Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Volt Becoming the New Edsel?!

April 10th, 2009 | Posted in: Public Opinion

Automotive opinion pieces in the Wall Street Journal always seem to come out against the Volt, but this one takes the cake.

Editorial board member Stephen Moore penned a piece called A Top-Down Approach To Auto Rescue. He noted himself to be a vocal opponent of the tens of billions in bailout dollars being given to GM and Chrysler, but admitted ” his heart leapt” when he heard the new Camaro was coming out.

He waxed poetic about his love affairs with Camaros he’s owned, the euphoria of driving them and the pleasure of watching the envy and admiration of others.

He noted he’s averse to protectionist policy of “buy American” but admits to feeling a patriotic duty to do so nonetheless. Moore says he believes the return of the Camaro is the first “bullish” sign from the US auto industry.

He does not seem too impressed with the idea of green cars though. He expresses rightful concern about the government running the car companies and feels that the result will be “small, unremarkable ‘green’ cars that get good gas mileage but don’t go fast, don’t look cool and don’t make your pulse race.”

He writes “If GM makes a comeback, it will be thanks not to the green dream battery-operated Volt (which is already becoming the new Edsel) but to cars people want to drive.”

Do you agree?

Source (WSJ.com)

Posted by: Lyle

206 Responses to “Volt Becoming the New Edsel?!”

charlie h Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:52 am

Moore should have explained why he considered it the new Edsel. Just throwing it out there is pointless.

(Quote)
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:54 am

No way. The Volt is What I want a camaro which uses too much gas is just that another car which uses too much gas.
Thank God we have people who have sense. Does Steven Moore have money invested in Big Oil?
Take Care TED

(Quote)
baccman Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:54 am

Guys like his are the reason why we are at this point

(Quote)
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:57 am

#3 I agree. This economy will never get above the ceiling of peak oil until we get off of oil.
Take Care,
TED

(Quote)
Tom C Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:07 am

Ok
Old way of thinking in the new world order.
I would like to know why people like Mr. Moore thinks he is speaking for the American auto buyers, I don’t remember him or anyone asking me what I wanted in my next car
Oil or a Plug?

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:10 am

I had hoped the Tesla Roadster had purged the stigma that EV’s are slow and lame – guess not. Hybrids like the Pries are dogs, and the Volt propulsion system is nothing like the Prius.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:14 am

Just a guy with an opinion and zero facts (or if he has facts, he failed to disclose them) to support his position. Maybe to much Atlas Shrugged influence?

I have no problem with what he is saying, he is just basically giving an opinion.

The SUN is out today! Spring may be near?

(Quote)
Bill C Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:14 am

Wonder if the Edsel had a waiting list of almost 50,000? Supposedly knowledgeable people are making an awful lot of assumptions about a car they’ve never driven (the real feel), seen parked in a driveway (mine would be cool), twittled the knobs, or even know what the production features will be.

Not that the Camero isn’t cool, and that direct injected V6 is doing some neat things, but given the opportunity they ought to be rooting for our car.

(Quote)
Soda72 Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:16 am

If GM could sell a volt for 20K, have it go from 0 to 60 in 6.0 seconds, and be able to replace the batteries for $500.00, they wouldn’t be able to build them fast enough to sell to the public. However that’s not what’s going to happen.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:17 am

He writes “If GM makes a comeback, it will be thanks not to the green dream battery-operated Volt (which is already becoming the new Edsel) but to cars people want to drive.”

Duh…. A manufacturer can build whatever they want (as long as it’s not with my tax money) but in the end, buyers must (a) WANT to own the product, (b) be able to get the loans or have the cash to buy the product, and (c) have the well paying, long-term jobs in order to earn the money to pay for it. Social(ist) “works” projects don’t create stable long-term jobs or “stimulate” anything but public debt and inflation!

As much as it pains me to say it, EVs will NOT be successful as long as gas is cheap and plentiful no matter where it comes from.

The auto manufacturers, statist central planners and pundants seem to be ignoring this simple economic fact in order to seek/justify corporate (un)wel(not)fare redistribution and grab for unconstitutional power.

(Quote)
Matt Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:22 am

I can see Moore’s point. While I don’t think the Volt is the new Edsel, there is something to be said for having an emotional connection with a vehicle. The Volt is meant for someone to go to a dealer and say: “Wow, 40 miles without using any gasoline. That would really cut down on my fuel costs” The Camaro, though, is meant for someone who goes to the dealer and says: “Wow.” Design and sex appeal make connections that fuel economy just cannot. Witness the outcry over the change from Volt Concept to production Volt, or the revolutionary change when GM introduced Harley Earl and the Style Division.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:23 am

This is to be expected.

Many people lack vision. They only identify with what they have experienced in the past, and then just take that past experience and project it into the future. When a game changing paradigm shift occurs, these people usually dismiss it.

12 years ago, I’ll bet this WSJ guy thought the Internet wouldn’t amount to much…

(Quote)
Gsned57 Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:25 am

The volt is not going to have the performance of a tesla roadster. based on what I’ve been getting from this site it will be much closer in 0-60 and top speed to the prius. I can appreciate the Camaro, but in my driveway the wife’s Prius is the fast car (the alternative is my 86 Vanagon). I can see how the people who want a fast car and want a high performance car won’t want the Volt. I just don’t think they realize how many people would rather get the plug than the performance. I’d love to have a fast car, but my budget won’t get a Tesla and I won’t buy anything new without a plug (and an all EV range of at least 20 miles at any speed). Stephen Moore just doesn’t want the same car as me. I only hope that GM realizes that he doesn’t speak for Every car buyer out there.

(Quote)
Howard Buckalew Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:28 am

Let me guess, Stephen Moore did not like last years Camaro, so he is waiting for next years model to buy. Oh, wait, he did not like the past three years model, oh wait, how long has it been since the Camero stopped production. I am sure sales kept up with the Mustang? Right? Sorry Stephen, there are not enough of you to have kept that line of cars in production. Your ideas of a good car are old hat, tired, and worn out.

The Volt will be a game changer.

Just look at the race to acheive no gas for 40-60 miles. The next race will be the solar/battery recharge unit. Solar cells in the day to charge up a discarge battery ready to plug and feed into your car at night. By-By imported oil.. See Ya!!

(Quote)
BillR Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:31 am

Actually, I think he makes some good points.

1) “Now that the politicians are running the auto companies, we’re likely to see Detroit rolling out small, unremarkable “green” cars that get good gas mileage but don’t go fast, don’t look cool and don’t make your pulse race.”

I am quite scared at having no mind politicians telling GM what to do, just in exchange for a low interest loan. This is a recipe for disaster.

2) “My uncle was brutally treated in a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp. So my mother ingrained in me at an early age the moral imperative of never buying a Japanese car…. I’ve always felt a patriotic duty to purchase American cars.”

I didn’t feel this patriotic duty when I was younger, and owned several foreign vehicles. However, when I started to see this nationalistic attitude in other countries (what percent of cars in Japan are imported?), I realized I needed to be patriotic and support my fellow Americans.

3) “It’s the first bullish sign for the big three auto makers that a classic like the Camaro is making a comeback, though the folks in Washington will complain that a gas guzzler like this is a menace to the planet.”

I’m sure there will be enthusiasts for the Camaro. I’m not sure this will save GM either. Although 29 mpg on the hwy for the V6 is good, GM needs to go further (perhaps 2-mode). Just like the ’80’s, it will take 4 or 5 years of steady low gas prices (~$2 per gallon) before people are comfortable with the idea of buying gas guzzlers.

4) “If GM makes a comeback, it will be thanks not to the green dream battery-operated Volt (which is already becoming the new Edsel) but to cars people want to drive.”

He is correct on one fact, a GM comeback will be thanks to cars that people want to drive. What he doesn’t understand is that the Volt WILL be a car that people want to drive. And GM understands this.

That’s why they are taking a great deal of time to make sure the Volt is high quality, efficient, quick, and well-mannered.

If the Volt is fun to drive, quiet, has a good driving feel (no sudden acceleration or deacceleration), and can return the economy as projected – why wouldn’t someone want to drive it? I think Mr. Moore just doesn’t realize how nice the driving experience will really be with the Volt.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:32 am

How ’bout that iMiev! Or better yet, an iMiev with fuel cells and a solar panel on the roof.

Just kidding…I know how “tickled” people get on this subject

(Quote)
ClarksonCote Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:32 am

It appears Mr. Moore has been drinking the big-oil kool aid.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:37 am

#11 Matt Says: Design and sex appeal make connections that fuel economy just cannot.
————————————————————————————–
That’s changing. Saving gasoline is not about saving money. It’s about saving our national security.

When a suicide bomber strikes, they do so knowing their family will be financially set for life. That’s oil money.

Oil exporting nations are getting more powerful. That means our president has to bow to the king of Saudi Arabia. It means Russia can afford ignore our pleas to help stop Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. It means Hugo Chavez can do whatever he wants with impunity.

As these things become more and more obvious, more people will start having an intense emotional desire against using oil.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:43 am

This guy sounds like my brother. He just bought a Dodge pickup with the biggest engine he could find last week.

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:49 am

The Camaro is a grit car – all flash and no panache. Even though I’m a hillwilliam myself, it has no appeal for me – no confusion of sexuality with sheetmetal penile envy delight and no way to get in the back seat either.
If GM can eventually fix the Volt pricing problem and gasoline goes back to $4(say Israel hits Iranian Nuke facility) and battery development continues apace and Toyodor and Houndog don’t undermine the market and etc, the Volt may be a success.
So what’s new about the WSJ column? Just Moore bad opinion reporting – ala that phony Michael Moore. WSJ should be ashamed for printing drivel.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:50 am

18 DaveG
“That’s changing. Saving gasoline is not about saving money. It’s about saving our national security.”
===================================================
No, it’s all about the kids……

Come on, lets try to keep this in scope. If we want to draw the conclusion, that saving oil saves lives, then lets draw all the other similar conclusions.
Like:
1) Wearing leather takes lives of cows
2) Buying clothing supports overseas sweatshops
3) Buying coffee supports S American terrorists.
4) Eating at McDonalds, causes increased health care costs, which in turn takes money away from worthy causes like, feeding children in the third world.
5) Breathing air depletes oxygen levels, and indirectly is destroying our ozone layer.

While we can always relate any “habit” to an underlying issue, lets try to focus on reality and what will actually make a difference on how people consume.

(Quote)
Thomas Gilling Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:54 am

How Wonderful the new Gas Drinking Camero! Asthma, Cancer and Smog Alert’s are also wonderful as well. Who cares about about electric car’s with “15′ wheels” when you can give some one an illness! And also I don’t like the horrible F1 car noises, only the idiot’s at Shell would encourage that!

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:57 am

19 Arch

Does your brother require a truck with a large engine? People in the trades cannot get by with a 6-cyl Dodge Dakota.

Just wondering..

(Quote)
Curt Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:07 am

The Camaro is the first bullish sign from the auto industry? He says this, as though the auto industry is rebounding from financial woes with a macho in-your-face hot rod? The new Camaro has long been in the works and is in no way a response to financial trends. It is a late bloomer compared to simalr concepts such as the Dodge Charge that has been out for quite awhile. When gas hits $4 and higher again, I can tell you, I won’t be held hostage, extending my manhood with a gas guzzler. (That said, I love the new Camaro…)

(Quote)
Harrier 1970 Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:13 am

The Camero coming back is a bad sign, not a good one. Harking back to a “better time” (in Mr. Moore’s opinion), when you could drive your gas guzzler and not feel guilty (or the pinch in your pocket from high gas prices). The SUV and the “Muscle Car” are exactly the opposite of what car companies need to be creating right now, no matter where they are based.

The author shows his ignorance in many ways, most notibly on the question of speed and power. Mr. Moore, who undoubtably sported his mullet proudly through the 80’s, looks at the world that used to be rather than the one that CAN be. An electric car like the Volt can rocket you forward at any speed thanks to its electric motor. To be completely fair, the Volt is not as sexy as something like the Tesla Model S, but it is meant for a wider audience. You could not expect a married couple to be toting their brood around in a camero. This car is about getting the widest audience, from young environmentalists to older folks who just want a great car. Yes, the Volt is all that, it is quite “remarkable.”

(Quote)
Edwin Mang Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:13 am

I know someone thinks I am Lancer , But no I am not Lancer .

Tiger is from the Bush admin . and not about to bluff .

Ask Al Quida .

God Bless

(Quote)
old man Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:20 am

I think the Camero looks great and if it could go up to 40 miles with no gas it would make the Volt an Edsel. It isn’t and the Volt will out sell it at least 2-1 and in a few years 10-1. Most will look at the Camero and want one while realizing they will not buy one due to a desire to own the Volt like their friend who almost never buys gas. That is why I said 2-1 at first then 10-1 in time. I again talk about the familys that live on my street only one family with 3 small children would not want the Volt. And shortly when Voltec is on larger cars even they will want one.

(Quote)
Charlie Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:20 am

I suggest you give him a test drive in one of the sporty electric cars….put a $100 bill on the dash and stomp on the accelerator. Given his wall street need for greed he won’t forget how difficult it was to grab…should be an interesting test for that head snapping performance he thinks he’ll be missing.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:21 am

This is starting to look like fun.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_12110128

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:23 am

People will “want to drive” the Volt when gas is $5.00 a gallon.

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:23 am

Edsel (1958-60) = “… barely average performance and an above-average number of assembly-related flaws.”

____________________________

In the 50’s Ford spent $400 million to develop the Edsel. It was a heavy car which sported an oval vertical OX collar grill. The Edsel didn’t catch on as planned although similar models manufactured at the same plant did well.

