should also enjoy the just minted euro version:
http://gmeuropefactsandfiction.com/
According in to GM, it is…”To support informed discussion and fact-based reporting, GM and Opel & Vauxhall have launched a website gmeuropefactsandfiction.com, which challenges the more commonly reported misconceptions and addresses each one with the pertinent facts. The site is a resource for the media, for bloggers and anyone who reports our news. It is also for employees, suppliers, dealers and anyone who has an interest in our business in Europe. The aim of the site is to provide all of our stakeholders with access to the facts.”
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewmonthlyreleasedetail.do?domain=3&docid=52944
————————
It contains such hits as:
Fiction: GM Europe/Opel-Vauxhall has no real plan for viability
Fiction: GM has intentionally made Opel unprofitable to avoid paying taxes in Germany.
Fiction: GM sold or used as collateral Opel patents as part of the U.S. loan agreements.
Fiction: Opel/Vauxhall is in financial problems because of GM’s North American mismanagement.
/enjoy
Mar 14th, 2009 (7:40 pm)Am I the only one that read that GM has pass on the next 2B request on the government loan? They say that their cost cutting is kicking in and they don’t need the help at this time.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/12/gm-says-it-doesnt-need-2b-loan/
Mar 14th, 2009 (7:41 pm)GM has also released a press statement on the CAW agreement and it’s “cash position”
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewmonthlyreleasedetail.do?domain=3&docid=52922
Which sounds pretty good, as we will finally will get a up to date number on their cash pile, and not just two month old data like we have been getting on financial reports and gov’t viability plans all along, right?
Um, no…apparently the ‘update’ on their cash position has nothing to do with how much cash they have, but rather GM takes the opportunity to mention (again) they won’t be needing that extra 2 billion they said they needed three weeks ago (that no one intended to actually give them anyway)
Mar 14th, 2009 (7:54 pm)#70 Todd Crenshaw said:
Am I the only one that read that GM has pass on the next 2B request on the government loan? They say that their cost cutting is kicking in and they don’t need the help at this time.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/12/gm-says-it-doesnt-need-2b-loan/
===========================
Yeah, we had some discussions on it.
Basically what happened was as soon as GM got their 13.4B, they put a addendum out, saying they were going to need another 2B in march, and 2.6B in april. Apparently ‘cost cutting’ has been so great between Feb 17th, and March 11th (22days), GM doesn’t need that dough.
Myself, being the resident pessimist, chalks this to the viability deadline being up in a couple weeks, and they have to show some hope for future success (given the failure to convert bondholders, reduce worker’s salaries in any meaningful way or somehow stop the year over year auto sales numbers from jumping off a cliff and making there ‘baseline’ sales for viability plan at 12.5 million vehicles look more and more ridiculous).
What better why to show you are doing better, then by saying you need a whole bunch more money 3 weeks ago…then today, turnaround and say you don’t actually need the 2 billion dollars now because cost cutting measures are working so well. “Huzzah! We don’t need that extra 2 billion now…we are doing just as well as we were 3 weeks ago now! That has to be a success story!”
Mar 14th, 2009 (8:17 pm)Static, I don’t think you’re the resident pessimist because even a pessimist has good things to say from time to time! In this case though I have to agree with you. It looks good for GM to not take the money, but isn’t that the world we live in today – a world of perception not reality? If they look like they are doing better there will be an increase in investment by many who have no clue how to evaluate the current situation. This investment possibly will help to pull GM out of their current position and therefore their perception actually causes a positive reality for GM. Stranger things have happened!
Todd
PS – I am also a pessimist. Being so greatly reduces disappointments and allows for pleasant surprises when things do go right. I want my Volt so I’m certainly hoping to be surprised, but until the economy improves, I’m not expecting it, at least not under the Chevy/GM brand.
Mar 14th, 2009 (8:35 pm)Todd Crenshaw “If they look like they are doing better there will be an increase in investment by many who have no clue how to evaluate the current situation.”
___________________________
Looking better that’s the ticket. Didn’t the market go up a smidge momentarily yesterday on the hopeful feelings of pre-euphoria from GM’s announcement. If you hadn’t been following closely, hearing that announcement would sound pretty darn good after all the bad news we’ve been hammered with for so long.
Mar 14th, 2009 (8:41 pm)The VOLT, although a wonderful excersize in enginnering, will not be the car to save GM. The Chevy Cruize is that car. And it needs to be perfect right out of the box.
The VOLT is good PR for the next 2 to 4 years, again if it is perfect out of the box But at 40 large it will be only for the early adopters and the glitterotty of Hollywood.
It is the Chevy Cruize that will make or break GM in the near future.