I can see Stephen Moore making a comparison between a V W Beetle and a Porsche. The Bug having several quality flaws and the Porsche being the street burning gas hog. The production Volt hasn’t been released so I don’t follow the Edsel connection to the Volt.

=D~

(Quote)
Arch Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:25 am

#23 JEC

NO! He got it to pull his 5th wheel camper. He has a state office job during the week.

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
spelcheker persin Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:26 am

It’s CAMARO people, not CAMERO.

(Quote)
way up in my grill Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:27 am

Edsel (1958-60) = “… barely average performance and an above-average number of assembly-related flaws.”

____________________________

In the 50’s Ford spent $400 million to develop the Edsel. It was a heavy car which sported an oval vertical OX collar grill. The Edsel didn’t catch on as planned although similar models manufactured at the same plant did well.

I can see Stephen Moore making a comparison between a V W Beetle and a Porsche. The Bug having several quality flaws and the Porsche being the street burning gas hog. The production Volt hasn’t been released so I don’t follow the Edsel connection to the Volt.

(Quote)
hermant Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:28 am

I think Stephen Moore is right on the money. Why can’t we all just chill about eco-friendly and churn up some rear wheel rubber. Power and influence make the world go round, but horsepower makes my tires go round. Slide me into a beautiful new Camaro and I’m at home in America. Force me to drive a greenie, tree hugging, tin can and I’m lost in my own driveway. Hey, JMHO! Enjoy.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:29 am

Arch (#29)

Good article, thanks!

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:35 am

Heramant @33
_________________________

No one is forcing you to buy one car or another. All these cars – Camaro , Corvette, Mustang, etc. will be range extended ELECTRIC vehicles some day (I trust).

They will be MORE fun to drive and use very little liquid fuel.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:37 am

Stephen Moore probably prefers Little Debbies over vegetables.

(Quote)
The Grump Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:38 am

Just another s-l-o-w Volt newsday.

IMHO, Moore seems to be another one of the type of writers you see in “Car and Driver” magazine. The Camero opinion was a dead give-away. He has that “More horsepower good, less horsepower bad” mentality prevelant in the hot rod magazines.

Like Mamma Grump always told me about opinions, “consider the source”.

(Quote)
Guy Incognito Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:39 am

38.
Guy Incognito Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:39 am

Would’nt the Volt have to be in production, like the Edsel was, in order to be called a flop?
Can a car that’s not in production, not available to the general public, be labeled a flop?

(Quote)
Sheltonjr Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:42 am

I love and want the Volt. That is why I cant resist coming to this site every day. But I also love convertibles. My current car is a ‘86 CJ-7, with Top and Doors off. You cant get more open than that.

I would be willing to give up the 5 miles AER to have a convertible. Maybe it wont be that bad, I never would have to run the AC.

I would wait for a Convertible option for the Volt, but I dont think GM would ever create one.

(Quote)
Van Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:43 am

If you replaced the 110 kW motor in the Volt with the 200 kW motor of the Raser SUV, the Volt would make the Camaro look like the new Edsel, appealing to yesterday’s market.

As for the Volt, its problem is mass market lines with a niche market price. Thus the “electric Camaro” with a more powerful motor and a more powerful (12 kWh SOC window) battery might make better sense.
Time will tell

(Quote)
Dragger Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:44 am

god- it went from “i’d buy that in a second” to “don’t park that crap in front of my house”
WTG- think we are blind and stupid, keep up the same crap you’ve been doing for a couple of decades …. enjoy the bankruptcy

(Quote)
Thomas Gilling Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:47 am

33.
What hermant are you crazy! Why do the people who drive car’s want some big gas thing. Is it not enough that there is horrible Petroleum car’s out there. That should be taken back and distorted just like GM did to the EV1.

(Quote)
solo2500 Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:52 am

This guy is an idiot.

The U.S. auto industry needs desperately (as far as products) is a broad portfolio of vehicles and flexible plants that can switch from 1 product to another in months, not years. They (the U.S. auto industry) were too truck heavy and their cars were almost afterthoughts.

There is no reason you cant have Volt like products, full hybrid products, performance cars, and trucks so long as you can adjust your product mix quickly to accommodate rapid market changes.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:57 am

Soda72 #9 Says: “If GM could sell a volt for 20K, have it go from 0 to 60 in 6.0 seconds, and be able to replace the batteries for $500.00, they wouldn’t be able to build them fast enough to sell to the public. However that’s not what’s going to happen.”

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

I should also be making what Donald Trump makes, live in a $10M mansion, and have Victoria’s Secret models chasing after me, but that isn’t going to happen either….. I think it is time you come back to Earth from your dreamland.

As to the original article: I have driven sporty cars most of my life, except for an unhappy period with a Ford Bronco in 79 (73 Ford Mach 1 – 86 Chrysler Laser – 91 Dodge Stealth – 01 Mitsubishi Eclipse – 04 Chrysler Crossfire) and I can’t wait for the Volt! So maybe he doesn’t speak for ALL car buyers!!!

(Quote)
Jess C. in Michigan Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:01 am

Give us a Volt powertrain with a Camaro body.
That way our kids can have the best of both worlds.

(Quote)
emartin Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:06 am

If energy become abundant again, electric cars will offer, by far, more performance, and allow much more sexy designs than any cars that are constraint to contain a big ICE.

My opinion is that, if the energy become available as it was, the “golden age” of cars is ahead of us, and the electric car will be at the center of it.

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:07 am

We’ll be seeing an “only electric” car dealership soon.

You won’t be seeing many Tundras parked in front of the government-mandated fuel-efficiency standards meetings.

=D~

(Quote)
Xed Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:07 am

“small, unremarkable ‘green’ cars that get good gas mileage but don’t go fast, don’t look cool and don’t make your pulse race.”

If that isn’t the stereotypical American macho BS attitude that directly contributed to this whole situation then I don’t know what is.

How about “every time an American puts gas in their car they’re directly funding people who want to kill them”. Then you can slap a big ol’ bumper sticker on your Camero that says “My car help kill Americans faster than your car.”

- Xed (an American and a patriot that’s tired of all the BS)

(Quote)
jdsv Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:22 am

And this Stephen Moore got paid to write an article like this? On behalf of alums of the U of I everywhere (and if George Mason alums would like, they can jump in, too), I disown this poor, shortsighted excuse of an economist.

Loving Rush Limbaugh I can forgive, pinning hope on Palin I can pity, but dissing all green cars to jabber on about the gas guzzler he’s married to? That’s just not right. He can take his flat tax and gas bill and shove them where the sun won’t shine.

quote: ‘I loathe the United Auto Workers union, but I admire the grit and work ethic of American hard-hat workers — even if they foolishly fork over part of their paychecks to union bosses.’

True, the UAW is a certain breed of parasite, but I don’t think he should talk like this, having never experienced dirt under his pedicured fingernails. What a pathetic piece.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:27 am

306 HP and 29 MPG on the highway. (and that’s just the V6 model)

There will always be high perfomance cars, whether gas or electric or hybrid. It’s just going to take another generation before the rumble of an American V8 fades into the distance of that long, lonesome highway…

From what I’ve read on this website, a high performance electric car with 400+ miles range is not that far away. Have patience guys.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:34 am

What a thing to say! I know we all have freedom of speech but I would not pass or propagate this garbage!!!! The world has certainly change from my younger days. I’m sure glad I was not born in this era.

(Quote)
Mark Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:34 am

I like the Camaro. I like cheap oil. I dislike boring cars. I dislike the cost of green cars.

I do not believe the govenment can run auto companies. I do not believe that GM’s cash burn is sustainable. I do not believe Chrysler run by Cerebus and stripped by Diamler will survive.

The Volt will loose money for GM, our tax dollars will be used to offset it’s cost, and there will be no reutrn to the consumer versus the nineteen thousand dollar Camry, Accord, Malibu, and Altima.

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:38 am

The Volt has never been about near term profits. It’s a HALO car, meant to restore GM’s image, and maybe make a profit of the tech in 6 or 7 years.

While Stephen’s name calling was unnecessary, I agree with his concerns about the gov’t running GM. When the Commander in Chief can oust your CEO and select your product line, the hair on my neck starts to stand up.

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:39 am

30mpg sports car + $2.00 gas = a market for this car.

It’s going to be sometime, before the majority thinks green = cool

It needs to hit their pocketbooks first

(Quote)
brad Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:42 am

What a nice picture of the new camaro. If I wasn’t planning on getting a Volt the Camaro would be my next choice. I am and will always be a muscle car fan. I’m looking forward to the day when I can get an electric Vette. GM really is the only car company thinking of making a decent looking electric car for the masses.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:42 am

Raser Technologies E-REV SUV coming to Detroit, promises 100+ mpg

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/04/10/raser-technologies-e-rev-suv-coming-to-detroit-promises-100-mp/

I love these reports of wonderful new technologies that leave out one little detail… PRICE!

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:55 am

#21 JEC — “If we want to draw the conclusion, that saving oil saves lives, then lets draw all the other similar conclusions.”

First, you misquoted him. He didn’t say anything about lives. He said it was a national security issue.

Second, no one should seriously argue with that. There is a reason why both conservative and liberal national security advisers agree on this point, and why former CIA Director Woolsey drives a Prius with a bumper sticker that says “OPEC hates this car”.

Your counter examples are silly because the dollars involved are minimal and the recipients of those dollars aren’t identified. For example, if we were sending $750B to Mexican drug cartels then cocaine would be a national security concern. Heck we send $1B now and it’s a problem. If we sent $750B a year to Iran for coffee we would have a national security problem. What’s so hard to comprehend?

It’s beyond me why you or anyone else would think it’s a fine idea to fund regimes which in turn fund terrorist groups that attack us. Next you’ll be claiming that we should be sending billions to Somali pirates so they can better equip and train themselves to attack our ships.

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:57 am

Xed @ 48:

Your stereotypical attitude about cars like the Camaro is obvious. I guess the nation is supposed to turn to electric cars with the perverbial “flip of the switch”? Where do you live? Not in a rural area, that’s for sure.

A car is not only a means of getting from one place to another for most people. Sorry if that fact disappoints you. No more than a house is a place to bed down at night and eat occasionally. Otherwise we would all be living in basic hotels. I hope you show the same vigorous attitude to the building of large, wasteful houses that are clearly a waste of resources and space and energy. Where is that outcry?

Electric cars like the Volt and gas cars like the Camaro are not enemies. There is no reason that the best attributes of both can not be merged into an electric car that is fast, elegant, cool looking and fun to drive. The author’s worry is that we will sacrifice the enjoyment of driving for the sake of “green.” I COMPLETELY AGREE with him. The terrorists win at that point.

Not to mention, I guess if we make cars unremarkable and dull enough, people will want to spend even more time at home creating imaginary environments and experiences on there various electronic devices. Instead of going outside and enjoying our natural resources. Sign me up (not).

For the life of me, I can not understand why enjoying the act of driving is something to be ashamed of and a problem, equivalent to “machismo” or “penile envy” or whatever childish namecalling people are tossing around. This is not Logan’s Run. Like it or not, we have choices. Sure oil use is a problem. But don’t pretend that if everyone immediately started driving electrics or 40mpg cars that somehow the country’s energy ills will be suddenly fixed and that we could literally thumb our nose at those who hate us. I guess they would just take their bombs and oil and go home with their tails between their legs. Grow up.

The electric grid will be the future theatre of terrorism. Sorry to burst your bubble. It has already started. It is inevitable.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10040101-38.html

(Quote)
make mine E-REV please Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:57 am

Moore is missing the boat here.

If we get the Volt these guys want to build, it will Be Great and lead to even better Camaros (e-rev), Bob Lutz, Andrew Farah, Jon Lauckner, Greg Ceisel, Frank Weber (my hero) and so many others at GM.

Bob Lutz is quoted as saying that the Volt has “inspired a legion of fans.” Thanks in large part to Lyle.

Jon Lauckner feels it is imperative GM makes this car absolutely perfect.
He said “we need an experience where people say ‘Wow’ this is really something special. These guys have put a lot of thought into the technology, a lot of thought into the interface between me as a driver and how the car behaving that it tells me the kind of information I need know when I need to know it and that it operates very intuitively.”

The Obama team “not so much” lets hope they just stay out of it.
The “path to hell” and all that, you know.

Obama’s press secretary Robert Gibbs said “the team is looking through those plans and figuring out how to be the best partner in what’s next for the auto industry.” and “whether the auto industry as we have it now is exactly what we have in a year is something I think is going to be determined by a lot of different factors.”

Huh?

(Quote)
eightjack Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:07 am

Stephen moore is an out of touch, middle-aged, mullet wanna-be.

He seems to think that America would be on top again if we all just put on our John Deere ball caps, hung feathered roach-clips from our rear-view mirrors and clicked our heels together three times, What a
freaking moron!

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:13 am

Don’t get me wrong, I love the Volt. I was at Voltnation and have been following this car for about 1.5 yrs. I will have an early one. But I will also have my Vette in the garage for life also. I guess that makes me evil to some. Couldn’t care less about that.

I was one who was very disappointed that the styling of the Volt was so heavily controlled by aero issues and not by visual interest and elegant lines. The Volt styling is acceptable to me, but it is certainly not inspiring. However, at least it doesn’t inspire laughter like the Prius.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:16 am

35 PLJ Says…. “No one is forcing you to buy one car or another. All these cars – Camaro , Corvette, Mustang, etc. will be range extended ELECTRIC vehicles some day (I trust).

They will be MORE fun to drive and use very little liquid fuel.
=============================================================================
I agree! In 1982 GM introduced an entirely new Z28 Camaro —the model that became the IROC (Int’l Race of Champions) legend. I had an ‘82 Z28 for 12 years & loved every mile I put on it! It seems the WSJ’s Moore is still in 1982, but I’ve evolved and we all need to adapt to the times.

Future high-power E-REVs will win every “stop-light derby” against the hottest race-tuned Camaros ever built —and leave yards of rubber on the street— without using a single drop of gas! Get over your Camaro obsession, Moore!

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:19 am

57 DonC

Ok. So, now lets see all the people race out to buy that electric car to give us our national security.

Come on, stop trying to spin the world on the fact that oil is the cause of us losing our national security. If your really that shallow, then keep espousing your message, and lets see where it all leads.

Obviously the point of my post was lost.

Why do you and others keep falsely believing that we are in Iraq for oil. Somehow the media has spun you and many others, on the reason. Bush sent us into Iraq to eliminate the threat of Iraq and WMD. He apparently was wrong and got bad info on the WMD, and then spun it into “We needed to save Iraq from itself” idea.

How is all that media Kool-Aid tasting today. Stop putting the spin on this, open your eyes and take a real look at whats happening in the world.

(Quote)
kevmark58 Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:22 am

Funny, he says the ‘green’ battery operated cars won’t make his heart pulse. I guess then he’s probably on life support anyway and near death.

I have a feeling that the Volt and Telsa would leave the camero in the dust when putting the instant torque of electric motors against a piston driven car!

My heart will pulse when I’m finally driving one. So GM, can I have it in mid-2010 in sufficient quantities to blow the competition out of the water and show them that you’re back with a vengeance?

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:23 am

….btw, the Edsel failed because it was so U-G-L-Y, not because of any advances in its drivetrain. The Volt will succeed in spite of its styling, entirely BECAUSE of its brilliantly-conceived drivetrain!

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:24 am

Steven Moore like Larry Kudlow and Arthur Laffer is one of those “made for Fox and WSJ” faux economists. Sans doctorate, and with lesser degrees from schools not considered elite, he makes a very comfortable living appearing and shilling on behalf of various conservative causes as an “expert”.

Essentially he’s a intellectual fraud. But, hey, everyone is entitled to an opinion. You have to love it: his itty bitty heart went pitty patter at the sight of a Camaro? Apparently his heart palpitations interfered with normal brain functioning. Let’s see, in his professional opinion, such as it is, GM should be congratulated for bringing back a car it discontinued because demand had shifted to passenger cars that GM should resist making. Right-O. Why make cars you can sell in the millions when you can make cars that sell in the thousands!

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:28 am

Hard to judge a opinion piece. He has one, and apparently gets paid to write it…so there you go. He seems like a little bit of a dinosaur, and to be fair there is a good deal of people still like him, but the ‘herd’ is thinning.

He doesn’t realize that the shift is on today. Electric = sexy now.

The only part you can find fault with is his assertation that in the future out of a gov’t run and/or electric future is, “unremarkable ‘green’ cars that get good gas mileage but don’t go fast…” To be fair, a lot of people don’t get it, but electric very easily means fast (and once battery production/capacity is up and running, it means fast for cheap…relatively speaking)

/imagines Tag in a Volt…hotness

(Quote)
KUD Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:35 am

I WANT TO DRIVE THE VOLT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will not buy a Camaro till it goes Voltec.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:36 am

Mr. Moore just doesn’t see where car fashion is going. Outstanding gas mileage is the new bragging right, replacing 0-60 or 1/4 mile time.

All you have to do is look at SoCal, where thousands of people who could well afford a Benz, BMW, Lexus or (dare I say it) Cadillac, are driving Priuses. They don’t need to save money on gas. They are making a statement. Today is is more cool to drive a Prius than it is to drive all of the above.

My younger son (28), who has been raised around Corvettes and Impalas all his life, is a “Midtown” urban pioneer type. He has already said that his next car will be electric. He is very typical of where “Gen X”, or whatever we are calling it, is going.

Maybe the WSJ needs to hire a twenty something “cool consultant” to help them to see where things are going. I’m sorry to say that my sense is that the Camaro is going to go exactly where the GTO, SSR, and so many others have gone, and where the Hummer, hybrid Escalade and G8 seem destined to go. Tune in in 5 years and statik will give us the sales statistics of the Camaro vs the Pruis. Or, God send, the Volt. Whoever said 10 to one above was being generous.

It’s a new paradigm guys, Lead follow or get out of the way.

#37 The Grump:

Yeah, Mama Park used to say the exact same thing. “Consider the source.” I guess it’s a generational thing, LOL. Excellent addvice, IMHO.

(Quote)
Jim I Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:36 am

Statik: Don’t lead Tag on. It is not fair!

(Quote)
Guido Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:42 am

This Camaro is truly a stunning vehicle – if it helps GM live to fight another day, it will have served a great purpose.

The Volt is a superb concept …. let’s hope history judges it more positively than this Mr. Moore. At least he didn’t stoop so low to call it “vaporware” ….. a slur which many of you have conveniently forgotten about.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:43 am

BTW, as to the horror of the “Obama Team” calling the shots at GM and Chrysler, somehow I don’t remember the existing private enterprise “management” doing such a great job. Did I miss something?

If someone doesn’t take their little hands and help them to change direction, they are going to run the comapnies off the clif by summer.

If my tax money is going to go to prop them up, I expect and demand to see a little adult supervision from somewhere.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:45 am

Test driving the Tata Nano

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr19m8tRZ4g

It’s a $2,500 basic 4 passenger car for the masses that get’s 50-mpg.

How much is the Volt and how much $5.00/gal gas can you buy with the difference? How many of these will sell for EACH Volt sold?

Yes, there IS competition that’s VERY strong in these difficult economic times!

(Quote)
Thomas Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:47 am

Wow, what an idiot Stephan is! I just finished putting together my ‘84 Firebird. I look forward to trading it in on my volt when the time comes – as that machine will make my blood pump, and give me the thrill I seek! The Firebird? It’s just another car….. And strangely, do people like him not realise that people do infact wish to buy the volt? My local Chev dealer said to me this, when I ask him how sales are going: “If I had volts, I’d actually be selling cars!”

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:47 am

FUKIT!!!
ERVEV THE CAMARO!!
This I will buy. Holds 4 peeps and freeway capable. It’s all good man!

(Quote)
Herkimer Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:58 am

JEC @ 63

Our WORLD’S largest security threats originate from countries, that without our oil money, would be nothing more than sand, camels, and mud-hut houses.

The Volt will allow me to stop sending those countries my money, and enable me to greatly reduce my environmental footprint.

—And I’m not the only one who feels this way!

(Your use of cliches and straw-man arguments really kills your credibility. Why don’t you put a little more thought into your posts?)

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:59 am

The treasury is negotiating for GM and Chrysler with the creditors. Since they own many of the creditors (TARP), the fed has some additional leverage.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123932036083306929.html

(Quote)
Guido Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:09 am

noel park Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:43 am
BTW, as to the horror of the “Obama Team” calling the shots at GM and Chrysler, somehow I don’t remember the existing private enterprise “management” doing such a great job. Did I miss something?

If someone doesn’t take their little hands and help them to change direction, they are going to run the comapnies off the clif by summer.

If my tax money is going to go to prop them up, I expect and demand to see a little adult supervision from somewhere.
——————-
You mean like Team Obama’s “Card Check” initiative, which will take away the sanctity of the secret ballot from all American workers ? Does this sound progressive to you ?

I thought you Obamabots were all enraged over Bush stripping away our ( terrorists ) civil liberties, yet you don’t seem the least bit annoyed by the “Card Check” stripping away the rights of every American worker to free, uninhibited free choice. Classic.

PS – Barry had absolutely NOTHING to do with the Volt …. but that’s not going to stop his minions from trying to co-opt it as “their idea”….right, Noel ?

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:09 am

lol….
OMG, I was just reading on the auto blog green site about the Govt buying big three cars. Here’s the criteria of what they will consider to buy…

“Each new vehicle will be required to manage at least a 10 percent improvement in overall fuel efficiency to be considered for purchase.”

lol….
First thing I though of was the Tahoe SUV’s that got an improvement of 10% from 18mpg to 22mpg. So that means those cars will qualify so they can still buy gas guzzling cars. For the sedans, I think Ford is going to sweep the house on this because of the Fusion.
Am I looking at this wrong????………probably not. The SUV meet the 10% efficiency improvement.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/04/10/feds-to-buy-over-17-000-of-d-3s-fuel-efficient-vehicles/

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:11 am

damn moderation…

lol….
OMG, I was just reading on the auto blog green site about the Govt buying big three cars. Here’s the criteria of what they will consider to buy…

“Each new vehicle will be required to manage at least a 10 percent improvement in overall fuel efficiency to be considered for purchase.”

lol….
First thing I though of was the Tahoe SUV’s that got an improvement of 10% from 18mpg to 22mpg. So that means those cars will qualify so they can still buy gas guzzling cars. For the sedans, I think Ford is going to sweep the house on this because of the Fusion.
Am I looking at this wrong????………probably not. The SUV meet the 10% efficiency improvement.

Goggle it: bloggreen feds-to-buy-over-17-000-of-d-3s-fuel-efficient-vehicles

(Quote)
DrNeu Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:12 am

The VOLT is what I WANT to DRIVE (right past the pump!)

(Quote)
LeoK Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:12 am

This guy is like many of our politicians – they say one thing (the American car companies should be building green fuel efficient vehicles) – then they come out and ridicule them for their efforts. Amazing…

And then the best part is that our US media eats this stuff up. GM was working on the VOLT long before the financial colapse hit the golobal economy – and it is NOT being funded exclusively with taxpayer dollars – but they are helping. GM’s biggest problem is public perception.

As cool looking as the new Camaro is, that is not the car that will help GM change the perception tide. The Camaro will simply rekindle spirits from the past muscle car era. The VOLT is the car that will cause critics to stand up and take notice. Not everyone has to like the first one out – their loss and our gain. If Moore equates the VOLT to the Edsel, then obviously he’s one that just doesn’t get it!

(Quote)
Blarney Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:13 am

I agree with the article, the Volt looks like a watered down commuter car. Maybe if they would have held closer the orginal concept it would have been something to make your heart race a little more. Now something like the Tesla S, thats a sexy beast that people will be super excited to drive. Its amazing that a new car company can come along an make something so refined looking and the best GM can so with all their years of experience is a Dodge Stratus clone.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:26 am

I like the Camaro. Just not the ICE in it. EREV the mofo, dumbdown the range to 20 AER by bosting the torque on the AC induction motor to give it a better off the line snap than the V8 model and people will buy. They’ll have a car in the Tesla Class.

Hey Stephen Moore, hear this…
The ICEAge is over, Embrace the VoltAge.

(Quote)
Camaros are for punks Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:27 am

I don’t see the Volt being the next Edsel -more like the straw that broke the camel’s back – styling is weak, price point is too high and it won’t sell.

GM will have yet another high profile lemon on its hands – we can bet 110% that the Japanese will out-engineer and out-price anything GM can do, particularly when GM is forced to cut costs and push the vehicle into production before it’s ready – the US consumer will be the guinea pig and they’ll resent it, just like they resent the boring, over priced vehicles GM now produces.

Honestly, why is GM even still around? Just shoot it, lay off the over paid union “workers” and let a rational business plan emerge.

(Quote)
ClarksonCote Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:27 am

Slightly off topic, but all this talk of the Volt and no ability to buy one until at least Q4 2010 has got me all jittery. So, to pacify, I just bought myself an eZip electric bicycle. I figure it’ll handle my 7 mile one way commute without any difficulties, and they’re relatively inexpensive too!

I expect to have to pedal some, but that’s part of my motivation to buy it. I’m hoping it’ll get my out of my car and exercising more, even if I’m not doing all the work.

(Quote)
Eliezer Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:32 am

While Moore’s article is obviously biased, his does point out that the Volt is not a very good looking car. I’m still scratching my head at how Tesla was able to get a C/D ratio for the Model S that is better that the Volt, but the Model S looks so much sexier. Even so, lets not forget the Cadillac Converj E-REV concept, which was a real show-stopper.

I think if Stephen Moore test-drives the Tesla Roadster, he’ll change his mind about electric cars.

(Quote)
Joe Dooner Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:38 am

I love the new Camaro and I love the Volt. Why can’t you have both?
One for everyday driving and one for fun. It makes GM more diversified in the market. You don’t see other car makers giving up on sports cars.

(Quote)
Otis Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:42 am

I am a big supporter of the Volt, but I need a Camaro for my mid life crisis. So how about a Camerovolt or just a Camaro EV. I could drive in style and have clear conscience.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:42 am

@Eliezer

He’s probably too “Bullish” if you will, to try a test drive. Put the Roadster against the Camaro on the strip. Better yet….lol, put it against the “White Zombie”.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:45 am

@ClarksonCote 86

I was thinking of doing the same thing. My Fat A$$ needs to excersise. Too much Chicken wings and Beer.

(Quote)
eightzero Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:46 am

The idea of owning an electic car that I plug in at home and lets me drive by gas stations, knowing I need never buy thier product directly ever again makes my heart race. I would pay a premium for the experience.

Been thinking about giving this guy a call:

http://blog.marketplace.nwsource.com/nwautos/2009/04/electric_converts_area_mechanics_convert_gas-engine_cars_into_all-electric_vehicles.html

(Quote)
Brad G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:46 am

“He waxed poetic about his love affairs with Camaros he’s owned, the euphoria of driving them and the pleasure of watching the envy and admiration of others.”

It appears that Steven Moore is so insecure in himself that he needs a Camaro to boost his ego.

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:50 am

The Camaro is about 20K with a great warranty. The roadster is what, about 100K ? Warranty?

I don’t think that most people would think the two vehicles could possibly be compared. In any way.

And some here are constantly complaining the Volt may be 10K more than the Prius?