Today, I learned the Toyota will offer a Hybrid car in the near future that competes in price with New Honda Insight. Both cars are third generation hybrids.
We can talk all we want to about the superiority of the VOLT version 1.0, but even if magical forest creatures can out and spread fairy dust over the VOLT and it magically came out at 30 thousand, it would still be too expensive for the average American. Even with the 7500 dollar tax insentive. Remember, you only get that money after you do your taxes for the year as a tax return. It does not come off the top of the price of the vehicle.
Lets do some math. Lets say the fairy dust has been spread and the VOLT is 30 grand for the base model. Even if you put 10,000 dollars as a down payment, you monthly car paymets will be over 600 dollars a month for 5 years at current interest rates for new cars. Lets not forget the higher initial sales taxes, yearly property taxes and insurance on the 30,000 dollar car you will pay on it.
It is the Cruize that will generate the cash needed to develop VOLT version 2.0.
Mar 14th, 2009 (8:47 pm)Lots of battery pricing information in this article(and not in a good way):
Grand Visions at the Geneva Auto Show
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,611348,00.html
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:01 pm)Statik #60
Well I had typed a nice big response but it got lost in posting. Basically, I think there was a little poetic license in intepreting GM’s comments about the Volt’s profitability in the beginning to mean 5-6 years. I don’t really believe Mr. Lutz or GM’s other management much more than you when it comes to their public announcements but I also extend this to their claims of selling at loss for $40,000. It’s a lot easier to sell something for $40,000 and that price is a bit of a stretch for the product but you convince the buyer that you are losing money at it so it can’t be any cheaper. I’m not saying I’m convinced this is the case but is certainly a possibility.
As for the EREV market in 5-6 years. I doubt it will have settled in to be multiple vendors offering very similar products and thus primarily price driven by then. There are so many opportunities.to iterate and innovate that GM has an opportunity to stay ahead of the curve without having to have the cheapest product on the block. This is not their strength and doubt it ever will be, even with successful restructuring. They just need to be able to compete effectively with Toyota, Honda, etc. My optimism doesn’t stem from any great respect for what GM has done or is doing (other than the Volt). It’s the technology that encourages me. They have missed on a couple of things with the Volt thus far, IMO, but have gotten it mostly right. As long as they truely understand what they have and apply it properly to the markets, I do think they have a tremendous opportunity with Voltec and can see the path to them selling vehicles with this technology profitiably in 5-6 years. Who knows though, time will tell.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:06 pm)#63 statik
We’ll see whether GM or the German government blinks first. As I understand it, the problem for Opel is that GM has all the patents and those patents are collateral for secure debt. Consequently, if Opel truly splits off from GM, it’s simply not viable. Elections are coming in Germany so we’ll see how all this works out.
#64 N. Riley says “I have been watching a Fox News story about the bail-out bills and the budget bills entitled “Two Trillion Dollars with a “T””
This is like getting your news from Xin Hua about American aggression and unfair business practices. Fox News? Are you kidding me? The same network that was the #1 cheerleader for the Iraq War — which has already wasted the $2T dollars they’re so concerned about — and the same network which still trumpets the success of the Bush economic policy. You know, the economic policy premised on the idea that riding a wave of asset inflation created by Asian dollars actually equated with real economic growth rather than an unsustainable bubble. Yes, that policy. The one that has landed us in this horrible financial mess we find ourselves in today.
As for the spending, David Brooks, the well respected conservative commentator (a founding editor of the Weekly Standard), has written that the congressional Republicans are completely useless because, in his words, “after a decade of profligacy, the Republicans have decided to demand a rigid fiscal straitjacket at the one moment in the past 70 years when it is completely inappropriate.” IOW, the spending is perfectly reasonable, the only question being whether it’s large enough.
In this regard, while Fox explicitly claims it broadcasts opinion and not news — which allows it to escape legal responsibility for all the misinformation it spreads — saying that there has been no impact stretches even their rather non-existent journalistic standards. First, as a factual matter, the programs put in place by the Federal Reserve have had a definite impact on borrowing and interest rates. Any journalist covering this story should know that.
Second, no real journalist would expect to see any impact from the all the money that has been spent because, as a factual matter, it HASN’T BEEN SPENT yet. The money has been appropriated. But until it goes out the door it hasn’t been spent. The income tax cuts won’t kick in for another month. The tax credits for EVs like the Volt won’t start until EVs like the Volt are sold. The programs for helping home owners stay in their houses were just announced last week. It’s the difference between deciding to buy a TV and actually going to the store and buying it. Big difference. But really, how hard can this be?