Be careful, your double standard is showing.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:52 am

@Brad G 92

“It appears that Steven Moore is so insecure in himself that he needs a Camaro to boost his ego.”

To praphrase…
Pen|s Envy?

(Quote)
Mike L Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:53 am

The funny part here to me is the notion that driving the Camaro is going to turn heads and make him an object of desire by extension. I guarantee you if you are driving an electric car — any electric car — you are going to attract more attention since people aren’t used to seeing them. And as far as the younger women go, I think they may be more impressed today with you being on the cutting edge of environmental concern than they are with your ability to purchase American muscle. Of course, environmental muscle … nuff said.

(Quote)
Brad G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:54 am

@CaptJackSparrow 93

Exactly

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:54 am

Just build my Volt Dangit!!!

(Quote)
MetrologyFirst Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:55 am

BradG @91:

And the Camry and Accord hybrids didn’t sell because ” they were indistinguishable from the standard drive train car aside from a small hybrid badge.” No one could tell they were hybrids. Apparently that was a problem.

Sounds like the Camaro buyers and the hybrid buyers aren’t all that different when it comes to vanity.

(Quote)
Mike D Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:56 am

This guy has never heard of tesla, or the torque of electric cars in general, you can tell this guys’ car tech knowledge hasn’t been updated in 20 years

(Quote)
StevePA Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:00 pm

Did not have time to scan previous posts in the thread, so if this is repetitious, apologizing in advance:
- Why is it that so many people see “green” and “exciting” as having to be mutually exclusive? Perhaps that is the history, but just a bit of research would have shown Mr. Moore some of the exciting “green” products being worked on by a number of manufacturers;
- Another online opinion piece this morning predicting oil prices will soon rise again quickly enough to threaten economic recovery. “Green” will grow in market share.

(Quote)
Luke Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:00 pm

— Offtopic —
Noel Park,

My younger son (28), who has been raised around Corvettes and Impalas all his life, is a “Midtown” urban pioneer type. He has already said that his next car will be electric. He is very typical of where “Gen X”, or whatever we are calling it, is going.

I’m 30, and I’m not a big fan of the “Gen X” label. If one must label generations, a much more descriptive term would be “Internet Generation”, since the biggest difference between us and our parents is that we’ve grown up expecting access to easy worldwide communications and vast stores of searchable and often contradictory information. I guess the other difference would be The Draft…

Anyway, your son sounds like the kind of folks I hang out with here in Illinois!

—- Aside —
No discussion about the Camaro would be complete without a link to the Camaro Mullet song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdegQmtgFSM
(Sung to the tune of “The Wreck Of The Edmund Fitzgerald”.)

(Quote)
User Name Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

Stephen Moore is a retarded imbecile.
Made evident by the fact that when it comes to automobiles, he hates:
” … small, unremarkable ‘green’ cars that get good gas mileage but don’t go fast, don’t look cool and don’t make your pulse race.”

When gasoline was approaching $5 a gallon over the summer, what was Mr. Moore’s view on cars that get good gas mileage, don’t go fast, don’t look cool, and don’t make your pulse race?

Mr. Moore must not know much automotive history, unremarkable cars like the Volkswagen Beetle & the Toyota Corolla did extremely well with the American consumer.

At this time, I’d like to nominate Stephen Moore for the 2009 Annual Gilded Turd Award.

(Quote)
Chaim Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:04 pm

He’s free to express his opinion. But he might also want to back up his opinions with facts. He might also consider explaining his Edsel reference. Without facts and explanations, his piece seems more like a rant – which is easy to dismiss.

(Quote)
Gary Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:08 pm

Well, it looks like that the Transformers movie a year or so back has people recognizing the new Camaro on the streets and are going gaga over it:

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/09/one-night-stand-taking-home-the-2010-chevy-camaro-ss/

Since the Volt is featured in the upcoming sequel, hopefully people will recognize it as another cool “gotta have it” car that was in the Transformers movie as well…

(Quote)
Brad G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:09 pm

MetrologyFirst @ 97

And the “hybrid” car or truck, except the Prius, only gets a few extra miles to the gallon than the standard ICE version. The extra cost of the hybrid does not justify the small savings in gas. That is another reason they did not sell well in the market place.

(Quote)
Guido Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:15 pm

Camaros are for punks Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:27 am
I don’t see the Volt being the next Edsel -more like the straw that broke the camel’s back – styling is weak, price point is too high and it won’t sell.

GM will have yet another high profile lemon on its hands – we can bet 110% that the Japanese will out-engineer and out-price anything GM can do, particularly when GM is forced to cut costs and push the vehicle into production before it’s ready – the US consumer will be the guinea pig and they’ll resent it, just like they resent the boring, over priced vehicles GM now produces.

Honestly, why is GM even still around? Just shoot it, lay off the over paid union “workers” and let a rational business plan emerge.
———–
Ahhh – a troll comes out from beneath the bridge. You can bet this curmudgeon was screaming “vaporware” 6 months ago ….

(Quote)
Frank B Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

His only valid point is about bold styling. GM should have stayed with the Concept Volt (very Camaro looking). They claimed they had to change it because of the drag. I don’t believe drag enters into it too much in city driving at 30 to 35 MPH which is what the bulk of the 40 mile range would. The only other thing to keep in mind is that the Wall Street Journal is a republican rag so don’t expect too much praise out of them for anything.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:23 pm

#67 statik:

Well, you sort of beat me to it again. “Electric = sexy now.” Sums it all up.

Also, My son may have been a bit ahead of me, but I’m in the NPNS column now myself. I devoutly hope that my next car will be a Chevy, but NPNS is the bottom line. I guess, if we live long enough, we start to learn from our kids.

#77 Cautious Fan:

Thanks for the very informative link. Sounds like the “Obamabots” are playing a pretty good game of hardball. Good for them (us).

#78 Guido:

Thanks for putting my comment up again. Everybody got to read it twice. It’s all good!

Did I say something about “card check”? You could have fooled me.

#100 Luke:

“Internet Generation” works for me. I take huge comfort in the fact that an “Internet Generation” member would be referring to “The Wreck Of The Edmund Fitzgerald”, one of my all time favorites. My son is equally at home with the latest in techno-pop and hip-hop, to Bob Marley, Michael Doucet, or Ry Cooder. It’s nice to know that the stuff my generation grew up with still has at least some relevance to younger folks.

Thanks.

(Quote)
Luke Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:26 pm

Brad G @ 104,

And the “hybrid” car or truck, except the Prius, only gets a few extra miles to the gallon than the standard ICE version.

As someone who drives a Prius regularly, I can corroborate your observation WRT the Prius. My experience driving it suggests that the Prius would be an unusually light/efficient/practical small hatchback car, even without the hybrid drive system. So I guesstimate that the Prius would easily be a 35-40mpg car without the hybrid drive.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

@noel park 108
“I guess, if we live long enough, we start to learn from our kids.”

If that’s true then someday I’m going to like “Hannah Montana”?
Awwwww…..sh|t. Shoot me now.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 12:49 pm

#53 Cautious Fan says “I agree with his concerns about the gov’t running GM. When the Commander in Chief can oust your CEO and select your product line, the hair on my neck starts to stand up.”

Obviously you have something less than nerves of steel. According to you we can trust someone with nuclear weapons and the military might of the country but we should shudder in fear if they replace a failed CEO. Next you’ll be going Glenn Beck on us and spilling tears on the keyboard.

You also act as though the current method of governance is perfect. Realistically it’s considerably less. Wagoner stacked his board with failed CEOs while not allowing the shareholders, who own the company, to nominate alternatives. Not exactly a process designed to produce the best management.

Whether you agree with its decisions or not, the fact is that the PTF has acted very much like you’d expect a private equity firm to. It evaluated the CEO, found him wanting, and gave him the boot. Not because of anything political but because he hadn’t performed. Do you have some problem with performance based reviews? Isn’t this more or less what Kirk Kerkorian tried to do? And with respect to product lines, the PTF isn’t suggesting a process radically different than what Ford has already decided is a necessary streamlining.

The big surprise to many had not been that the PTF has been political but that it hasn’t been. From firing Wagoner to negotiating with the bond holders it’s been as shark-like as the most aggressive private equity fund. Most no doubt expected kinder and gentler treatment. Too bad. It’s our money and we should be happy it’s being protected.

How the government exits GM is a major issue. Replacing Wagoner is not.

(Quote)
Lektriktadpole Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:01 pm

And newspapers wonder why they are struggling financially and people are getting their news from the internet. It is all about competence.

For financial advice, you can’t beat Statik. He saved me 10 grand by advising all on this list to avoid the romantic foolishness of buying GM stock at 10 and letting its magical recovery to 40 pay for my Volt. When the WSJ hires Statik, I will listen to them, or at least him.
Other than that, their industry deserves the trouble it is in.

Send these folks back to school, or at least to school.

(Quote)
fred Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:02 pm

The writer is an edsel.
Soon approaching 13 years on my old gas powered truck while awaiting a battery powered car.
As soon as they make me what I want to buy i’ll gladly get rid of the truck and buy a new electric powered vehicle

(Quote)
stopcrazypp Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:09 pm

@92 MetrologyFirst
The Roadster goes 0-60 in 3.9 seconds. The base Camaro goes 0-60 in 6 seconds, even the SS is 4.6 seconds. So you are paying for different amounts of performance. Also the Roadster is a lot more exclusive, only ~1000 per year so far (less than the production rate of the Corvette ZR1 (1500-1750) which is also in the $100k range). People are paying for that exclusivity and also the EV drivetrain.

I think the Corvette is a better comparison to the Roadster, but even the Corvette is different, it’s higher volume.

On the article itself, a sports car is still a short term market (and usually a small one too). Sure it brings excitement for car enthusiasts, you can’t really expect it to carry a company the size of GM. For that, GM will need more practical cars, like the Cruze. The Volt’s idea is not for short term profits, the idea is they have their foot in the technology so in the long term they are ahead of competitors. It seems like this guy hasn’t realized that plug-ins are the next big thing looming ahead for cars, and GM wants a head start.

(Quote)
Wassup Dawg Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:12 pm

With the government firmly in charge of GM, look for some super bland gas sippers. There is no reason an EV cannot outgun a V8 Camaro on the street. Once we start seeing a wide variety of EVs on the road more people will realize they don’t have to sacrifice to ride in one. But letting the Feds make decisions on car models is wrong.

Might as well just rename them Green Motors if the Voltec is only platform the government is pushing down our throats. The Volt is actually a rather small and lame EV. Many people will want something bigger sportier that can eat Camaros for breakfast and doesn’t use gasoline.

(Quote)
MarkinWI Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:14 pm

Congratulations to Nasaman! Obama bit on your idea for buying American hybrids. Hopefully, it will expand to include the Volt soon.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/09/AR2009040904319.html?hpid=topnews

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pm

I would like to thank GM for building at least one car that the public REALLY wants to buy: Camaro.

When the VOLT hits the showroom floors, I hope the public is at least half as excited to get one, cuz they sure aren’t kicking in the doors to see a Malibu, Tahoe or Silverado Hybrid.

Thankfully, there are rebates to bring ‘em in for those.

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Well, considering how many writers have claimed that GM “isn’t building cars people want to own,” the guy has a valid point. We all know that THE ONLY reason anyone preordered a Tesla was because the English automaker Lotus provided them with a goodlooking design. It really doesn’t cost any more to make a pretty car than an ugly one. It just requires artistic talent – like that exhibited in the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky (the designer was lured away from GM by a Jap automaker, I believe). GM apparently can’t afford both a good designer and the UAW at the same time.

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:31 pm

111 Lektriktadpole

Bought GM at $9.40 and sold at $11.80 last year. This year bought GM at $2.50 and sold at $3.00

Last October I predicted GM stock at $6-$7 by Spring. GM had plans to release the Cruze and Camaro by summer of this year. These plans combined with the Transformers II movie seemed like an easy financial base hit. We were then told that plans to deliver these hot selling models have been delayed by a “perfect storm”.

Despite the Edsel comments and anti-green sentiment spewed by backward thinking writers. The market is a good place to be now. Battery stocks will double by the end of the year.

Word is that China is recovering. And China is making an honest effort to monitor and repair their run-away pollution situation. Asia is again buying aluminum. Japan just announced a financial stimulus plan. Banks around the world are making money. Houses are selling.

My personal “Volt fund” stock trading program is sitting at $22,700. Holdings are in “metal recycling”, “bio medical kits”, “environmental research devices”, “lithium batteries”, “golf products” and “clean coal systems”. The analysts say “there are no Obama stocks”. They are wrong. They think like editorial board member Stephen Moore. They will attempt to verbally beat the green agenda down. They will say “no you can’t”. Don’t miss this opportunity.

=D~

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:34 pm

117 kent beuchert

I’m not sure if it’s the designers or the good ol’ boys that they work for. After all, somebody higher up has to approve their designs for production. There must be some new blood in there. The Camaro was green-lighted. Maybe the ’surgical bankruptcy’ will take with it the cancerous decision makers that brought us the Aztec, Equinox and Aveo.

(Quote)
Chuck D Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 1:59 pm

Seems pretty basic to me, see what the competition is selling and kicking your butt with and make similar cars. Where are GMs versions of WRXs, Civics, Scions, Jettas, Subarus? These are the cars that everyone under 30 is buying. Young people don’t want to be seen in a Camaro! Things like Buicks may sell great to the 60+ crowd, but the under 30 crowd are who is doing the bulk of the buying and GM seems to offer nothing for them.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

Stephen Moore’s commentary (and it is opinion) is mainly about Camaro, with only a toss off comment about Volt. As to Volt, he is right.

Once Volt lost the styling of the concept and the promised performance of the concept, Volt became a wimpish green car, perhaps something to be considered as an alternative to Prius (itself only a tiny slice of the overall market). With its higher price, Volt may be owned by Obama and Leno but in the general market it will be an Edsel. No wow factor at all.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 2:12 pm

115 MarkinWI…. “Congratulations to Nasaman! Obama bit on your idea for buying American hybrids. Hopefully, it will expand to include the Volt soon.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/09/AR2009040904319.html?hpid=topnews
===========================================================================
Thanks , Mark. But our own Lyle Dennis was the co-sponsor of this idea and deserves at least equal credit for endorsing/promoting it here! (BTW, it was also an Obama campaign promise, so I must defer to the President himself for the originating the idea!)

(Quote)
benion2 Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 2:26 pm

The Volt has an important date to keep with automotive history, I think. The New Camaro is going to make some needed cash for the General. There seem’s to be alot of people with their undies bunched up, about Stephen Moore too.

(Quote)
Tom K. Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

My driving car is a near pristine lovingly maintained 1984 Camaro Berlinetta with close to 200,000 miles on it. Aside from the Rally Sport Camaro in the early 1970’s (the one GM really should have made the basis for the new Camaro) it’s the most beautiful Camaro they made. I’ve said it before in this blog — I love my Camaro, but it’s a gas guzzler and I’ll trade it in for a Volt. The Volt is the next 1957 Chevy, the next sexy car, the next Camaro! Now if they made an EREV Camaro I’d have to trade in the Volt, but by then I’ll be such a loyalist it will be too late.
–Tom K.

(Quote)
Zach Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 2:42 pm

I can only agree partly with what he is saying. I want a fun to drive fuel economic vehicle. The best of both worlds. It’s coming to a fine reality, and there is no reason why we SHOULDN”T want both.

Tesla’s Supercar is as well competitive with every other manufacturer and their gasoline-burning vehicles.

No reason not to go economical.

(Quote)
Edwin Mang Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 2:48 pm

I need to get the attention of this GM bull .
So Monday in China , Russia , Tiawan , Japan ,
England , India , and perhaps Africa .
GM Plants will have a sutdown for saftey inspections .
Reopen well mabey .

GOD BLESS

TIGER

(Quote)
Eliezer Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 3:29 pm

#120 Chuck D:

“Young people don’t want to be seen in a Camaro!”
—————————————————————

You’re right… they want to be seen DRIVING a Camaro:

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/09/one-night-stand-taking-home-the-2010-chevy-camaro-ss/

BTW, I’m 25, and I think the new Camaro is the best thing any of the Big 3 have put out in years.

(Quote)
Vincent Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 3:36 pm

Lets see how Stephen Moore feels when his paper bites the dust like all the other large news papers. The problem with one persons opinion is just that. It’s one guy. Big Deal.

Young people will buy a Camaro. Thank God you guys are not in marketing. 300 horse and 29 to 30 mpg…hello…wake up dude. It’s a seller!

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 3:37 pm

#63 JEC says “Why do you and others keep falsely believing that we are in Iraq for oil.”

When Alan Greenspan was publicly questioned about why he had said that Iraq was only about oil, his response was along the lines of “I thought anyone with half a brain knew that.” Why do you think we’re there? To “help the Iraqi people”? To stop Saddam Hussein from using all those non-existent weapons of mass destruction? Of course Iraq was about oil, about that there can be no genuine argument.

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:12 pm

My neighbor has the new Camaro, my cousin has an Aztek & loves it, my Uncle just bought a new Equinox. My point: everyone is different and likes different things. There’s no correct opinion.

(sorry to get so post-modern, but we are debating in circles)

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:19 pm

-
-
Just build my Volt Dangit!!!
-
-

(Quote)
truthguy Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:20 pm

Okay we all want the Volt ASAP but let’s be realistic. I cannot get a Volt until 2011 at the earliest. My car is on its last legs. I have money to buy and new car now but I’ve been waiting. The new Camaro looks great and the reviews have been very good from everyone (at least all that I’ve read) . The 2010 Camaro V6 is 300 hp and goes from 0-60 in 6.1 sec. That’s respectable. It also gets 18city/29hwy mpg. This is excellent for a car of this performance. GM needs to sell a lot of ICE cars to get to EREVs. So why not get a Camaro and have fun for a couple of years and they trade in on the Volt? Why not? You only go around once. However I know that gas will go back up over $4/gal and sooner rather than later. Maybe I’ll try to hold out for a Cruze or get some type of used car for the time being. Suggestions?

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:22 pm

#118 Dave K said:

111 Lektriktadpole

Bought GM at $9.40 and sold at $11.80 last year. This year bought GM at $2.50 and sold at $3.00

Last October I predicted GM stock at $6-$7 by Spring. GM had plans to release the Cruze and Camaro by summer of this year. These plans combined with the Transformers II movie seemed like an easy financial base hit. We were then told that plans to deliver these hot selling models have been delayed by a “perfect storm”.

Despite the Edsel comments and anti-green sentiment spewed by backward thinking writers. The market is a good place to be now. Battery stocks will double by the end of the year.

Word is that China is recovering. And China is making an honest effort to monitor and repair their run-away pollution situation. Asia is again buying aluminum. Japan just announced a financial stimulus plan. Banks around the world are making money. Houses are selling.

My personal “Volt fund” stock trading program is sitting at $22,700. Holdings are in “metal recycling”, “bio medical kits”, “environmental research devices”, “lithium batteries”, “golf products” and “clean coal systems”. The analysts say “there are no Obama stocks”. They are wrong. They think like editorial board member Stephen Moore. They will attempt to verbally beat the green agenda down. They will say “no you can’t”. Don’t miss this opportunity.
===========================

/oh Dave, lol

I like you, quite a bit (not as much as Tag of course), but there is a lot of ‘absolutes’ in there…which is dangerous. I’ve started so many posts on people’s past predictions on GM and cut and pasting them, and on ‘revisionist’ history of performance…only to just edited them out and said ‘forget it’ to myself, I don’t want to get into a argument anymore (like the old days) or hurt anyone’s feelings. I found myself doing it again today.

As for absolutes…I try to not deal in them, or make any stock ‘picks’ at all (unless someone asks me what I am doing…and generally even then I say, please don’t do anything I do…make your own decisions on investing).

I will speak up when I think something is a dog, (and why I think that way), if someone else is pumping a position I think is a mistake…and maybe someone like (#111) Lektriktadpole saves a couple bucks.

Even if they don’t try to, people are affected by hearing something is ‘a buy’…if they hear it over and over again without contention. So I feel I have to wade in and present the other side of that coin if I don’t agree…which usually gets me into a ‘bru-ha-ha,’ especially if it was about GM (not so much on the arguing with me about that now, lol)

Take for instance your quote of “the market is a good place to be right now”, people have heard that a lot the last month or so, but is it? I dunno….I heard a lot of people the months before this rally say, “This thing can’t just keep going down, we have to be getting a bear market rally at least soon,” is that less true now? Is this a bear market rally? (I don’t even understand your quote of ‘houses are selling’…in relation to what? Or ‘battery stocks will double’…not sure how you can make a statement like that in all seriousness)

/apologies if I went to far

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:26 pm

This just in: WSJ says the economy will recover by Sept 3rd at 10:04PM. Whew…

(Quote)
Eliezer Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:31 pm

#134 k-dawg:

“This just in: WSJ says the economy will recover by Sept 3rd at 10:04PM. Whew…”
—————————————————————–

I guess they need to put up a new countdown clock at the Volt headquarters.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:45 pm

Call me slow, but I just found the link to allcarselectric.com at the top of this page. Check it out. There’s an interesting post on the Spark, second one down at the moment. Due here in early 2010, or so it says.

#129 DonC:

No, no, no. It was about bringing the blessings of democracy to the entire poor, benighted, Middle East. Iraq was only the first step.

#135 Eliezer:

Yeah, or maybe on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. Right behind that platform where the celebrities ring the bell to close the session when there’s something to celebrate. Not so much lately..

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 4:48 pm

These same folks on Wall Street are the ones who have messed the country up in the first place. Due to the elimination of regulatory safeguards by “gee-whiz-who-could-that-be?”, too many on Wall Street (weasel-streeters) skim the hard-earned money of truly hard working Americans, and, therefore, since there are so many bad ones (due to the crass eliminations of regulations), I would not trust ANY of them as far as I could spit.
The grandiose Wall Street Journal (weasel-street-journal imo), offers nothing whatsoever to improve America in the least. They are the advisers to the administrators of the bankrupting of the World’s finances due to their own inflated personal-worths, and, the total self-conviction of their own “stuff”. (They likely feed themselves regularly their own bs in front of the mirror every morning so as to believe it themselves to sham the unsuspecting). This is what Wall Street is all about, thanks to deregulation by previous administrations.
The Wall Street Journal still hasn’t gotten a clue yet, and, are still projecting that they know anything at all about the changeover to the green electric motoring. Perhaps they are being harassed by the natural gas interests (or bribed by them), who want to put tanks containing 3,600 pounds per square inch of natural gas into people’s trunks to go 80 measly miles. (While the tank is 4″ thick, what happens in an accident if the FITTING breaks off? You might be compressed to a pancake firstly before being converted to your own ashes for burial secondly.) (Yes, it was natural gas interests who harassed me and threatened me on my three-days off birthday vacation the weekend before last. It seemed to me that they had been tipped off to my reservation and had the space directly next to mine).
To be fair, it is very likely that baseline electricity generation might need to be switched over from coal to natural gas (to save carbon), which would increase our electric bills by about 10 bucks per person per month in the Summer A/C season. (So, I don’t know why they are so paranoid that they all won’t rake in lots of properly-earned billions.)
Central Texas natural gas interests just need to back off and cool off. AND, stay the heck away from automotive.
The Wall Street Journal is all about big money and making the very greedy feel comfortable about making more obscene big money.
Period.
They are the very antithesis to saneness for the survivability of future generations. They are there to re-enforce the nasty things that a handful of bad corporations do to be the greediest of backstabbers, protected completely by the corporate veil (you can not sue them without many millions of bucks).
So, no, the Wall Street Journal is just another irrelevant “history channel” of their own bs, deeply anchored in serving their handful of conceited and corrupt business people to have their wealthy egos flattered, and to be re-enforced that their unregulated greed is OK.
************************************
IT IS NOT OK.
************************************
If you trust the Wall Street Journal completely, then it means that you do not have the capacity to think for yourself. (Resign).
Once again, flaky journalists, which have way too much influence in media, business, finance, and anything else, step out of their little non-technical world to make abject technical fools of themselves.
If you do not have an extremely well-developed background in “hands-on” technologies nowadays, all you are going to do to yourselves at the Wall Street Journal when you attempt to forecast anything technologically-based is to prove to the entire World why they all lost so much from your gross, self-convinced hubris, and, the self-corrupted array of your other power and wealth conceits. You are doing nothing other than being parasites to the honestly-hard-earned savings of normal, honest Americans (and, yes, those honest Corporations also).
Hire some technical people and pay them
*************************
five times more
*************************
than your president, and stop being backstabbing weasels.
Dan Petit Austin TX.

(Quote)
Eliezer Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:06 pm

#136 noel park:

If Iraq was only the first step, I’d hate to see what the next step will be.

#137 Dan Petit:

Your post is the the only raving diatribe I’ve read on this site that actually makes sense.

(Quote)
Big Picture Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:11 pm

Lots ‘o competitors going to be driving down profit margins:

China Vies to Be World’s Leader in Electric Cars.
TIANJIN, China — Chinese leaders have adopted a plan aimed at turning the country into one of the leading producers of hybrid and all-electric vehicles within three years, and making it the world leader in electric cars and buses after that.

The goal, which radiates from the very top of the Chinese government, suggests that Detroit’s Big Three, already struggling to stay alive, will face even stiffer foreign competition on the next field of automotive technology than they do today.

“China is well positioned to lead in this,” said David Tulauskas, director of China government policy at General Motors.

…”BYD has 5,000 auto engineers and an equal number of battery engineers, most of them living at its headquarters in Shenzhen in a cluster of 15 yellow apartment buildings, each 18 stories high. Young engineers earn less than $600 a month, including benefits.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/global/02electric.html?_r=2&th&emc=th

Tata Motors is also making strides in elec vehicles.

My $’s on Chindia to win in the end. Lower costs ($7200/yr for an engineer!!). More highly motivated /bigger stick (5,000 BYD battery engineers!!). How can GM win against THAT?

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:13 pm

statik 133

Yes houses are again selling in Southern California. We saw a decided shift here about a month ago. I also heard a promising report from Michigan. Blocks of homes are being bought there by high rollers with the expectation of future profit to be made.

And yes, the market is a good place to be right now. I bought $18,000 S&P at 710 (shortly after the 666 S&P bottom). The other stocks (referred to in post 118) are up 15-25% in the last two months.

On the topic of lithium battery stocks. Yes, I have been waiting for a pullback to buy more. They are too strong to retreat. We’ll see a 10% bounce on the day AONE goes public alone! I don’t want to state which I own now. Want a pullback to buy more.

I’ll admit, a third of my stocks are in Asian companies. Will buy a white Volt in 2012.

http://garfwod.250free.com/Photos/Volt%2002-26.jpg

=D~

(Quote)
Steve W. Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:14 pm

Ahh, that was just an OPINION piece by one journalist….and, everybody has an opinion. My opinion ??…. give me a VOLT…I dont care if oil sells for .50 cent a gallon, I dont want to send ANY of my money to the Arabs ! Looks dont matter to me as much as reliability and operating cost …..so let the Camaro growl and speed by, I could care less ! It’s time to move autos into the next century and quit repeating the same mistakes over and over as we have since the oil embargos of the 70’s. We need to free ouselves of dependence on the middle east !!