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:09 pm)I actually showed up because there is a very interesting article in the NY Times Greentech section about how the role of an ICE changes for a car like the Volt. It contains an interesting discussion of why GM picked the 1.4L (Hint: it was the engine closest to generating the 67 HP needed). Also a teaser about a new 1L engine for the second generation of the Volt.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/automobiles/15CHARGE.html?ref=automobiles
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:11 pm)Distraction over: Here is a very interesting article in the NY Times Greentech section about how the role of an ICE changes for a car like the Volt. It contains an interesting discussion of why GM picked the 1.4L (Hint: it was the engine closest to generating the 67 HP needed). Also a teaser about a new 1L engine for the second generation of the Volt.
Sorry, can’t post the link Just go to the NY Times site, then go to Autos (on the top left in the blue). It’s the third article down.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:14 pm)DonC #78
My fingers thank you. Fox News, HA! Oxymoron if there ever was one.
Sorry, N. Riley, I like your comments but how much did FOX say has actually been spent?
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:30 pm)For me, the Volt seems about 10 years too late. Even if you lose money, having a production volt sends a powerful message that GM is an innovative company. Had they followed up the EV-1 with a volt like car 10 years ago, they might have had time to build a better image that could have hopefully put them in a better position for times like today. For me, I remember seeing an EV-1 on the road in the mid 90s. I was blown away, here was this futuristic looking electric car that I hadn’t even heard about. I thought that the future was finally here and GM was leading the pack. I was soooo close to becoming a GM convert, but I never saw an EV-1 again, and I fell back into my japanese car buying ways. I give GM a lot of credit for developing the Volt now, but in my mind, it is way too late.
Mar 14th, 2009 (9:32 pm)DonC #79
On queue for my #77.
I think they’ve been reading my past comments, LOL.
Mar 15th, 2009 (12:29 am)DonC,
As for Fox news, couldn’t agree more.
Statik,
I would think at this point it seems pretty obvious to most that the only reason we maintain the ruse that the feds will let gm fail is to get a deal done with the bond holders. To quote someone who has a pretty large say in whether they are aloud to fail or not.
“I don’t think the country that invented the automobile should walk away from its makers”
John1701A,
“Not mentioned is the $7500 tax credit already approved for the first 500,000 buyers of the car.
_____________________________
That’s because reliance on it doesn’t inspire confidence. Gambling on a big price drop soon doesn’t either.”
Funny you see it that way being a Penis i mean Prius lover, isn’t tax rebates and gas prices what got the prius off the ground and out of the red for Toyota?
Mar 15th, 2009 (12:40 am)the chevy volt will make GM viable in the long term some 3 to 4 years from now. but they have to be competitive. now the best option is to get the latest mit batteries so we can justify the cost and therefore export to the world. GM should only export and not make it in asia. let the asians pay for the volt with their hard earned money. but we should have that kind of tech and price of oil must go up gradually
Mar 15th, 2009 (3:22 am)…isn’t tax rebates and gas prices what got the prius off the ground and out of the red for Toyota?
_____________________________
107,897 Prius were sold here in 2005, which was before any tax credit was available.
119,855 was the total for the years leading up to 2005.
So the answer is a clear: No
Mar 15th, 2009 (3:44 am)Also, let’s not forget what else happened in 2005, before the tax credit…
17,954 sales of Highlander-Hybrid here (launched June 2005)
11,774 sales of RX-400h here (launched April 2005)
Expansion to a very different platform (AWD SUV) provided a big influence on the technology.
Mar 15th, 2009 (7:44 am)#19 Redeye Says: To get expectations for a Volt in the $30,000 or lower range and then come out with it at a price of $40,000 would be a disaster.
————————————————————————————–
I have no idea where this $40,000 keeps coming from.
Here’s the latest I’ve heard from GM:
GM VP John Lauckner indicated he expects the Volt to cost in the mid 30s…
http://gm-volt.com/2008/10/17/car-and-driver-on-the-volt-tens-of-thousands-in-first-year-generation-two-after-5-years/
So after the tax credit, the Volt should be less than $30K, or probably around $30K with taxes and fees.
Mar 15th, 2009 (9:23 am)#73 Todd Crenshaw said:
PS – I am also a pessimist. Being so greatly reduces disappointments and allows for pleasant surprises when things do go right. I want my Volt so I’m certainly hoping to be surprised, but until the economy improves, I’m not expecting it, at least not under the Chevy/GM brand
——————
This is how I look at it myself…very true
===========================
===========================
#77 koz
I appreciate your rebuttal comments. You make some good points and you have put some real thought into it.
===========================
===========================
Mar 15th, 2009 (9:26 am)#78 DonC
I had a good laugh about your reaction to Fox news, and your obscure Xin Hua reference. Thanks, lol.
Mar 15th, 2009 (11:43 am)statik Says:
March 14th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
I like the passive aggression there Lyle.