Steve W in Boca Raton

(Quote)
Edwin Mang Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:19 pm

For Fourty thousand I can get Tesla a 20% range boost and 10% acceleration increase .

Think I’m kidding .

E E
E E
E E
E

Tiger Knows .

(Quote)
Bony Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:34 pm

I’m going to get a Volt AND a Camaro. You know, just to maintain some balance.

I’ll wave at folks while driving one and get out and beat people up when I drive the other.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:48 pm

My less than, 1/2 brain is working to hard today. Should stop trying to explain things that only a person with 1/2 a brain could understand.

Ok, lets see if I am getting this.
1) We are in Iraq for its oil (how much oil have we actually gotten, and how much will be see in the future…hmmmm).

2) Our national security is going to be greatly improved with the coming of the Volt. Now I understand why the govt decided to save GM!

3) We want to get out of Iraq to stop the loss of American lives. (So, do we get to take some oil with us, when we leave?)

4) We are going into Afghanistan to fight terrorists…or is this another sneaky US attempt to stake out for more oil?

5) Countries with oil are a threat to the United States, and we will do whatever we need to do to control these countries. Uh Oh, Canada you better start investing in a stronger national defense. Canada should be an easier target for US, since it is nice and close.

6) CIA Director Woolsey drives a Prius with a bumper sticker that says “OPEC hates this car”. And this means what? That someone bought a Japanese vehicle, that’s going to save the US and make us more secure?

Ok, that’s about all a < 1/2 brainer can do for one day.

Happy Easter….Maybe the Easter bunny will enjoy my post?

(Quote)
hermant Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:49 pm

The problem with electrics is the sound. What good is rubber ripping and burning without the rebel yell from a high compression V8? Electric is cool; fire breathers are HOT! Camaro rocks; the Volt just rolls.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 5:49 pm

#83 CaptJackSparrow Says: I like the Camaro. Just not the ICE in it. EREV the mofo, dumbdown the range to 20 AER by boosting the torque on the AC induction motor to give it a better off the line snap than the V8 model and people will buy. They’ll have a car in the Tesla Class.
————————————————————————————–
The more I think about this, the more sense it makes.

I’m not into 2-door muscle cars, but just having an EREV version like this would help dispel the notion that green has to be lame.

Another possibility would be to design a smaller EREV sports car on the same platform as the Cruze, Volt, Converj, and Orlando. If they go down to 20 miles of AER with the same size battery, that would free up the issues with styling and performance. GM could tweak the drivetrain software to optimize for performance instead of efficiency. And the coefficient of drag wouldn’t force it into a Prius type shape.

Either way, an EREV sports car makes sense. Tesla has shown us how much this changes people’s minds…

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:05 pm

In the short term he is right. The volt is not going to save gm, trucks and sports cars, and family cars run on gasoline will. But moving forward you will see a slow transition to less gas and more electric. THAT’S RIGHT! The transition will be a transition that doesn’t happen over night or even in a handful of years. Decade at the bare minimium.

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:26 pm

______________________________________________________
“If GM makes a comeback, it will be thanks not to the green dream battery-operated Volt (which is already becoming the new Edsel) but to cars people want to drive.” Stephen Moore.

—-
Moore’s WSJ article loosely staggers around several overlapping points.

I disagree with his prediction that people will not want to drive the Volt. But I don’t hold that against Moore because he is not a visionary.

It takes either a non-logical thinking person or a visionary to believe that the Volt will help GM comeback. Moore is logical but non-visionary.

Moore made an honest evaluation regarding the Volt based on what he knows to be true: Currently there is no evidence/example of a widely purchased consumer battery-operated car that “people want to drive”.

It will take a few more years of EV/EREV early adopter momentum before the non-visionary types like Moore will be able to put their arms around proof that people will want to drive Volt type cars.

The Tesla Roadster has accomplished its mission of gaining the attention of the visionaries like Bob Lutz and Lyle’s band of VOLTEC Heads. For us, the Tesla Roadster has demonstrated (albeit on a very limited scale) that indeed a production EV can be a car that people will want to drive. The Tesla Model S will reach out to an even wider group of early adopters. The VOLTEC cars will also further reach out by offering the benefits of extended range.

We VOLTEC Heads registered on Lyle’s Volt Wait List are the visionary early adopters that will soon give the Moore’s of the world the comfort to join the EV Revolution.
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Indpendence!
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:29 pm

146 DaveG/Capn’

I would agree also. A sport E-REV would be a seller.

Also, the mini-van E-REV has to be high on the list of must haves.

A mini-van is a usually a must have vehicle that gets sub-par mileage, and in many applications it is more like a bus (soccer mom’s). I think the E-REV mini-van would be a hit. Lots of short trips, lots of stop-n-go, price is already near $20,000+, so drop in about $12,000 E-REV updates, get back $7500, and have your self a Merry Xmas.

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

Something to think about, what if there were 2000 nuclear powered
ships out at sea right now cracking sea water to produce hydrogen
for fuel cell cars?

Say that the nuclear waste can be safely deposited under the sea
floor in the Artic ocean.

Fuel cell cars seem to have more horsepower than battery electric
cars and the barriers to commercialization are rapidly coming down.

Nuclear isn’t the only option to get hydrogen, but it’s an effective way. There is also the copper chlorine cycle and there are other
non nuclear means of getting hydrogen as well.

This Moore guy says that people want the Camaro instead of the
green car. Well, the Chevy Equinox fuel cell vehicle seems pretty
peppy. That’s old tech that’s in it, fuel cells are becoming platinum
free and they are getting more powerful.

If current designs for nuclear power plants are used, the only significant problem that remains is what do you do with the
nuclear waste? Well that and you still have to mine uranium.

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:47 pm

From the “Only in California” department… there are those lithium batteries again.

Hyundai says the Nuvis’s radical styling “hints at a possible design direction for a future-generation crossover,” most likely the next Santa Fe or its replacement, although don’t count on the production vehicle using those gullwing doors! The staff at the California Design Center “studied the way water splits across and flows around the hull and sides of a boat” in creating the Nuvis, to form the illusion of constant motion.

The large gullwing doors open to a luxurious 4-seat cabin with a “cascading” floor and ambient blue lighting. The seat fabric is made from 100-percent reclaimed soda bottles, while the seatbelts were made by Harveys Original Seatbeltbags (they make handbags out of seatbelts); Harveys also provided two matching handbags for the Nuvis.

http://autos.yahoo.com/auto-shows/new_york_auto_show_2009/950/Hyundai-Nuvis-Concept;_ylc=X3oDMTE5cmowcjI0BF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEc2VjA2ZwLXRvZGF5BHNsawNudXZpcy1jb25jZXB0

=D~

(Quote)
Larry Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 6:54 pm

“So why not get a Camaro and have fun for a couple of years and they trade in on the Volt? Why not? ”

Here’s why, because buying a new car is one of the worst financial moves you can ever make. Doing it mulitple times in a couple years compounds that terrible move. You should keep a car as long as possible to minimize the tremendous depreciation of driving a new car off the lot. This kind of mentality is why most Americans have a negative net worth.

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:14 pm

#150 Michael Robinson Says:

Something to think about, what if there were 2000 nuclear powered
ships out at sea right now cracking sea water to produce h******
for fuel cell cars?

Say that the nuclear waste can be safely deposited under the sea
floor in the Artic ocean.

Fuel cell cars seem to have more horsepower than battery electric
cars and the barriers to commercialization are rapidly coming down.

Nuclear isn’t the only option to get h******, but it’s an effective way. There is also the copper chlorine cycle and there are other
non nuclear means of getting h****** as well.
===================

You are nothing if not persistant sir, I can respect that…even if you make my eyes bleed from time to time. (=

/although I had to censor your post, so others are not needless harmed.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:21 pm

This is an interesting cross between a sedan and a CUV. GM would have been better served by trying to package something like this as an E-REV than trying to resurrect the mullet car:

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/10/young-acura-designer-watches-her-baby-arrive/

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:28 pm

Statik, you are annoying. Censorship of the word
hydrogen is completely uncalled for. Hydrogen is an
energy carrier just like Lithium is in a Lithium ION
battery. The difference is, hydrogen is a better
energy carrier than Lithium.

There is no reason to be afraid of hydrogen. Hydrogen
produced using nuclear power is completely OIL free
and CO2 free, depending on how the uranium is
obtained for the reactor. Fortunately, it doesn’t take
a lot of uranium to get a lot of power.

Hydrogen is a part of every hydrocarbon and it is used
to refine gasoline from OIL.

If there’s a plug, I won’t buy it. There isn’t a chemical
battery in existence that will get you further than a high
pressure hydrogen tank and a fuel cell will. Better yet,
dump the high pressure hydrogen tank and go with a
hydrogen on demand system utilizing a hydrogen rich
fuel.

People are afraid of nuclear power, but they shouldn’t be.
All of the current aircraft carriers save maybe one are
nuclear powered. Submarines tend to be nuclear
powered. There is a large Russian fleet of nuclear
submarines, or at least there used to be.

You can’t be an environmentalist and be against hydrogen.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 7:32 pm

#138 Eliezer:

Yeah, the problem is that the first step didn’t work. My understanding of the concept was that, after the Iraqi people greeted us as liberators and put flowers into the barrels of our rifles, the other nations of the Middle East including, but not limited to, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, would see the light, throw off their monarchies/dictatorships and become shining clones of America.
Of course, if they needed a bit of military help to do so, we would be happy to provide it.

Alas, the benighted people of Iraq were unable to appreciate the benefits of our invasion, and refused to cooperate. Thus, the schedule has been delayed indefinitely.

So I guess that my short answer to your comment is “Me too!”

BTW, the whole thing was supposed to have been paid for with their oil revenues, if anyone remembers that.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:26 pm

“You can’t be an environmentalist and be against hydrogen.”
==================================================
Thanks! I will add this to my growing list of things I can’t be.

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:40 pm

The major oil fields are in Saudia Arabia and Kuwait,
that is why Saddham invaded Kuwait way back
when. Well, partially that’s the reason. I think the
other part is that Saddham believed that Kuwait
is actually part of Iraq. Deposing Saddham
Hussein was a much better idea than trusting he
won’t do anything too terrible. Trouble is, a muslim
country is no picnic to put back together. Especially
one as diverse as Iraq with both Sunni and Shiite
muslims. The problem is partially to blame on Islam,
a very conflict prone religion. Muslims historically
viewed anyone who believed something else as
the perfect slave.

How did we get on the subject of Iraq anyways? The
article was about whether or not the Volt is an Edsel.
Maybe it is, it is very expensive at $40k for a car that
can avoid gasoline use if and only if you plug it in at
night and you don’t travel more than 40 miles round trip.

If muslims fight amongst each other and not against
non muslims, that is a good thing. The last thing the
world needs are Sunni/Shiite muslim armies hell
bent on conquest.

I very much doubt that we will be gone from the middle east
for long. If Obama is throwing away all the progress in Iraq
by pulling out too soon, we will eventually have to go back.
Hopefully, I’m wrong about this.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:46 pm

Noel Park, “Yeah, the problem is that the first step didn’t work. My understanding of the concept was that, after the Iraqi people greeted us as liberators and put flowers into the barrels of our rifles”
_______________________________

I remember hearing that line of thinking before the invasion. At the time, in my office we joked, what if Iraq really needed a thug like Saddam to keep a lid on the situation. And the whole thing could go crazy once the US military took the lid off the pressure cooker.

We were only joking at the time but, WOW, who knew, or rather should have known. Also some of the bolder Shiite’s were out thanking GW Bush for the first Desert Storm invasion. Most of those were reportedly hunted down and (politely ?) asked to refrain from such activities in the future, so people weren’t running into the streets to implement any US objectives this time.

Without oil revenues involved the US would never have had any of it’s interests tied up with this area.

JEC without oil revenue, how would any leader in the region pay for WMD’s?

(Quote)
Voltair Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:48 pm

Question: Wasn’t the Aztec GM’s Edsel? It wasn’t a horrible car, had some good features, but it had looks only it’s mother could, um, make excuses for.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:49 pm

#155 Michael Robinson,

Hydrogen is the biggest scam going. It’s the big oil companies that are pushing hydrogen. They know it will probably never work out, and if it does, hydrogen will be made from natural gas, like it is now. Meanwhile, they’ve used the promise of hydrogen to delay other viable alternatives, like plug-ins. That’s why they call them Fool Sells. They are meant to deceive us. Classic red herring.

http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html
“In a recent study, fuel cell expert Ulf Bossel explains that a hydrogen economy is a wasteful economy. The large amount of energy required to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds (water, natural gas, biomass), package the light gas by compression or liquefaction, transfer the energy carrier to the user, plus the energy lost when it is converted to useful electricity with fuel cells, leaves around 25% for practical use — an unacceptable value to run an economy in a sustainable future. Only niche applications like submarines and spacecraft might use hydrogen.”

(Quote)
Bri of Elma, NY Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 8:55 pm

Edsel??? If you’re going to invoke the name of an ugly vehicle, why not use the Honda Element? I still see Element owners hide their faces when they drive theirs around town. I’m all for form follows function, but the Element is just downright ugly. While I’m dissing Honda, how about those new Acuras, huh? You know, the ones that look like a buck-toothed village idiot (B.T.V.I.), or Bugs Bunny on steroids.

Or, how about those new Mazda 3’s? C’mon, they look like they’re getting ready to “French” the car in front of them for crying out loud!

Oh, I get it… the writer, he works for Consumer Reports. They hate anything that’s not from Toyota or Honda. Must be his free Toyota Sequoia lease is running out and he wants another new one. Big surprise!

To call a car that’s still under development, and the last, best hope for a troubled AMERICAN automaker, is just plain, well, un-American. The writer is just trying to get publicity, and we fell for it!!! Shame on me, or should I say shame on all of us, for clicking on a link based on an insulting headline written by, uh, well, a B.T.V.I. (buck-toothed village idiot)!!!

No new free Toyota Sequoia lease for that B.T.V.I.!!!

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:01 pm

#147 omegaman66 Says: But moving forward you will see a slow transition to less gas and more electric. THAT’S RIGHT! The transition will be a transition that doesn’t happen over night or even in a handful of years. Decade at the bare minimum.
————————————————————————————–
Yes, exactly. It will take a decade before EREVs make a significant dent in our oil use. As a comparison, it’s taken the Prius 12 years to get where it is now. It takes a while for car buyers to switch to a new technology in large numbers.

In the meantime, I do think GM can be profitable on the Volt way before 2019, perhaps even as soon as 2014.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:05 pm

Dave G 161

Why do you keep trying? Gotta admire the tenacity though. Oh, yours too by the way.

The analysis of having an EV and renting a Carolla provides good information, thanks for the insight, That sparks a jolt with a lot of volts, smart outlook, I bet Nicola Tesla’s inventions couldn’t have sparked on the scene with a greater impact, like a super nova, while your competitors moves are like slow grazing impalas.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:09 pm

Edit 163 should have been; G. H. W. Bush

(Quote)
Mark Wagner Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:21 pm

I agree that the Volt won’t save GM now, but I believe it will be paramount to the long term future success of the company.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:31 pm

Are we really hearing what we are saying? (Please listen carefully…Don’t let others sway you to close your ears)

The theme is “We (USA) will do anything we want in the name of oil”. I am not totally vain, to think we do not make political moves in the guise of righteousness. But, if we all believe, accept, allow and take this as normal then I am afraid of where we, as a country are heading.

So the rules of the game, allow the USA to go into other countries, that have resources that we desire, and forcefully take them! If this is reality, then do we not understand why other countries might hate and despise us? And be willing to make any sacrifice necessary to rid them of us. Would we, not become the terrorist, if someone stepped into our country with same ambitions?

Boy, this 1/2 brain may be ready to call it quits for the night. This is pretty scary stuff, when people outright admit that the US govt’ would be so bold, and the scariest thing is people accept it, and do not even question it.

Thomas Jefferson once said “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” If things stay on course this time may be nearer then most would be willing to admit.

Done.

PS: Wasn’t this thread about something related to the Edsel?

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:44 pm

171 JEC (me)

Ok. Sorry, my rant was really deeper than what I like to post publicly.
I will try harder in the future.

/Boy, I hope the CIA doesn’t monitor this blog…..

(Quote)
Larry R Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 9:48 pm

The wall street journal and their columnists want GM to chapter 7.
That way they can get rid the Evil Unions and hire Illegal Immigrants
and pay them minimum wages.
Its all about profits and stock prices with wall street.
Main Street knows better.
We will buy the volt because it will make and keep us free.
I am still on the volt list

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:17 pm

This Moore jerk can’t think straight with his stupid analogy. The Edsel was an ugly car. The Volt is not.

The Volt, from what I can tell from the photos I’ve seen, will be a VERY nice looking sedan. Unlike the Prius which I think is frumpy looking.

GREEN does NOT equal ugly.

GREEN doesn’t have to be “unremarkable.”

GREEN can elicit all kinds of passion if it is done right, and GM seems to be doing just that, with the remarkable and sharp looking Chevy Volt.

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:20 pm

#159 Michael Robinson said:

Statik, you are annoying. Censorship of the word
h****** is completely uncalled for. H****** is an
energy carrier just like Lithium is in a Lithium ION
battery. The difference is, h****** is a better
energy carrier than Lithium.

There is no reason to be afraid of h******. H******
produced using nuclear power is completely OIL free
and CO2 free, depending on how the uranium is
obtained for the reactor. Fortunately, it doesn’t take
a lot of uranium to get a lot of power.

H****** is a part of every hydrocarbon and it is used
to refine gasoline from OIL.

If there’s a plug, I won’t buy it. There isn’t a chemical
battery in existence that will get you further than a high
pressure h****** tank and a fuel cell will. Better yet,
dump the high pressure h****** tank and go with a
h****** on demand system utilizing a h****** rich
fuel.

People are afraid of nuclear power, but they shouldn’t be.
All of the current aircraft carriers save maybe one are
nuclear powered. Submarines tend to be nuclear
powered. There is a large Russian fleet of nuclear
submarines, or at least there used to be.

You can’t be an environmentalist and be against h*****n.

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

/frick I ran out of astericks and I only had one letter left.

I honestly can’t argue discuss the ‘word that shall not be named’ any longer, you had to be here ‘back in the day’ I suppose. (=

Side note: Have you got some kind of weird 3rd party paragraph structure justification going and cutting and pasting all your posts here? I’m grateful, at least I know to ‘proceed with caution’ hehe

/I’m only funning with you

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 10:40 pm

Ok no link at all this time:

The autoblogspam/moderation is annoying, lol. I’ll try to cut and paste:

Zenn has a wicked good deal. Their NEW is priced at $9,995 through June 30th. As a NEV the top speed is 25MPH, but if your state allows higher, it can be modded up to 35…the range is 35 miles.

I would be so all over this if it was legal in Ontario (Which is ironic as it is actually built here…still in regulatory purgatory).

Who cars it is a NEV….and not a full speed BEV or E-Rev. It is a electric car for under $10,000 (including the $1,250 gov’t rebate). It is cool, and gives anyone who is impatient for the tech a opportunity to buy…and it is pretty easy to do ‘the math’ on it, even if you are only zipping around town.

/I hate everyone who has access to this, lol

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:15 pm

Hydrogen is not a big oil scam, it is the first element in the periodic
table and it is usually in gas form. The ways I have described that
hydrogen can be acquired do NOT require the input of OIL or natural gas. It does not matter that hydrogen is “inefficient,” gasoline is inefficient. There is a lot of energy input to refine OIL into gasoline and a lot of water which is ultimately used at 25% efficiency or less.

Currently, the conversion of all light-duty vehicles in the
U. S. to hydrogen vehicles would require 100 billion
gallons of water. However, producing gasoline in this
country currently uses over 300 billion gallons of water
per year. The math is pretty simple, producing
gasoline takes 3x the amount of water it will take to
provide hydrogen for all light duty vehicles.

Only a hydrogen fuel cell has driven an electric motor for
200+ miles on a single fill of hydrogen ( that hydrogen is
liquid, compressed gas, or provided to the fuel cell in
some other manner ). 200 miles is way better than 40.

Fuel cells are at least 30% more efficient than ICEs, so
they make up for the energy that is lost acquiring hydrogen
for them. Chemical batteries can’t compete with hydrogen
as an energy carrier. The Volt’s battery is incredibly heavy
and if you were to multiply the amount of battery by a factor
of 10 to get a 200 mile range, that would be an excessive
amount of battery. The Volt has the disadvantage of having
an ICE which lessens the benefit of electric drive.

Anyone who thinks hydrogen is a big OIL or a big NG scam is uninformed. The Oil companies don’t want to see hydrogen
cut into their OIL profits. The idea that hydrogen can be
retrieved from many different sources using many different methods is unsettling to big Oil. The fact that the best sources
of hydrogen are NOT fossil fuels doesn’t favor big OIL in any way.

Hydrogen is in:

1) All water.

2) All plants.

3) All fossil fuels.

Retrieving hydrogen from 1 and 2 makes more sense than trying
to get it from 3. It is in retrieving hydrogen from 1 and 2 that you
have a renewable resource, especially 1.

The real cost of OIL if the cost of securing foreign oil fields is factored in is MUCH higher than the diesel/gasoline pump price.
Hydrogen is a domestic resource. It is harder to handle, but it
doesn’t need to travel around the world to be consumed like
OIL does. With nuclear ships producing hydrogen, plus wind
farms producing hydrogen, and farmers producing hydrogen
it becomes a fuel that comes from multiple domestic sources.

Hydrogen is a better route to go than biofuels as there are more
ways to create hydrogen than there are to create biofuels. Also,
hydrogen produces zero carbon emissions when it is used.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:51 pm

CH5 not a lot of hydrogen in ethanol

Arch

(Quote)
Kubel Says:
April 10th, 2009 at 11:51 pm

This opinion piece might be right. The Volt may become an Edsel. We really have no way of knowing yet if it will catch on or if the car will be a quality machine. How many “Chevrolet” buyers do you know that are willing to spend $30,000 for a car with the performance capability and seating capacity of a Cobalt? There aren’t many of us Volt fans, and even fewer of us have money like that to blow, especially now.

But I still think the first years production of the Volt will sell out before the first model hits the dealers parking lot.

(Quote)
Laura Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:28 am

Read this:
“…
the euphoria of driving them and the pleasure of watching the envy and admiration of others …”

Others what excludes me.

Camaro is just a sign of a piece of s*, bulky car. It is not surprising that GM and other American car makers are dying. They don’t let it go that stupid passion for things from the past and obsolete.

(Quote)
Vincent Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:31 am

#180 that’s why they make different vehicle shapes and sizes.
Who cares if you like it or not. There are already ~ 20,000 ordered.

(Quote)
Sam Y Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:44 am

Hey Michael Robinson.

So nuclear powered boats out on the ocean. What do you think about all the nuclear waste? You think they can be safely deposited at the bottom of the ocean somewhere? How are you gonna get the hydrogen transported from the production site? Can you honestly hear yourself there?…You got to be joking right?

What about the water? You honestly think that as water becomes a more valuable resource for personal & agricultural use, we want to use it for electrolysis and get hydrogen?

Why use hydrogen when the tech is still in development? With the R&D dollar required to bring this tech to economically viable mass market scale, not to mention the crazt amount of infrastructure needed for producing, storing, transporting, dispensing Hydrogen with safety in mind? I know you can list some weird crazy techs as well as scientifically sound techs still in development, but I’m not sure people want to use it; it’s too dangerous for general public…who wants H2 storage tanks exploding in the middle of a busy highway, or some stupid fool trying to bomb a H2 pipeline (I know, I know, you can’t transport it via pipeline but still). What if it leaks and instantly freezes a poor bystander’s arm off?
At least with electricity, it has a well-developed infrastructure (easier to upgrade rather than build new, man) and economically viable, safe method to produce it, transport it, store it, and deliver it to end-users. It’s not likely to explode in your face either (at least very unlikely compared to H2) and damage can be limited even if something goes wrong. Honestly, H2 is too dangerous (and expensive) every step of the way. If I have a H2 car and get into a crash with a semi, I don’t care how much failsafe systems there are, I’m gonna be burnt crisp. I infinitely prefer a gas tanker exploding rather than a hydrogen tanker exploding on a highway (I know, it’s like choosing between lesser of two evils). If some idiot starts a fire at a gas station (accidentally or intentionally), if proper steps are taken, there are some chance of containing the fire and not make everything go kaboom, but H2, I don’t think we’d have a good chance. I’m sure you heard these arguments somewhere.

You talk about using other non-nuclear sources. I’m not even gonna bring up ICE which you compare to your H2 scheme, since I know how much resource it takes to sustain OIL economy (I’m in Alberta, which produces heavy “tar sand” oil…a very energy intensive and water wasting method). Instead, I’m talking about electricity. Why not use the non-nuclear sources, get the electricty produced and use it directly rather than use it to produce hydrogen (…which will be put into fuel cell and produce electricity…very inefficient due to conversion loss if you take a look at physics of it). Look at your whole argument from money and energy point-of-view. It’ll take too much…way too much energy and resources to even entertain the idea of hydrogen being used en masse. With fraction of money and with a lot less energy input, we’ll be able to generate much more electricty, for all the uses we want.

Think about it. “Printable” (…or called something else I forget…you know those ultra-thin solar panels that are almost fully developed) solar panels on everything; clothes, houses, windows, cars, bikes, mailboxes, your fences, buildings….pretty much all human-made standing structures & products. Can you imagine how awesome the world would be then? If we can do this, then somehow re-capture all those CO2 in the atmosphere and stuff those under the ocean that would surely put a huge dent in climate change, give us energy independence, and make North America the envy of the world. And personally,I’d rather have CO2 stored in the deep sea rather than nuclear waste. We can may be even put those re-captured CO2 into the empty oil wells (like some petro-geologists & chemists are suggesting). Plus, if we start using massive amounts of energy from Sunlight to generate electricity (& heat while at it), it’ll cut down climate change directly as there wouldn’t be as much energy in form of “heat” that will be trapped.

Point is, there’s just no way that we can even entertain the thought of hydrogen economy while there’s much better alternative that’s already here: electricity derived from the power of sun. Unlike H2, which we have to get from water or hydrocarbon sources, we can get electricity from sunlight, which is the ultimate abundant renewable resource. You want to talk about using a large # of nuclear fission reactors? Why not make the most use of our Sun, a single gigantic free fusion reactor that’s maintenance free, completely safe from accidents & criminals?

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:58 am

Michael Robinson

Your comment on 177 was an admirable effort and of lot of work.

Take a break, take a deep breath and relax, and take a physics class, and an econ class too.

(Quote)
Brian Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:24 am

When the Volt was first introduced, it had the WOW factor. Here is a cool looking car that also provides an electric motor. That is what attracted me to the Volt and made me want one. I am afraid the “turning heads” excitement is probably not going to be there. The new Camaro definitely has it. If I had to pick between the two vehicles, I would rather have the Volt because of the electric motor, but I wish it had an exciting body also.