——
As for the rest of it, I think we need to remember the basic principle of the auto business–”Sell cars at a profit” The Volt does not achieve this goal realistically at any point in the next 5-6 years…and GM only has enough cash to put change in the meter for another few weeks.
————-
Statik, your rap bores me greatly. Kills me how important you think your opinion is ….the way you rush here daily to deposit your crap. You seem to understand these facts … I guess I’ll take some satisfaction from that, and chalk it the rest up to the “quirky Canadian with US envy” phenomena.
Mar 15th, 2009 (12:00 pm)#26 noel park says, “Too many engineers here, LOL. It makes you stop and think though. ONly 7 more years to the REAL Pi Day (3/14/16)…”
Some of us will be celebrating early (at 3/14/15 9:26:53.6).
And I didn’t even have to look it up!
Mar 15th, 2009 (12:23 pm)I remain convinced that there’s strong evidence they’ll be able to make huge profits on the Volt from the very beginning in 2010.
_________________________
It’s statements like that which result in the skepticism.
Modest profit by the start of year 2 may be arguable, but even evidence of that isn’t available. In fact, all the talk of the second generation seem to indicate quite the opposite. So does the continued investment in BAS.
Remember, the first year will primarily only be in select markets.
SMTD
Mar 15th, 2009 (5:11 pm)Statik #89
“I appreciate your rebuttal comments. You make some good points and you have put some real thought into it.”
This is plain scary. Who are you and what have you done to the real Statik? LOL
I suppose the had run its course.
Mar 15th, 2009 (11:44 pm)The answer is fuel cell vehicles using hydrnol for the
hydrogen.
http://www.asemblon.com/hydrnol/faq
The Volt is too expensive and will remain too expensive. Lithium
ION batteries are already mass produced and the fact is there is
a Lithium shortage. Worse, Lithium comes from unstable and unfriendly parts of the world. It’s not possible to replace a
significant number of vehicles with Lithium ION E-Rev’s. You
have to replace 25% of the cars on the road or more than that
to make a significant improvement. This can’t be done with Lithium
ION batteries. The sooner GM shifts it’s focus to fixing the Sequel
and bringing it to commercial viability, the better. Companies that
don’t focus on fuel cell vehicles are going to go under in the long
term.
Mar 16th, 2009 (9:42 am)#35,
I keep hearing these statistics but my ’97 Discovery starts first time, every time. I don’t drive it a lot because it IS hard on fuel, it’s primary mission in life is to pull my camper. But it has been absolutely reliable, with the exception of a failed cluch slave which required a ride on the flatbed a few years back.
#50,
Absolutely! at least twice a week I need to go farther than the ideal battery range running kids to “activities” on those days my daily driving total will easily go over 100km. A pure electric, even a tesla wouldn’t likely have the range with the heater running the whole time would be hard pressed to get me home. No range extender no sale.
Mar 16th, 2009 (10:08 am)I was at the Calgary car show on the weekend and was struck by the incredible blandness of it…
As expected, no VOLT ‘sigh’…
However the new Camaro is beautiful. It occured to me that a voltec powered Camaro convertible would be a very attractive ride. It would certainly appeal to a different group of people like myself who still have kids at home but who are approaching middle age (mid 40′s) and want a bit of style with the responsibility.
I want to have a nice car, it doesn’t need to break the speed of light but does need to be fun to drive. I think there is a place for a stylish car that a person would want because it’s nice to look at and drive, oh by the way it’s pretty damn green too. (I really dislike the term ‘green’ but there it is)
Ford pulled it off in the 70′s with the mini pony mustangs, fuel saving somewhat stylish cars (by 70′s standards which were VERY low!).
A Camaro would be a very pretty poster child for the lets take care of the world in style crowd. Yes you would lose some range etc with a convertible body style, but I think you could gain sales. (A hardtop would be OK too of course, it’s just that I want a ‘ragtop’!)
Mar 16th, 2009 (2:03 pm)#92 Bob G:
LOL. Thanks, I needed that after reading all of the above.
Mar 17th, 2009 (6:09 pm)GM is dead. Get over it.
Mar 18th, 2009 (7:07 am)I think the introduction of battery powered vehicles needs to go hand-in-hand with the increase of fuel taxes. Otherwise there will be too little motivation to go off oil. Lessening demand for oil (thanks to EV-s) will drive down the price of oil and therefore also slow the adoption of EV-s. Of course too rapid adoption of EV-s will create it’s own problems but if we want a world with most vehicles EV-s AND still some oil left in the ground for other purposes than driving, the tax rise is inevitable.
In fact, the increased tax on fuel should be used for 1) battery research, 2) electrig grid and generation development, 3) financing the development of EV-s and purchase credits.