(Quote)
Mike Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:46 am

The Volt will pave the way for the electric Camaro. Old gasoline powered Camaros will be crushed except for a few that old guys will drive around to classic car shows.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:25 am

#185 Mike says “Old gasoline powered Camaros will be crushed except for a few that old guys will drive around to classic car shows.”
=====================

I hope I can be one of those guys

One can be for the Volt without having to be against everyone else.

(Quote)
GeorgeB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:25 am

I bought a shiny new, red T-Top Camaro SS in 2000. It was drop dead gorgeous and fun to drive for about a month. Then the reality set in. The Eagle F-1 directional tires cost over $1,000 to replace after 20,000 miles; I got beat by a Mazda RX 8 in a Florida back-road race (he pulled ahead of me at 125+ mph); I had a hard time getting in and out of the thing and my back started hurting when I drove it.

On the positive side, I got some satisfaction from comments by others (”Hey…nice ride!” etc.) and got to let my daughter and her date take it to the prom instead of the boy’s beat up Explorer. I sold it after about 1 1/2 years for what I owed on it.

In the end I realized it was just a box I had to check on my list of things I felt I had to do before I kicked the bucket; get a fancy sports car. There will always be a market for these kind of purchases and GM is wise to cash in on them. But, being a little older and wiser, the Volt looks pretty good to me.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:29 am

This kind of postings will not help Lyle be one of the first to drive the Volt!! I’m not surprised to see such an an article because the internet is full of this stuff, but I’m surprised to see it on this site.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:42 am

Bri of Elma, NY Says: @166

Well said……and there is a lot of truth in it.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:46 am

#64 nasaman says
“Future high-power E-REVs will win every “stop-light derby” against the hottest race-tuned Camaros ever built —and leave yards of rubber on the street— without using a single drop of gas! Get over your Camaro obsession, Moore!”
==================================

Yes that was the promise of the concept Volt, and someday it will happen

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 7:07 am

#177 Michael Robinson Says:
Hydrogen is in:
1) All water.
2) All plants.
3) All fossil fuels.
————————————————————————————–
This is precisely why hydrogen won’t work. All hydrogen on the planet is already chemically bound to something else. Breaking those chemical bonds requires energy – more energy than the hydrogen provides. Hydrogen is an inefficient energy carrier, and therefore wastes a lot of energy.

Yes, hydrogen can be made from nuclear, solar, or wind energy, but doing so wastes most of that energy. For example, if you had solar panels that made electricity to crack water to make hydrogen, that hydrogen may run a Honda FCX for 15 miles a day where the same size solar panels would run the Volt 40 miles a day.

And by the way, making hydrogen from nuclear, solar, or wind is many times more expensive than making hydrogen from natural gas, so most hydrogen will be made from natural gas, like it is now.

Bottom line: Hydrogen can never compete with it’s own fuel source.

Why a hydrogen economy doesn’t make sense
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 7:25 am

191 DaveG

I think your talking on deaf ears. Myself and MANY other posters have used similar explanations on why H is not the answer.

I am not sure why, but Mr. Robinson appears to have some vested interest in H and its success. His arguments are generally disjointed, at best, and basically say the same thing, over and over.

I think a H site would be the place to be for Mr. Robinson.

Easter is near, have no fear. I hear the Easter bunny will be riding to town in his new H car.

/ “Coffee breaks over, back on your heads.”

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:07 am

______________________________________________________
#188 Joe Said:
“This kind of postings will not help Lyle be one of the first to drive the Volt!! I’m not surprised to see such an an article because the internet is full of this stuff, but I’m surprised to see it on this site.”

——-
Lyle’s posting Mr. Moore’s prediction that people are not going to want to buy the Volt (which I believe to be an incorrect prediction) is exactly what makes this site an excellent venue for candid discussion and evaluation of the Volt.

The alternative would be a site that filters out all posts and comments critical of the Volt Program; a site that most Voltec Heads such as me have no use for.

With regards to Lyle being one of the first to drive the Volt, I believe that GM owes Lyle that and much more. They owe Lyle dedication of the first Production Volt that rolls off the line by allowing Lyle to purchase that first Volt. Such a gesture would both be correct recognition of Lyle’s contribution of promoting awareness of the Voltec Program and also a PR home run for GM.
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
GeorgeB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:12 am

Nature has taken millions of years to store energy in hydrocarbon-rich fossil fuels and we are well on our way to using it all up. Some other form of energy storage will be necessary in the not too distant future and the big cost associated with this is more about distribution than production.

Hydrogen can not be delivered through the existing infrastructure so new distribution systems will have to be developed. It has taken 100 years to build the oil/gas infrastructure at a cost of God only knows how much. I don’t know what a hydrogen distribution system would look like, but I do know what the electrical system looks like so it makes sense to me that we should get the electric option developed while we work on “Mr. Fusion”.

If hyrdogen is a practical solution, why don’t we have hydrogen fueled power plants?

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:23 am

#165 Dave G
#182 Sam Y
#183 jeffhre
#192 JEC
#!94 GerogeB

….where do you guys find the energy?

/don’t answer ironic double meaning (=

(Quote)
Alex E Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:16 am

The only thing keeping the price of fuel down to about $2.00 per gallon right now is the miserable economy we are all slogging through. What will happen when the credit gates open, the economy starts to roar again, and sales of new cars take off through the roof? Did everyone already forget spring/summer of 2008? We’ll be looking at $5.00 minimum for regular gas. Who, at that point, will be pushing for 15 MPG turbocharged muscle cars that burn hi-test?? Hybrid cars, including plug-in’s (and eventually all electric ones) can be made fast and stylish a hell of a lot easier than Chavez, Putin and all the other owners of 80% of the world’s oil can be made pro-American. When we reach that point, a reborn Camaro with a big muscle car engine will far more likely flop than any hybrid.

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:45 am

#196 Alex E said:

The only thing keeping the price of fuel down to about $2.00 per gallon right now is the miserable economy we are all slogging through. What will happen when the credit gates open, the economy starts to roar again, and sales of new cars take off through the roof?
=======================

It will happen…but the flaw in your logic is when. So many people assumed it would bounce back quickly, even retest the highs…and now we are quickly approaching the 1 year anniversary of the high, and trading at about a third of it (well ok it was on July 11th, 2008@$147).

This isn’t like other recessions, with short term factors negatively impacting the economy. This is a recession (maybe depression) of larger fundamental problems. This economy is more likely to be mired in the mud for a decade than out by next year.

So actual gas prices ‘may’ not be as big of a deciding factor of buying a hybrid and not buying a Camaro…at least not this one.
—–
Disclaimer: Although one could argue inflationary pressure on the price of crude which is traded in USD could provide a similar result domestically as you allude to, which could come as a result of all this printing of stimulus money on top of an already broken system that was quickly devaluing the dollar before the panic/flight to safety rush came in.

Whenever the economy is stable (but not good necessarily) the USD continues to go back to the weakening trend it has been in for years. When there is panic (like Sept-Nov ‘09 and for Jan 09 to early March when the market was continually losing and short sellers where running wild) the dollar roars back as a ’safety play’.

http://quotes.ino.com/chart/?s=NYBOT_dx

If the world economy is stable, the USD is likely to not only return to the trend of being devalued, but at a accelerated pace when you tack on all this recent ’stimulus spending’ plus all the extra money to just keep social programs and infrastructure working, and all the other fun/broken stuff…which will make everything a lot more expensive for Americans (including gas).

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:26 am

#159 Michael Robinson & #161 JEC:

I am a member of the Sierra Club’s California Air Quality Committee. While i am just a simple private citizen with a bit of a big mouth, many of the members are PhD qualified experts.

The Committee just this week decided to lobby the California Air Resources Board to divert money allocated to hydrogen refuelling stations to electric car recharging facilities.

The reasoning is that, as others above have pointed out, producing hydrogen is highly energy intensive, the infrastructure to support hydrogen vehicles is basically nonexistant, and the cost of a hydrogen refuelling station is estimated to be in the millions of dollars, while and electric recharging station is in the thousands, so many more can be built for the money available. The conclusion of the Committee is that electric cars and “plug-in hybrids” will reduce fuel consumption, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions much faster than hydrogen vehicles can hope to do.

These are cutting edge environmentalists, and they are against hydrogen.

(Quote)
Eric C. Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 3:18 pm

@CaptJackSparrow 93

Haha, same here with the beer and wings. Someone started working at my company recently and has one too, they said they love it. Between that and the good reviews I saw online, I figured it was worth it.

And maybe in addition to getting in shape, I can make room for a little more beer and wings at the same time.

(Quote)
ClarksonCote Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 3:19 pm

That post #199 was me by the way, used to post with Eric C. but there were too many other Erics floating around. Looks like this computer still had Eric C. saved.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:37 pm

I think a lot of the older classics will be converted to electric, it is a very easy conversion.. on one of these RWD cars just attach the motor to the rear differential.. and place modular battery packs anywhere you have room.

I think future batteries will not require cooling, thus simplifying installation even more.

I would like an early 70s Buick Riviera.. 200hp motor and about 300 miles range would be just about right.

…………………………………………..
#185 Mike Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:46 am
The Volt will pave the way for the electric Camaro. Old gasoline powered Camaros will be crushed except for a few that old guys will drive around to classic car shows.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:43 pm

I think a lot of the high prices were due to speculation, and I think that will be controlled in the future..

This collapse and $2 gas has dealt a terrible blow to alternate fuels, oil exploration and electric cars.. and probably to investments in oil refineries. The fuel subsidies in China did not help either.

Luckily Tata Nanos will take a few years to ramp up to million cars production rates.

……………………………………….
#196
Alex E Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:16 am
The only thing keeping the price of fuel down to about $2.00 per gallon right now is the miserable economy we are all slogging through. What will happen when the credit gates open, the economy starts to roar again, and sales of new cars take off through the roof?

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:22 pm

The hydrogen infrastructure can be built as the cars come into
existence. Hydrnol, a product that asemblon is going to market,
will be available along Interstate 5 soon. Fortunately, asemblon
will be offering to modify ICE cars and trucks to run on hydrogen.

There are many ways to acquire hydrogen and the sooner we
get started the better.

I have a web site with links to other resources on hydrogen and
some of my own comments on the subject:

http://web.robinson-west.com/michael/hydrogen

So called environmentalists who are so called experts calling for
the abandonment of the hydrogen highway in favor of having a
recharging station every 40 miles or so are overlooking a lot of
things. First off, what impact will these batteries have on the
environment when they wear out? Second, if the range of battery
electrical cars fails to increase from 40 miles to 400 without increasing the weight and size of the battery, how will chemical
battery EVs ever become a practical replacement for gasoline
ICE cars/trucks? Third, the battery as of now in the Volt alone
is too expensive to be practical. Fourth, Mercedes will be marketing
a fuel cell electric vehicle for $30k in the near future. Fifth point,
electrolysis is not the only pathway to hydrogen and even gasoline
involves a large energy input. Six, the electrical grid in it’s current
state has very little spare capacity where hydrogen pipelines are
MUCH cheaper than high voltage lines and they go underground
resulting in less harm to the environment. I think these PHD’s who
are against hydrogen are closed minded fools.

Hydrogen infrastructure can be built as fuel cell cars come to market
in a gradual approach. Distributed production of hydrogen is a very
real possibility.

(Quote)
Paul Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 7:12 am

This WSJ writer is obviously technically illiterate and just knows nothing about EVs. Most of us have to admit it’s only through logic and imagination that we know what an Ev drives like because few of us have been in any EV other than a train. If this WSJ writer knew how much stump pulling torque the Volt will have and how fast it will be off the line he’d forget about V8s.

I myself drive a 5.7Lt LS1 V8 as my daily driver but it’s only for the torque. I’m straining at the leash to get an EV because I know they cost 1/20th per mile what my Gen 3 costs to run, don’t eat themselves alive with heat stress due to the engine wasting 85% of the energy that goes through it… AND have MORE low down torque than my V8.

An EV like a Tesla makes a mockery of any V8 in terms of acceleration… and this WSJ writer sounds like he simply fantasizes about driving the fastest car on the road…. soon that will be ANYTHING EV.

(Quote)
fas Says:
April 14th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

I think the Volt might be successful but competing with the likes of the Prius and then the Telsa wont be an easy job. Oh wait Honda’s got the Insight too.

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
June 1st, 2009 at 7:56 am

Let Moore buy the GM Camaro that he likes, let the rest of us buy the Voltec vehicle that we like.
Not all of us can have the opportunity to buy a Voltec vehicle the first few years.
Let us count on the “one track mindedness” of Moore, who must “puppet to his petro-greedy audiences” via the “weasel street journal”. That is all they will ever have to say about anything.

As far as Federal ownership of GM, there will be a massive repurchase of that portion of ownership by the public very quickly in the New GM, I predict. The receivership is merely a legal transitioning from one era to another era,

The green electric motoring era.

I have not ever bought stock in any company.

I will buy stock in the New GM as I can afford.

I’ll bet Moore will go right out there and buy GM stock as well, as quickly as he can, and as much as he can (nay-saying all the way to the brokerage, in hopes that the stock won’t skyrocket before he can get there), because he knows that the Voltec vehicle line will have performance (financial as well as horsepower) characteristics that will blow the doors off both of his previous benchmarks. This is precisely how your competitors work to buy the New GM stock operate, as a function of their greed to make money.
Let there be a new GM nationalism to buy everything GM.
Dan Petit Austin TX.

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009
This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]
BigCityCat
Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009
I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]
omnimoeish
First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009
The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]
admin
Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009
- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]
Texas
New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009
Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]
srschrier
New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier

Volt Becoming the New Edsel?!

206 Responses to “Volt Becoming the New Edsel?!”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts