Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Wall Street Journal Editor Explains His Volt the Next Edsel Statement

April 11th, 2009 | Posted in: Public Opinion

In our last post we discussed the fact that Wall Street Journal Editorial Board member Steve Moore gave the opinion that the Chevy Volt was already becoming the next Edsel. He did not define exactly what he meant by that which left us guessing.

I was able to point out our to discussion to Mr. Moore who I contacted by email, and asked him what he meant. He responded “The Volt is a huge money loser just like the Edsel. This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build.”

The Ford Edsel was built in from 1958 through 1960 and was created as a new division within Ford and had several different models. It was launched with great public anticipation and fanfare and flopped miserably mostly because the public had a hard time understanding what it was.

In the end Ford killed off the car and the division for a loss in 1960 dollars of $350 million.

Lets hope Mr. Moore is wrong.

Posted by: Lyle

115 Responses to “Wall Street Journal Editor Explains His Volt the Next Edsel Statement”

DonC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:29 am

The guy is simply uninformed — that the government told GM to build the Volt would be quite the surprise to GM. He has no qualifications whatsoever and he is best ignored. I don’t understand why Lyle would even bother with such random noise.

(Quote)
Dave B Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:30 am

Don C @ 1…

Because that’s what unbiased fact reporters do…they go to ALL sources.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:30 am

Edsels were cars that had the glamor halo for a time. I thought they were nice looking, even though others thought not. Maybe they were too different for that moment.

In any event, it is nice that Mr Moore responds.

(Quote)
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:31 am

Dead wrong.

(Quote)
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:32 am

Remeber gas is easing up…..
Take Care,
TED

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:34 am

#1 DonC says
“He has no qualifications whatsoever and he is best ignored. I don’t understand why Lyle would even bother with such random noise.”
————————————————————-

Lyle puts up with you and me, so why not Mr Moore? Besides, Mr Moore’s opinion is widely read while ours is not, so his opinion has more impact (and it was only an opinion column, not a news report). We just don’t like him because he might be right.

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:43 am

Washington didn’t tell Ford to build the Edsel, nor did it tell GM to build the Volt. And no sensible person would make any analogies between the two cars.

This Moore guy is a clown.

Does he know Toyota lost $10,000 per car on the first generation Prius?

(Quote)
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:46 am

I would like to know his opinion on peak oil and its affect of the worlds economy every time demand is high and prices skyrocket. We need to educate the public of the importance of getting off of foreign oil.
Take Care, TED

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:46 am

#8 PLJ says
“Does he know Toyota lost $10,000 per car on the first generation Prius?”
————————————————————–

Well yes and no. Toyota never sold any for less than the cost to build one Prius on the average over the first model’s lifetime. They “lost money” in the sense that they did not recover all the development cost and corporate overhead in the first year. (Good accounting, which they have, would not require them to do so.)

(Quote)
Ted in Fort Myers Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:47 am

The world will eventually go to electric cars. GM has to build the Volt just to stay in the game.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:50 am

#8 TED says
“I would like to know his opinion on peak oil and its affect of the worlds economy”
———————————————-

Keep in mind he was writing an opinion column about the Camaro, and the number of words he is allocated is limited. Within the WSJ the function of opinion columns is to provoke discussion, and in this regard Mr Moore has succeeded.

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:52 am

Edsel was a whole new division for Ford.

If this guy had any real knowledge about the auto industry he MIGHT make an analogy between Ford creating Edsel and GM creating Saturn.

Both were mistakes.

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:55 am

Behold the power of GM-volt.com, lol. Obviously this guy doesn’t take anymore time responding to emails as he does writing his opinion pieces.

“The Volt is a huge money loser just like the Edsel. This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build.”

I remember in 2006 when the government issued that memo to GM, forcing them to build, display and announce GM’s intention to built the Volt at the 2007 Detroit autoshow, (er I mean the NAIAS, lol). Boy, those where good times…as I recall George Bush was on the stage introducing it.

The guy is right, it is a money loser. And It is a ill-conceived project, specifically because a company in GM’s position could never bring this to market, or could afford to maintain the program through its desired end result.
—but that is not what he said, he drew a unsubstantiated conclusion, so now we get to jump all over him with righteous indignation

/feels good

(Quote)
imagine Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:55 am

To prevent the loss of their monopoly, oil exporting countries may well try to sink the Volt and other alternative-fuel vehicles by keeping the price of oil relatively low. If people do not buy Volts because gas is cheap, GM may well lose its investment in the car. Then, we will face high oil prices and car companies will be even more afraid to make investments in alternative-fuel vehicles. Mr. Moore may be right, but unlike the loss of the Edsel, that would be a genuine catastrophe. We as a nation need to support GM and the Volt even if oil is relatively cheap for several years.

(Quote)
Freemon Sandlewould Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:59 am

I’d pay to have George Bush back after seeing what President SpendsAlot Obama personal popcicle of Larrry Sinclair is doing. None of my black friends know how to manage money and Barack is no different. A trillion here a trillion there here a trillion there a trillion …ole Obama is setting up a true crash that no one can control. It occurs when the currency which merely represents interpersonal trust is corroded to the point that it can not be recovered for significant periods of time. Forget all other models. Think TRUST.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:03 am

Boy, that cleared up my questions on Mr. Moore…and this guy gets paid to write stuff?

“The Volt is a huge money loser just like the Edsel.”
Huh? Any car that has not yet made it to market would fit this statement.

Mr. Moore, the Volt has not sold a single vehicle yet. Come on, you gotta have more than that, right?

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:11 am

Well Hyundai introduced a new Hybrid, Nuvis.

All I have to say, is the swinging up doors sound cool, but in practicality, they are ridiculous.

So, when you drop little Johnny off, he has to open the entire side of the car to the elements. This SUCKS when its 10 below and wind is whipping. The door will likely cause the car to capsize, as the wind blows you over

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

(Quote)
solo Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:19 am

Does anyone think Steve Moore and Michael Moore might be related?

They booth have reverse digestive systems because every time they open their mouths………..

(Quote)
Gas Electric Volt Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:21 am

I think Mr. Moore is right.

We should all bury our heads in the sand and hope that OPEC and Chevron don’t stick it to us again.

And who really cares that other car companies are developing their own EREV type vehicles. I’m sure GM will have no problems surviving on Hummer and Camaro sales…

(Quote)
avatar Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:25 am

Less is MOORE!! = actually Less OF Moore!

(Quote)
Thomas Gilling Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:29 am

Well GOOD marketing would combat this problem. Please do not look at

tinyurl.com/dn42on and tinyurl.com/cqk8l2

for idea’s on how to do the new Ad! This is why Electric Car’s Failed! Oh and don’t describe the limitations of the car if someone want’s to buy it!

(Quote)
GeorgeB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:38 am

I like the fact that Lyle chose to put Mr. Moore’s comments on the site. We of the GM-Volt community are all a little (maybe a lot) parochial on the issue of electric cars and I think Mr. Moore speaks to the more skeptical folks out there.

I talk up the Volt everywhere I go just to measure the response and, to be honest, I’m usually met with muted non-responses when I suggest that electric is the way to go. It’s hard to overstate the importance of a successful launch of the Volt. If it meets expectations then the we’re off to the races. If not it’s EV-1 redux.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:40 am

Lyle, you just gotta stop feeding the trolls.

Although, when he says; The Volt is a huge money loser just like the Edsel. This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build. I always did wonder why GM came out with the Volt in 2007. I think Statik was advising GM on how to maximise a GSB when the money ran out.

/Thank god the banks don’t have guys like this on their boards!

(Quote)
avatar Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:02 am

Violence in Nigeria’s oil region left 1,000 people dead and cost $24 billion dollars last year, a report says, according to an official and activist.

We fill up the tank but fail to realize the total “cost” of the resource.

We need an alternative and we need it yesterday!!! GO VOLT

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:03 am

Moore should respond in kind: Post a few of Lyle’s opinions in his column. Fair is fair.

(Quote)
Computer-codger Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:05 am

As I have said about the Wall Street Journal before, you have to consider the source and their agenda.

And besides I don’t believe the government told Ford to build the Edsel. Car companies can make big mistakes on their own with out government help. I don’t think the government had much to say about GM starting the Volt project.

Let’s all hope the Volt technology is the big success we all want it to be.

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:05 am

#22 NZDavid said:

Lyle, you just gotta stop feeding the trolls.

Although, when he says; The Volt is a huge money loser just like the Edsel. This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build. I always did wonder why GM came out with the Volt in 2007. I think Statik was advising GM on how to maximise a GSB when the money ran out.

/Thank god the banks don’t have guys like this on their boards!
========================

Lol.

I think the gov’t backs GM’s survival either way…but there certainly looks to be a multi-billion dallar payday waiting on the otherside of bankruptcy on the DoE loans for the Volt and other ‘Volt related’ hotness…up to 10.2 billion worth.

Once a bankruptcy judge lets them out of C11 and/or the PTF declares GM is a potentially viable company, that money is going to flow.

I guess in that respect (milking the gov’t for money) the Volt is a screaming success…provided acquiring huge loans needed for your own short term surivival based on a questionable future products and relative ROI, with no reasonable way to repay and/or service said loans is considered a sucess.

/by that metric you could consider GM VERY successful over the last decade, hehe.

(Quote)
Nelson Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:07 am

“This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build.”

WRONG!

The public is telling GM what to build, with their buying decisions.
The reason GM’s inventory is not moving off the lots is because the public doesn’t want that low tech, low MPG, polluting JUNK!

NPNS!

(Quote)
BillR Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:07 am

Unlike the rest of us, Mr. Moore hasn’t considered the big flick:

1) Peak oil is upon us, and with 3rd world development, fuel prices may rise exponentially
2) Atmospheric CO2 levels have been increasing for 150 years, and may be causing global warming
3) We are paying an exhorbident price in resources and human lives to maintain stability in world oil markets
4) Our trade deficit is helping to ruin our economy
5) More needs to be done to reduce air pollution

I’m sure there are other reasons that I have missed that explain why we need the Volt, and other cars like it.

So, is the Volt an Edsel, or is it the KittyHawk?

Mr. Moore’s comments are analagous to the following quote:

“It is complete nonsense to believe flying machines will ever work.”

— Sir Stanley Mosley, 1905.”

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

Well, that is the big risk. The Volt will lose money. Maybe lots of money for 5+ years. That is a huge investment for a stuggling car company to make. Then we all know the extra costs of in home electrical work, need of new power plants (be it coal, nuclear, or my favorite new tech the solar tower from Australia), and the pain of owning new tech. The old adage was never by a car in it’s first year. That was for established design principles.

Big risk for GM and those who by the first gen. be prepared for large bills outside of just buying the car.

Just to be clear, I think Volt like cars are the future. You just won’t save any money over the lifetime you own the car. So it is a feel good buy, not a save money buy.

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

The problem is that he has the potential to be right. Volt’s success is not a slam dunk by any stretch. It’s expensive and not cost-effective without $4 gas. It’s a tech wonder but I suspect it’s not going to be the savior of GM.

Only time will tell.

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:31 am

Windows 95 is a consumer-oriented graphical user interface-based operating system. It was released on August 24, 1995 by Microsoft, and was a significant progression from the company’s previous Windows products.

In the marketplace, Windows 95 was a major success, and within a year or two of its release had become the most successful operating system ever produced. It also had the effect of driving other major players in the DOS-compatible operating system out of business.
____________________________

Why buy a Pentium 1 133 with Windows 95 for $2500 when you can buy a type writer for $200?

Anyone seen a type writer lately?

=D~

(Quote)
Tim Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:48 am

Only time will tell is Mr. Moore is correct or not, but many have doubts about any EV’s success as long as regular gas is below $3.50/gal. and batteries remain more expensive than gas tanks.

There is ONE constant…. CHANGE!

(contrary political spin, not all change is “good” change.)

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

#6 RB says “We just don’t like him because he might be right”

The problem is that he CAN’T be right! Why? Because everything he writes is factually inaccurate. Let’s look at his response. To quote:

“The Volt is a huge money loser just like the Edsel. This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build.”

This is amazing because it’s hard to get three facts wrong in one sentence. First the government never told GM to build the Volt. (Unless you remember George Bush ordering it). Second the government never told GM to build the Edsel. Third the Volt hasn’t lost money because it hasn’t been sold yet. (Note he’s not saying he thinks it will lose money he’s asserting that it has lost money, which we’re not going to know for years).

Then there is the (complete lack of) logic of his shilling. He says that “this is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build”. Huh? What is this guy smoking? Is he saying the government told GM to build the Aztek or the Cimarron? Is he saying the government told GM to build Hummers? How about Saabs? The fact is that the government has never told GM to build anything. Given that GM has lost market share for fifty years, the facts better support the argument that this is what happens when the government DOESN’T tell GM what cars to build.

At the end of the day Moore represents how bad things have become for conservatives, and is, in a sense, the conservative equivalent of the Cimarron. It seems that what started out as a conservative disdain for liberal intellectuals has morphed into a disdain for anyone with an intellect. Why else write slop that can’t stand up to even the most cursory analytic review. Basically he’s just paid to spew pap that fits the world view of an increasingly small percentage of the population. That he manages to make money doing this is to his credit, but it hardly ads to his credibility.

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:57 am

The Silicon Valley elite whom we met at the unveiling party seemed to love it.
And why not? Other than sleek looks, Model S features include:

* An all electric engine
* Zero-to-60 acceleration in under six seconds
* Seats five adults, two kids
* Storage space under the hood and in the back
* 17” touch screen entertainment and navigation system with 3G connection

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/229945/Behind-the-Design-of-Tesla%E2%80%99s-Sexy-New-Sedan?tickers=F,GM,^IXIC

=D~

(Quote)
Larry Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:58 am

As much as we might not want to admit it, being fans of the Volt. The guy is right. Its a huge money loser. Just because you dont want something to be true, doesn’t mean it isn’t.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:59 am

All of this is nonsense and it should be ignored….not worthy of any discussions!!!! You are all playing into the writer hands.

(Quote)
old man Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:01 am

I can not say the Volt will be a save or lose money buy. This is in opec’s hand. If the price of gas stays low then no. BUT, if they should deside to create another oil shortage and you can not get gas to get to work as happened during the last extreme shortage. well maybe.

I hope there a lot of people like me who will buy it without regard to the money but rather a sence that we do not want to be any wheres near as vulnerable the next time. And are as tired as I am at funding those who want to kill us. And I know we buy oil from our friends in Canada. This does not negate the fact that our consumption of oil helps keep the price high which helps those fore mentioned people that want us dead.

Could go on about my hope for a green world.

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

The VOLT success is directly linked to the price of GAS and the availability of the car. At $4.00 or more a gallon and 10,000 Volts build in 2010 the Prius wil be a hot seller and the Volt will be sold out in weeks

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:42 am

I agree with other posters – the author of that article has no idea what he’s talking about. He needs to spend some time reading up on the Volt’s inception, and especially the correct context around its development.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:47 am

Well, DonC said it all at #1. We could have stopped right there, but the rest of the comments are great too.

Ted in Fort Meyers:

Great comments all. Great to see you contributing so effectively here.

#23 avatar:

Amen!

#28 Bill R:

Well done! LOL at Sir Stanley!

#37 old man:

I agree wholeheartedly. The price of gas has been increasing at a pretty rapid rate here the last few days. Sooner or later, the current honeymoon will be over.

My thought is, when you have the enemy down, don’t let him back up. Now is the time to buy Volts. I’d a lot rather buy mine when gas is $2 and try to help to keep it there, than to wait and buy it when the horse is already out of the barn at $4+.

Great work guys! Blog on!

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

The Wall Street Journal was recently purchased by FOX Entertainment and Rupert Murdoch. A once great source of information has gone the way of all informational journals into the world of gossip, rags, and entertainment. Fox has an anti-government view of everything. I’m sure the new platform there will thrive just as the Volt will thrive.

This country needs to get off Middle-East oil – period. The macro view supports all autos going to electric.

(Quote)
alex_md Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:59 am

I don’t know if it is even fair to ask a bankrupt company to keep developing technology without any commercial benefit, which will loose money for the company for the next maybe 10 years. I am not sure that this company will be really trying hard to bring the product to the market. Sure they need it to repair the damaged image caused by the destruction on EV1s. GM as well as Toyota and Honda are interested in ICE tech which is at the core of their business model.
The disruptive technology like the one found in Model S can only be developed by small start-ups or government sponsored agencies like NASA. So far we don’t even know which tech will come out on top. Logic tells me that pure EV is the most efficient way to start, but there are so many different combination of battery and ICE.
The only thing in which GM has clear advantage over Tesla, and multiple over start-ups with great new tech is the ability to mass manufacture whatever they design. So far nobody has seen the prototype – only computer simulations and preintegration mules. At the same time Tesla is out there driving on the streets. So are probably 10-15 different all electric and hybrid plug-ins from different small groups.
Since we all agree that getting our commute uncoupled from the oil is a national security issue, and since the only financial body which has and willing to part with money is the government the logical thing to do is to hold and open tender in three categories

1. Plug in small commuter car
2. Plug in family car/van/suv
3. Plug in Pick-up truck

The winners would get government and private funding and handed over couple of closing truck/SUV factories from GM, Chrysler, C11 sales together with massive contracts for the next 15-20 years funded partially from the defense budget. That is going to make Toyota and Honda cry like a baby, but who cares.
Once there is an alternative people will buy it.

(Quote)
User Name Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:09 pm

As I said yesterday, Stephen Moore is a retarded imbecile.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

#42 alex_md:

Well I dunno about the first part, but everything after “Since we all agree….” works for me.

(Quote)
Noah Nehm Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:27 pm

Going out on a limb here, I’d say that the Volt’s European cousin, the Ampera, will be a guaranteed success in France. Why? Lots of cheap nuclear power available at night, high gasoline prices, and relatively small family sizes.

On the whole, for the first few years the Volt will be relegated to the niche market, but over time that market will grow to be fairly substantial. And, given the rate of innovation in battery technology, the costs will come down to a reasonable level. I’d even venture to say that the reliability of drive train will be relatively good too, given the reliability of electric motors, and the simplicity of the ICE-generator drivetrain.

Most importantly: GM has to get the Volt right from the beginning. Any major technical or reliability mis-step will put this technology back 5-10 years.

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

Does anyone in America or anywhere else in the World not now understand why all that money got “lost”?
These people just walk in off the street and get stuck onto a desk and are just asked to do whatever it takes to make money or sell papers.
They are “history thinkers” instead of (new technology) “discovery thinkers”.
Of course everyone who hears about the Volt (who is a “Discovery thinker”) is entirely attentive to learn everything about it.
All Voltec vehicles have already have been “sold out” pro-actively for the next 3 years of production for a very wide variety of concrete reasons.
It is really easy nowadays to understand (because of the Volt), who is really not “connected” to the important technological news of our time.
They do not care about anything but their money.
Sadly, the things that wealth and power do to the human psyche when it is exposed to obscene amounts of either, is for that psyche to become corrupted absolutely.
This is what wise governmental regulations are for.
And I thank God that we are getting them back again.
Another sign that someone’s priorities have been corrupted by wealth and power is that they treat their possessions like their children, and they treat their children like possessions.
Dan Petit Austin TX.

(Quote)
Eliezer Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:33 pm

The Moore article and email is very troubling. Why? Because if a WSJ journalist is so misinformed when it comes to the Volt and electric cars, imagine how little the rest of America really knows. It seems that the misconception of electric cars as boring, ugly golf carts is still alive and well.

I hope Lyle educates this guy about the origins of the Volt. If we can get a widely read journalist like Moore to see the light, imagine what kind of impact that could have.

(Quote)
Frank B Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:54 pm

Everyone has to remember that above all else The Wall Street Journal is a deeply republican rag, and as such they support the republican positions, you know drill baby drill. They have no interest in getting America off oil. No one told GM to build the Volt, they built it on there own accord. So just ignore this idiot.

(Quote)
Frank D Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 12:59 pm

Mr. Moore’s opinion is exactly what’s wrong with the press hampering progress. He does not realize our need to embrace technology to solve current inefficient and costly technologies. He is stuck in his own vision of the way the world should stay stuck in the present and not invest in a better future.

(Quote)
thoughadventure Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:00 pm

Who is willing to bet that gas will stay at current prices for the next ten years?

(Quote)
Larry Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:09 pm

He isnt saying anything about the need to produce EVs in general or get off oil. Just that the Volt is a money loser. Of course most of us agree EVs are the way to go, thats not the debate There will be many winners in the game like Tesla, probably Honda and Toyota. Unfortunatley the Volt will probably not be among those winners.

(Quote)
sudhaman Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:20 pm

idiot washington doesnt tell to make volt . gm had it on their schedule. it will make money in the longer term

(Quote)
Steven Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:32 pm

Off topic, but check out this awesome video with the Tesla S designer. Talks about how they got the car designed and built in 7 months. Also shows them building the cars and the slick interface of the 17″ touch screen controls. Amazing stuff.

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/229945/Behind-the-Design-of-Tesla

(Quote)
RonB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 1:59 pm

I suspect that any major innovative advance in a vehicle will initially result in a cash loss until production ramps up along with sales. And it would certainly be to our advantage as a society if (as other governments have done) the Volt and other U.S. hybrids were partially subsidized.

Why do I say this? First, because it will help us to become energy independent far sooner. To rely on market forces (like the price of oil rising above some magical ceiling), leads to unpredictable results, and does not represent any coherent energy policy.

Second, it will enable an industry that has lost so much market share to lead the technology revolution and gain anticipated market share in the long-run. As a result, it will help grow jobs not only in the auto industry, but in other supporting and overlapping industries within this country (that is, if we don’t outsource production – which should be a requisite for receiving government subsidies).

And third, it will certainly go a long way to reducing pollution and preserving limited resources.

Now, I also look forward to lower maintenance costs, lower cost of operation, and faster cars.

I for one, who has grown up during the muscle car years of the sixties, embrace this new technology.

(Quote)
Monroe Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 2:01 pm

Moore knows not of what he speaks. (1) Washington did not order the Volt. (2) It’s not like GM was doing fine making its own product decisions and then the government made them go green; they’ve been having sales problems for a long time due to their own decisions. (3) The Volt cannot be judged as a money loser because it is not on the market yet. Time will tell.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 2:25 pm

I don’t know about why the Edsel failed, but Lyle’s post, “It was launched with great public anticipation and fanfare and flopped miserably mostly because the public had a hard time understanding what it was.” reminds me a little of what Britta Gross was saying about the Volt. I had been composing a letter about why I think some of her conclusions treat Volt enthusiasts unfairly while trying to reach all of the expected stakeholders that will be affected and affect the Volt introduction.

I never put the letter here in comments for GM to see, so you Volt enthusiasts are on your own!

NPNS!

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 2:49 pm

Over at Jalopnik (4-06-09), apparently, Elon Musk continues to grill E-REV.
Perhaps Mr. Musk might wish to explain that there are apparently some extremely-serious and expensively unfortunate things showing up regarding BEV “very-low-DOD” situations (if he is allowed to discuss things like that), which I am hearing can very easily burn-out the charging and DC to DC electronics. (Due to 2 possible and entirely different situations).
EREV’s will assure us all that those things will not happen.
What’s the warranty on a Tesla again???????
Mr. Musk? Your commentary sir?
Dan Petit Austin TX.

(Quote)
RB Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:02 pm

#33 DonC says about Mr Moore (and possibly me):
“At the end of the day Moore represents how bad things have become for conservatives, and is, in a sense, the conservative equivalent of the Cimarron. It seems that what started out as a conservative disdain for liberal intellectuals has morphed into a disdain for anyone with an intellect. Why else write slop that can’t stand up to even the most cursory analytic review. Basically he’s just paid to spew pap that fits the world view of an increasingly small percentage of the population. That he manages to make money doing this is to his credit, but it hardly ads to his credibility.”
============================

I can see that with less than a sentence Mr Moore really got to you.

(Quote)
Vincent Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:15 pm

This reporter is just not qualified to speak on behalf of what the public understands in regards to motor vehicles…

He has already revealed in his first ridiculous article just how unqualified he is to print “opinions” with zero background or foundation of the issue…

How hard is it to wrap your brain around a rechargeable vehicle that uses no fuel between charges…and if you go beyond the batteries capacity an on board generator kicks in to complete your trip.

This will be easy for GM to educate people on especially since we are all sensitive to fuel prices and want to be free from the Oil countries strangle hold.

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:17 pm

The price of gas has less to do with the Volts possible success than the price of the batteries and their capacity and the time to recharge and the expected life.
(X)EVs need to be recognized as a strategic need in the US, note Noah’s post regarding abundant, cheap nuclear power in France. Shall we double the price of electricity in the US by the cap and trade fiasco?

When was the last nuke plant built in the US? Will the present administration emphasize nuclear power development? Will we cut the export of petro dollars to our enemies? Will we develop native industries to provide safe, clean, virtually unlimited power on demand 24/7?

What’s the problem? In the US it is US.

(Quote)
Unni Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:17 pm

Steven : that was good, shows me how GM thinks and others think ( took only 7 mounts ), because of that GM has to evalute from the concept to current version and how are are struck with classsic thinking (ex: ipod display vs teslas iphone display, Cd.26 cd vs Cd .27, 5+2 seat vs 4 seat etc ). GM has to take design clues from tesla (frm any one in the worls if they fail to come up with there own ) also on V2 design. As per Tony, its all about efficency and shows me Vot team is not doing its best and i see better designs out.

Again, Feature to cost matrix, They have to think wise : ex: an iphone style display centre console gives then options to reduce cost than the current ipod style display because of less parts and less maintance cost because you dont have repair and gives more room for innovate. No separate audio system needed becase they have have a software audio/video player integrated with cetre console.

To GM. To be true ,we want you to come back but without breaking the paradigms you cant win the game this time because you have a lot miles to go to in thinking.

Give your teams better targets, question them on failures ( than just fire them and give them a chance to correct and understand ways to do things in new ways in time ) . examples ot targets may be 60/55 mile 2010 malibu using mix of exisiting technologies ( like 2 mode hybrid,combining best of 6/8 speed transmssion and EVT, Direct injection, active cylender fuel mgmt , aero dynamic styling etc etc ) with cost and style (dont think putting a chevy grill is called style ) in mind. Another may be similar goals for volt /cruze and you need to revise them periodically.

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:19 pm

Postscript- Wish I had an Edsel – sharp looker – people in ‘58 thought they were ugly

(Quote)
make mine E-REV please Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:21 pm

Lyle, you got any news on those mules, or Volt Integration vehicles we can sink our teeth into or do we gota just sit around here talkin about the rise and fall of the Edsel. You know pics are always good or maybe spice it up with a little video. I’m just sayin it’s a thought.

Bang up job here Lyle thanks for doin it.

(Quote)
Pat Joy Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:23 pm

The price of gas is not standing still, and has been going up as of late and it will track with the recovery. As the recovery continues, china will awaken again and prices will continue to rise. Safe bet is 3+ dollars a gallon in 1 to 1.5 years. And guess what the volt will be on sale then as well as many others. The economists that work for these companies are no fools. And these companies buy the best.

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 4:46 pm

To Unni @ 61:

A sentence is a group of words that expresses a complete thought and has a subject and a predicate.

Can you resubmit your opinions is this form please? I really would like to understand what you are talking about.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pm

PLJ

Are you the former “teacher”?

We can always use a grammar pro, to keep things understandable.

This is an excellent link to lessons in grammar (I love this guy!). He has a bunch of other hilarious parodies, I especially like “PopStar”. Need a good laugh….take a look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj6QqCH7g0Q&feature=PlayList&p=0DA3A16B663242CD&index=0&playnext=1

(Quote)
ccombs Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:09 pm

The Government is talking down the Volt currently, not the other way around. Can’t see how if this flops it will be because the government tried to force GM to build it. The Volt is GM’s to make or break.*

*Okay, so this is a bit simplistic. Government policies (gas tax, etc.) will have a lot to do with whether or not it succeeds.

(Quote)
Unni Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:35 pm

PLJ : Thanks, Happens ( lot time my wife also ask me the same )

Comparing volt to tesla model S

1) Tesla is a 7 seater ( 5 + 2 ) where volt is 4
2) Tesla has Cd.26 where volt is estimated .27+
3) Tesla has an iphone style display where volt has ipod style

This are just some primary examples. Tesla design came in 7 months and Volt took 2 years to reach above spec and still trailing.

If Tesla can come to this point in 7 months then why Volt cant improve in short time ?

More example with ipod like centre display and iphone style one : The iphone like large one may be bit expensive at inital but
It has less components compared to ipod style switches. In touch screen display , you can have software applications for music player, video player etc which is upgradable or extentable ( like your PC). So finally it will be more efficent.

some where above there was an example : a pentium with printer, people will buy at higher cost if it doesnt do only same as of a typewritter ( yes i can take a picture print, i can have word application, i can have interet browsing, –. it can do more things than just a type writter) . Think you get a PC and a printer for $2000 where its locked only to use as a typewritter ? will you buy ?

These are just a layman examples of optimizable areas.

Again Volt seems to be correct approch to answer Oil imports/oil dependency , if the battery prices are high but to stay in the race, the need to have hybrids.
For that GM looks to have technology but they have to think of applying it better.

ex: set a goal of 2010/2011 malibu hybrid with 60/55 mile to stay in the hybrid race. The current technologies GM has

1) 2 mode hybrid
2) 6/8 speed transmission
3) EVT
4) DI
5) Automatic cylender shutoff
6) Airo dynamic styling

etc

They have to make incremental upgrade from the current model :

for example : try an incremental model with 2 mode hybrid power train where ICE part is Direct injected engine which supports automatic cylender shut off and the EVT has 6/8 instead of 4 fixed gear set and a lower drag coaff .

check the feesibilty of the model and whether it meets cost and goals if possible start working on those directions. GM is even struggleing to push a small 2 mode hybrid.

Hope above is fine

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:36 pm

#33 DonC said:

“At the end of the day Moore represents how bad things have become for conservatives, and is, in a sense, the conservative equivalent of the Cimarron. It seems that what started out as a conservative disdain for liberal intellectuals has morphed into a disdain for anyone with an intellect. Why else write slop that can’t stand up to even the most cursory analytic review. Basically he’s just paid to spew pap that fits the world view of an increasingly small percentage of the population. That he manages to make money doing this is to his credit, but it hardly ads to his credibility.”
—————

Personally, I’m glad that Lyle posted this article and contacted Mr. Moore for an explanation. And I think we should listen to the guy. If we only listen to people we agree with, we don’t learn anything.

I’m sure that the Volt will be a success on its own once GM figures out a way to bring the cost down. There are enough people in America who will want an electric car because of the social implications that GM can sell 100k a year easily. But in order to make a significant difference in terms of oil consumption, we need to find a way for it to meet everyone’s needs. And that includes Mr. Moore. He represents a significant portion of the population.

Based on my interpretation of the article, that means that GM needs to concentrate on finding ways of making EREV cars that are well-designed, and are fun to drive. For everyone. Not just electric car enthusiasts. And, if gasoline is still relatively cheap when the Volt goes into mass production, GM should run ads that focus on the “electric driving experience” and not just on fuel economy, and the numerous social advantages of getting off of oil.

By the way, on balance this article is a positive one for us. He’s pushing the Camaro, which is a GM car. If the author gets some of his readers to take a look at it, and a few of them actually buy one, that’s a good thing. They need to sell as many Camaros as possible in order to make it until they start producing Volts. And better the Camaro than a truck or an SUV.

(Quote)
Scotty Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 5:38 pm

#53 Steven.

Great video. That adaptive touch display is just one example of why Telsa knocked it out of the park with the S design. I like how he says its about getting rid of hard buttons and allowing for software changing and skinning of your own personal interface. With the 3g always on connectivity of the car, they are able to update, diagnose, reconfigure, reassign controls, recalibrate the whole car. With less physical parts and more software controls, Tesla is already planning for a day when cars are fixed more remotely by a engineer than by physically turning wrenches in a garage. Truly ground breaking stuff they are doing, above and beyond the EV aspect of the car.

I think its an example of the power of startup thinking and innovation, that simply isn’t possible in an old school entranched thinking corporation.

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:17 pm

______________________________________________________
53 Steven Said:
“Off topic, but check out this awesome video with the Tesla S designer. Talks about how they got the car designed and built in 7 months. Also shows them building the cars and the slick interface of the 17″ touch screen controls. Amazing stuff.

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/229945/Behind-the-Design-of-Tesla
———-

Excellent link find Steven…thanks!
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclear Energy = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:21 pm

#63 make mine E-REV please Says

“Lyle, you got any news on those mules, or Volt Integration vehicles we can sink our teeth into or do we gota just sit around here talkin about the rise and fall of the Edsel. You know pics are always good or maybe spice it up with a little video. I’m just sayin it’s a thought.”

===========
You mean like this?

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

…oh you meant video of the Volt?

Sorry, Leno and Miley Cyrus have all of that because of their close relationships with GM. Maybe check out the new Hannah Montana movie for some sneak peak footage…according to the TV commercials it is “The Best Movie of the Year” and I have no reason to disbelieve whatever I read right? It is win-win.

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:28 pm

#53 Steven says:

Off topic, but check out this awesome video with the Tesla S designer. Talks about how they got the car designed and built in 7 months. Also shows them building the cars and the slick interface of the 17″ touch screen controls. Amazing stuff.
======================

“…so you came on board about 7 months ago”
“Yeah, August 1st”
“… and Elon told you I want a car that seats seven…”

/sigh, design to working protoype to taking deposits in 7 months

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:33 pm

I have to say that the Volt IS an Edsel. $1k for 5 miles on electricity
is TOO EXPENSIVE! A $30k Mercedes B class fuel cell car is sounding great right now. It will be cheaper than the Volt and capable
of going further without using any gas!

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

Go hydrogen fuel cell!

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

This is two days old, but this is a video of Elon talking about why E-Revs are ‘not so good’ and why the Volt will be anemic on the highway and that it is unlikely the ICE can surivive the rigors of normal driving because it is being worked so hard, etc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t10zalmWFzA

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:43 pm

#74 Michael Robinson said:

I have to say that the Volt IS an Edsel. $1k for 5 miles on electricity
is TOO EXPENSIVE! A $30k Mercedes B class fuel cell car is sounding great right now. It will be cheaper than the Volt and capable
of going further without using any gas!

http://web.robinson-west.com/michael/h******

Go h****** fuel cell!

========================
Oh…it is all making sense now.

Go Battletech!
/DOS games FTW

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:47 pm

______________________________________________________
#69 LauraM Said:
“….By the way, on balance this article is a positive one for us….”
———

I like Laura’s writing style and way of putting things into context. I hope Laura continues to contribute on this site. Laura’s style of writing reminds me of brainiac Karen Pease: http://gas2.org/2008/10/13/lithium-counterpoint-no-shortage-for-electric-cars/
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 6:57 pm

73 Statik
“/sigh, design to working protoype to taking deposits in 7 months”
====================================================
I recall you were the one who said long ago, that building electric cars would be simple. Even Tonka could build one (I added this, but I think you said something similiar. I am not going to dig back a year in posts..).

So, buildiing a pure electric really is not that difficult, right. Once you built one, you are pretty much just building to reduce cost and improve reliability. You find a little lighter motor, a less expensive inverter, better batteries, improved software, more efficient regen capacity, etc…

My concern for the Tesla (not that I can afford one) are those darn batteries. I am not sure how long these will last, and your talking some major cash, to replace them. Since, they are basically just using off-the-shelf Li-Ion batteries, I would be surprised if they lasted more than 5-7 years.

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

76 Statik

To funny! I was about to make the same BattleTech comment…I have not laughed so hard for a long time.

Lots of software links for Nerds (I would fit this also, so do not be offended, at least by me Michael).

/Interesting when you get to have a peak behind the curtain…

//Note to self: Never post a link to any of my websites…got it.

(Quote)
Ed M Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:29 pm

RB
The Edsel failed because it offered nothing new to car drivers. It looked identical to other cars except for a bit of chrome and buyers decided to stick with other designs they liked better.

Mr. Moore is definitely wrong because the Volt is an entirely new concept that Americans will like. Whether they’re willing to pay the extra dollars for gas free mileage and better performance will remain a question. But another Edsel like production, it definitely isn’t.

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 8:52 pm

To Unni @ 68:

Thanks!

(Quote)
PLJ Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:05 pm

To JEC @ 66

Ha, ha! Good link.

No, I’m not a former teacher. But I did OK in English classes.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:35 pm

#69 Laura M says “And I think we should listen to the guy. If we only listen to people we agree with, we don’t learn anything. ”

The problem is that, as statik so aptly put it in #13, it’s not that he disagrees, it’s that he knows so little that the argument put forth is so devoid of thought as to insult your intelligence. So in his case there isn’t much to learn other than his primary occupation is to pander and spin.

In this regard, I don’t disagree with anything YOU said, which is that the EV experience is a selling point quite distinct from its green appeal. But that’s not what HE said. He rolled a couple of talking points about government interference in the auto market together into a giant sandwich of unintentional non-sequiturs. Sadly, he couldn’t have made your point about the advantages of an EV experience because he obviously hasn’t a clue about the technology (or marketing but that’s another story).

You can rest assured that GM most definitely understands your point, which is why you have GM employees talking about the EV experience being similar to that of the most expensive luxury cars. However, at the end of the day the relative success or failure of the Volt and the Camaro will be determined by gas prices. If in five years gas is $1/gallon sales of the Volt will be toast. If it’s $4/gallon the Camaro will once again be resting securely in retirement.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 9:50 pm

#78 JEC says “I recall you were the one who said long ago, that building electric cars would be simple”

You are spot on here. Should be a maxim: EVs are simple but batteries are hard. If you check out the DIY forums you find that sometimes people can do the conversion in a weekend. Then they spend the rest of their lives fixing the batteries ….

Basically batteries suck. They suck in your iPhone. They suck in your laptop. And they’re going to suck in your EV. Which is the reason why the serial hybrid solution is so compelling. It wouldn’t be if the batteries were ready for prime time.

FWIW the laptop batteries Tesla used probably won’t last five years which is why Tesla is now selling a replacement pack at the time of sale. Mini is using the same batteries in the EV Cooper which may be one reason why they haven’t had a zillion takers. (The fact that the three year lease reminds one of the EV1 fiasco may also be playing a role).

(Quote)
Zach Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:06 pm

It doesn’t take a lot for educated people (most likely individuals to understand the technology and buy the vehicle, noting the financial situation most of us are feeling) to understand the Volt.

That alone proves how weak Moore’s comparison is.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:07 pm

84 DonC

Yes. I am right with you on the difficulties that batteries bring into the EV equation.

Now we need a few things to happen:
1) Battery technology improves to make the battery less expensive
2) Battery life improves.

This is why I have in the past, been a proponent for battery leasing. I hate leases, BUT I think this makes sense for many reasons. When you lease, your protected against premature battery failure. This also, will make the vehicle more affordable to a larger number of people, and should get more EV’s on the road, sooner.

The automaker is able to control issues related to this new technology, without putting its reputation on the line. As batteries improve, the automakers will supply less expensive, more reliable batteries.

So, now instead of paying for petrol, you pay for battery lease, and the energy to charge it.
Since Lithium is recyclable, the manuf. can assure that the old battery is properly recycled, and returned back into service.

So, even if the battery only lasted 3-years, but could be recycled for say, 30% of the cost of a new battery, then the life of the battery becomes a non-issue, as long as the battery is under a lease (Not that it could be done by the individual, but I believe that the lease would make this a more palatable solution).

(Quote)
CS Guy Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

“This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build.”

This discussion would be moot if President Ronald Reagan hadn’t sold us all down the river at the request of the oil companies. President James Earl Carter had a plan which (if Reagan hadn’t worked tirelessly to kill it) would have had us 100% independent of foreign energy sources in 1990. Here we are 20 years later and still trying to free ourselves from the stranglehold of big oil. What a hero! A president of the United States directly, by his words and actions, the deaths of thousands of Americans in oil related conflicts. Thank you President Reagan. You are my hero!

By the way, President Reagan promised us in 1980 that the US oil companies would drill us out of the energy crunch and produce enough oil to be energy independent. All we had to do was give them massive tax breaks and they’d do the honorable thing. He also spearheaded the way for millions of acres of land to be used for oil exploration free of cost to the oil companies. Nice deal if you can get it, eh?

So after $Billions in federal tax breaks, special incentives to increase production, etc., here it is 30 years later and we have not had even a small increase in domestic oil production. Quite the opposite. We are now twice as dependent on foreign oil as we were then.

This is what happens when Washington tells an oil company what to do. They stick it to you.

=) NOPLUGNOSALE – ALL ELECTRIC VEHICLES WILL FREE US
(NO GAS, NO PROBLEM)

(Quote)
Bintoo Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 10:34 pm

In his aticle in the WSJ he said the Camero was the car that Nader was writing about “unsafe at any speed” it was actually the Corvair. A fact this bafoon would know if he read any if the 10,000 google hits regarding Naders book.

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:17 pm

Does anyone really expect the Volt to be profitable? The Volt is a HALO car. Just consider the development cost as coming from the marketing budget. It still pays off to develop it. By improving your brand, you can charge more on your other cars.

DonC

Regarding my comments from yesterday on “the commander in chief running GM.” I agree with Obama’s decision on the CEO. And I like that he’s trying to force the bondholders and UAW hands. What scares me, is that politicians have political incentives. Businesses have profit incentives. Giving businesses too much political power, or politicians too much business power is not a happy marriage, and I don’t care if it’s Ghandi, Bush, or Obama running things. Incentives matter…….a lot.

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

73 Statik
“/sigh, design to working protoype to taking deposits in 7 months”
—————

#78 JEC said: I recall you were the one who said long ago, that building electric cars would be simple. Even Tonka could build one (I added this, but I think you said something similiar. I am not going to dig back a year in posts..).

So, buildiing a pure electric really is not that difficult, right. Once you built one, you are pretty much just building to reduce cost and improve reliability. You find a little lighter motor, a less expensive inverter, better batteries, improved software, more efficient regen capacity, etc…

My concern for the Tesla (not that I can afford one) are those darn batteries. I am not sure how long these will last, and your talking some major cash, to replace them. Since, they are basically just using off-the-shelf Li-Ion batteries, I would be surprised if they lasted more than 5-7 years.
==================

I did indeed.

Well, I said that building a pure electric car is nothing like building a traditional car, it is a simple thing relatively speaking…and that it basically removes a ton of variables out of the equation when you can swap out the ICE for electric, eliminates the need for thousands of parts and processes.

I took it further to saying that it basically commoditizes the car, because the whole thing becomes about the battery. I figured that in the future you were more likely to see toy producers in China building cars than any large automaker in NA, because seemingly that is the end game to any product that does not need specialized prep or handling.

This whole EV thing is the double edged sword for GM (and all the other automakers too) and I think they all know it. As soon as the batteries are up and running what does big auto have to offer as a competitive edge? No more need to develop 300HP twin turbo/intercooled vehicles, no need to develop a complicated hybrid with regen that gets 60 MPG, when you got any piss-ant company down the street chucking a battery and a motor in there and gets 0-60 in 5 secs and 250 MPG.

Batteries are the death of the $50,000 sport sedan, or the $60,000 V8 SUV and just about any sportscar with the big spreads and margins, basically anything that sold before based on performance is toast…and I’m really not sure what kind of premium people are willing to pay ‘in the future’ for leather seats and a heated steering wheel. (and what is to stop anyone else from doing that too…they make a lot of ‘fancy’ toys in China)

Free flowing access to batteries will let everyone get a piece of the action, GM, Toyota, Mitsu, Ford, Tesla…for awhile. Everyone mentions about how much cheaper these packs are getting even now, and then into the future…and how that is so great for us and for the Volt gen 2 and 3.

However, a 60kWh pack @ $10,000 is the end of the car business in North America, thats a 500 mile range in a econo car for about $17,000….or a 200 mile range in a sub 4 sec 0-60 car for $22K…and it won’t take other companys that long to figure out it is not that hard either to hook a gas generator to a cheap battery pack to have a ‘E-Rev’ once it is on the market very long…unlike the thousands of different configurations of internal combustion engines, they only have to do this trick once…then it is rinse and repeat.

Detroit invented reverse engineering, but everyone has it perfected now, and nothing is special for very long (GM has whole factory floors of competitors cars broken down to the bare parts). Check General Motor’s Technical Center in Warren to see the latest hotness bought and then torn apart at GM’s Vehicle Assessment and Benchmarking Activity center for its secrets to be integrated into their next product offering.

Enjoy GM employee’s tearing down a Toyota Sienta because this is what is going to happen to a Volt in China in December of 2010:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.02/images/FF_136_teardown1_f.jpg

This is a Prius, and about a zillion other cars in GM’s reverse engineering graveyard:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.02/images/FF_136_teardown2_f.jpg

GM has maybe a good 4-7 years with electric cars, then they are done. How can this not be so? What makes car companys special now, is the need for enormity to produce, compete and adjust quickly. Something that is not needed in the electric car business….it is all about the battery.

The price for a entry level electric car 10 years from now is not going to go from $40,000 to $30,000 (well it might for GM)….but it is going to go from $40,000 to $10,000.

(Heck with have a 35 mile NEV now for $9,995, lol)

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:41 pm

______________________________________________________

#75 Statik Said:
“This is two days old, but this is a video of Elon talking about why E-Revs are ‘not so good’…”
——-

Tesla Motors vs. GM Fisker Automotive:

Normally Elon Musk would not publicly go negative on a competing EV/EREV project such as the Volt. The official Tesla Motors company line is that Tesla Motors is in the EV game not only for itself to make Electric Cars but also to help bring general awareness of what is possible with Electric Cars for the purpose of fostering other automakers to also start manufacturing Electric Cars.

So why has Elon gone off message by putting down the GM Volt? The answer is Fisker Automotive http://karma.fiskerautomotive.com. Elon is playing a high stakes game of chess with nemesis Hernik Fisker.

Elon believes that Hernik befriended Elon so that Hernik could get close enough to the Tesla program to gain Tesla Motors EV know-how to aid Hernik in the development of a Fisker Electric Car. While Hernik was breaking bread with Elon and providing Tesla Motors vendor design services to design the Tesla White Star, Hernik never disclosed to Elon that Hernik was at the very same time developing his own White Star type Electric Car at a secret project facility fully staffed with engineers and designers. It came as a complete surprise to Elon when Hernik made a public reveal of the Fisker Karma. Elon felt that he was stabbed in the back by Hernik and so Elon being the ingenious Type-A egomaniac that he is (that’s meant as a compliment) he set out piss on Hernik’s EV party.

The Breakup:
http://blogs.edmunds.com/greencaradvisor/2008/04/plug-in-war-tesla-sues-fisker-over-alleged-idea-theft.html
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=125939

The Slap Back:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9944883-54.html

The Judgment:
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS110724+03-Nov-2008+PRN20081103
http://karma.fiskerautomotive.com/news_items/download/5/2008-12-11.pdf

Elon publicly declared that the ruling in favor of Hernik Fisker was “a miscarriage of justice, a pretty severe one.”

So how does this have anything to do with the GM Volt?

The Arabian Proverb “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” has its corollary: “The friend of my friend is my enemy.”

Fisker Automotive and GM are friends…close friends.

The Fisker Karma shares the same design concept of the Volt with regards utilizing an ICERE (ICE Range Extender) even down to the 40miles EV range. By Elon attacking the validity of the Volt implementation of an ICERE, Elon is also attacking the Fiske Karma implementation of an ICERE.

But the relationship between Hernik and GM goes even deeper than sharing a common ICERE design philosophy. GM will be supplying Fisker Automotive the ICEREs for the Fisker Karma.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/11/fisker-automoti.html

It is also rumored that Fisker Automotive and GM are exploring additional ways of becoming even more closely aligned (closer friends).

…. the friend of my friend is my enemy.

So what is the latest in the Tesla Motors vs. GM Fisker Automotive war?

http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1020004_fisker-announces-low-cost-model-to-compete-with-volt-model-s
______________________________________________________
Electric Cars + Nuclar Energy = American Energy Independence!
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
Unni Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:52 pm

Real or fake ? If its from chevy, i started loosing respect

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBXK4EE7Lg8

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:57 pm

#77 CDAVIS

Thank you. And thank you for the link. I was worried about the lithium issue, so it’s good to know that it’s an abundant element.

#83 DonC

I agree with you that Mr. Moore clearly doesn’t know anything about electric cars. But that doesn’t make his point of view invalid. He represents a significant portion of the car buying public. They want power and style, and they don’t care about the implications of using oil. And most of them don’t know anything about electric cars.

For EREV to go mainstream, GM has to a)educate these people (I’m sure some will convert), and b)build stylish electric cars. The converj concept is beautiful, and could go a long way towards winning over customers if it makes it into a production vehicle. And, hopefully, someday battery technology will allow GM to build an EREV Camaro.

That said, I agree that the price of gasoline will also matter. I actually think that the Volt could be a successful niche car even with $1 a gallon gasoline. But It wouldn’t go mainstream, or transform the auto industry. Guys like Mr. Moore would probably stick with ICE muscle cars. And the SUV contingent would stay put. But given the current situation with peak oil, I doubt that we’ll see $1 gasoline again unless we actually go into another 1930s style depression.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 12:43 am

#89 Cautious Fan

Yeah, it’s a problem. No question about that. My favorite was Barney Frank lobbying for a bank in his district to get extra TARP money. Lovely.

However, by and large a whole lot of business decisions are made by politicians. For example, I wasn’t overwhelmed by the the no bid contracts Iraq.

My only point was that it would be good to have some perspective on the entire process, particularly since at this point the PTF has acted just like a private equity fund. It is being very much an SOB and driving a very hard bargain. It seems that it’s sole goal is to maximize taxpayer returns, all the while screwing just about everyone else. It’s so private equity like it’s kinda weird actually.

(Quote)
rfeeney Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 12:46 am

So the new(?) Camaro is a ticket to success and an innovation such as the VOLT is a recipe for financial disaster? I think that’s backwards. The Camaro (and I am a fan of Camaros past) is a perfect example of the reason GM is and deserves to be in such trouble. They haven’t come up with anything particularly innovative in a very long time. The only reason they are resurecting the Camaro is because they have seen how well the retro Mustang was received in the marketplace and they want to jump on the bandwagon. Just like the HHD followed the success of Chrysler’s PTCruiser. When you see retro you have to ask yourself; is it really a trend or just laziness and fear of change?

(Quote)
Cautious Fan Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 1:03 am

#94 DonC

Determining what’s in the best interests of the taxpayer is, in my view, absolutely impossible, and the main reason the 2 spheres of incentives should be kept separate. Pile on top of this those who are supposedly looking out for our interests really are looking out for their own interests (getting reelected by an illinformed public.) The result, I have no confidence the result will be in “our” best interest. I’d trust a business to act in its own interests before I’d trust a politician to act in mine.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 1:29 am

#93 Laura M

Here’s the thing. Moore wasn’t saying anything about the merits of any car in particular. He was just pitching the idea that the government was causing GM to fail because it had ordered GM to make the Volt, which is asinine for the simple reason that this simply didn’t happen. Maybe it’s just me, but I think someone who signs up to write an op ed piece at the very least owes the readers enough respect to educate themselves minimally on the subject they’re writing about.

The other thing is that his entire idea of how GM can be a success is patently lame. For thirty years Honda has been taking market share from GM. For each and every one of those thirty years GM has been making Camaros and other “fun to drive” vehicles. And for each and every one of those thirty years Honda has been making Civics, Accords, Insights, and other “boring” vehicles. Given that the “fun to drive” approach has failed to work for GM for thirty straight years, doesn’t it strike you as strange that his recipe for success has GM making even more “fun cars”?

Finally there is the simple cost and benefit thing. Developing both the Camaro and the Volt have been expensive. But realistically, even if the Camaro turns out to be a success, it will be a one-off success which might let GM sell 100K units a year. On the other hand, if the Volt turns out to be a success GM could sell 1M units a year. Plus, and this is very important, the development of the Volt will give GM a gazillion pieces of valuable IP. The upsides aren’t remotely comparable.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 1:44 am

#96 Cautious Fan says “Determining what’s in the best interests of the taxpayer is, in my view, absolutely impossible … I’d trust a business to act in its own interests before I’d trust a politician to act in mine.”

Once you move away from a sole proprietorship and enter the realm of collective business action you have the same problem on the business end. If it’s impossible to ascertain what is in the best interests of taxpayers, for similar reasons it’s impossible to determine what’s in the best interests of a corporation. Just ask the Yahoo shareholders about that one! Morever, just as politicians look out for their own interests, as we’ve seen with AIG and other financial institutions, employees and executives may look out for their own interests and may ignore the interests of the shareholders.

Granted the spheres are different but the differences are more between shades of grey rather than black and white.

(Quote)
Paul Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 7:18 am

Err Washington told GM to build Hybrids when Clinton was in power and they didn’t. The Japs saw what the Yanks were doing and DID make Hybrids and got the huge head start they now enjoy.

If this WSJ writer doesn’t understand that it’s not Washington telling GM to make the Volt, it’s the competition then, as with most of the mainstream media, he has not a F*^king clue what he’s talking about.

Just ignore him.

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 8:20 am

______________________________________________________
#91 CDAVIS Said:
The Arabian Proverb “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” has its corollary: “The friend of my friend is my enemy.”

—–
Lol…That was obviously a big typo ….it should read:

The Arabian Proverb “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” has its corollary: “The friend of my ememy is my enemy.”
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
fred Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 8:24 am

Aptera,iMiev,Volt,BG.
Which one is it going to be?
Can you add batteries to the Insight and make it all electric?

(Quote)
Herm Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 8:41 am

Wow Statik, you really jumped the shark this time and let the car out of the bag.. I can just see 1000s of fellow Voltee spewing the coffee across their computers

I think you are right that cars will quickly become comoditized with the resulting price collapse that we saw in consumer electronics and personal computers.

The majors have invested a lot of money in robotic frame manufacturing with low manpower.. the question is can they make money making a $10k sedan?

Also the question of who will make the batteries.. hopefully they will be made in Detroit or they are toast.

The cost of developing a new car will consist mostly of making a “glider” with its associated production line, the motors, electronics and batteries will be all cookie cutter designs out of a standard parts bin.

GM has been thinking about this for a while, see the following link regarding the “Skate” concept:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/02/21/futurecar-report-on-the-gm-skateboard-car-on-youtube/

if the link disappears search google for GM skateboard
…………………….

#90 statik Says:
April 11th, 2009 at 11:19 pm

This whole EV thing is the double edged sword for GM (and all the other automakers too) and I think they all know it.

Batteries are the death of the $50,000 sport sedan, or the $60,000 V8 SUV and just about any sportscar with the big spreads and margins.

Free flowing access to batteries will let everyone get a piece of the action, GM, Toyota, Mitsu, Ford, Tesla…for awhile. Everyone mentions about how much cheaper these packs are getting even now, and then into the future…and how that is so great for us and for the Volt gen 2 and 3.

However, a 60kWh pack @ $10,000 is the end of the car business in North America, thats a 500 mile range in a econo car for about $17,000….or a 200 mile range in a sub 4 sec 0-60 car for $22K…and it won’t take other companys that long to figure out it is not that hard either to hook a gas generator to a cheap battery pack to have a ‘E-Rev’ once it is on the market very long…unlike the thousands of different configurations of internal combustion engines, they only have to do this trick once…then it is rinse and repeat.

(Quote)
kevmark58 Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 10:00 am

Funny how Mr. Moore says it’s a big money looser when not a single Volt has been sold yet. He also states that the government told GM what to build! Boy is he ever an uninformed, misguided, propaganda pusher. In my humble estimation he should look for another job as he really doesn’t do well in the one he’s in.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 11:41 am

an older thread from june 2008, having fun going thru it again:

http://gm-volt.com/2008/06/09/this-history-of-the-chevy-volt-have-they-made-a-huge-mistake/

an article on the futuristic GM Hy-Wire/Autonomy from 2000, and the idea of the skateboard universal frame for cars, just replace batteries where you see hydrogen or fool cells.

http://www.autointell.com/nao_companies/general_motors/gm-autonomy/gm-autonomy-02.htm

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 2:37 pm

The battletech comment is totally off topic. I didn’t post a link
to my main page, I posted a link to my hydrogen specific page.

E-Revs will never give this country energy independence.
They don’t get you off of OILl. Quite the contrary, they make
you dependent on both Lithium and OIL.

If a fuel cell car hits the market for $30k and it has a 200 mile or
better range, you have to ask why buy an E-Rev for $40k+?
Hydrogen refueling infrastructure can be built when fuel cell
cars become available and they will become available. Making
cars that depend on materials that aren’t domestic is a bad
business plan and GM knows this. The E-Rev idea is to get
an electric car on the market that can cover the gap between
now when GM is still making conventional vehicles and a few
years from now when fuel cell cars start to disruptively take
over. Where a simple hybrid isn’t good enough, that doesn’t
mean that an ultra expensive hybrid is a good idea.

Obama isn’t bringing an end to the recession and he is anti
religious calling the Knights of Columbus an oppressive group.
He is bringing radical gay activists into his interfaith advisory
council. I think he will lose in 2012. When he does, the next president will probably realize that we need to transition
from OIL to hydrogen as it is the only option that will give
us energy independence. The conservative majority is
being oppressed by liberals, but that is only a temporary
problem. People will get angry when the economy doesn’t
improve and they will become angry when they realize who
Obama really is.

Anyways, here is a link to my hydrogen page:

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

(Quote)
statik Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 6:10 pm

#102 Herm said:

Wow Statik, you really jumped the shark this time and let the car out of the bag.. I can just see 1000s of fellow Voltee spewing the coffee across their computers

I think you are right that cars will quickly become comoditized with the resulting price collapse that we saw in consumer electronics and personal computers.

The majors have invested a lot of money in robotic frame manufacturing with low manpower.. the question is can they make money making a $10k sedan?

Also the question of who will make the batteries.. hopefully they will be made in Detroit or they are toast.

The cost of developing a new car will consist mostly of making a “glider” with its associated production line, the motors, electronics and batteries will be all cookie cutter designs out of a standard parts bin.

GM has been thinking about this for a while, see the following link regarding the “Skate” concept:
======================

Sorta on topic for our discussion: Autoblog put up a thread from the ‘Newsweek Future of Automotive Panel Discussion’ at the New York Auto Show, which involved Lou Rhodes, from Chrysler’s ENVI and Henrik Fisker from Fisker…who had this to say:

—at the New York Auto Show last week, Fisker was the voice of the insurgent. For example, he said that, in 2020, plug-in hybrids will cost less than $20,000….”The car industry needs to reinvent itself,” he said, “and it needs to happen now.”

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/04/12/new-york-2009-fisker-says-plug-in-hybrids-will-cost-just-20-00/

Kinda what I was getting at…if the guy trying to sell $89,000 cars, is seeing the price point under $20,000 in 10 years, you can bet the rest do too. All about the battery.

(Quote)
koz Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 11:03 pm

Statik & Herm

I absolutely agree with you guys that battery prices will continue to come down and there will be a sub $20K highway BEV with >150 mile range within the next 10 years. I would be very surprised if it were an EREV or if it is a practical highway vehicle with >350 miles range. 60kwh battery gets you maybe 320 miles at 100% cycle. I do hear what you guys are saying. BEV’s certainly lower the barriers to market but not all of them. Cars will still be built in Noth America and shipping costs won’t be coming down.

(Quote)
Michael Robinson Says:
April 13th, 2009 at 1:36 am

You guys need to stop drinking the Kool Aid. How are battery prices going to drop so significantly that battery electric cars
can be sold for $20k? I don’t see $1k/kw coming down in 10
years. Sorry, I don’t see that happening. The Volt has, repeat
after me, an 8 kwh battery. That is not a 60 kwh battery. You
are predicting a 7x improvement in battery capacity that isn’t
going to happen. That 8 kwh battery is so large that a seat is
lost in the back of the car.

Now then, fuel cell cars don’t have a huge battery that wipes out
one of the back seats. Fuel cell cars have a 200+ mile AER now.

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

Fisker and Tesla are going to go bankrupt if they don’t go to fuel
cell drive. You can’t make a battery that is no larger and no heavier
than the Volt’s battery pack and effectively pack 60 kwh of power
into it. Even if you could, it is doubtful that the battery would be
cheap. I don’t see batteries getting any better in 10 years. We
are at the limit of what we can do with Lithium ION batteries and
Lithium is the lightest metal that there is.

I just hope the auto makers don’t attempt to wait 10 years to commercialize fuel cell cars. The ones that do deserve to fail.

Fantastical predictions don’t make anything happen. Stop drinking
the Kool Aid and accept that the future lies with hydrogen.

(Quote)
benion2 Says:
April 13th, 2009 at 8:57 am

The upcoming Camaro will be a home run. The base machine is a 306 hp car that will pull close to 30mpg on the highway. It will cost around $23000.

(Quote)
Darren Says:
April 13th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

opinions are like assholes…..

(Quote)
Electric Vehicle Owner Says:
April 13th, 2009 at 4:48 pm

@ Ted in Fort Myers 10

The world has already gone to electric cars. It just doesn’t know it yet.

I blame poor marketing.

It’s what’s inside that counts.

(Quote)
George Says:
April 14th, 2009 at 12:53 pm

Quoting from this post, ‘He responded “The Volt is a huge money loser just like the Edsel. This is what happens when Washington tells GM what kind of cars it must build.”’

Couple points. GM came up with the idea of the Volt long before bail outs and economic depression. That is a fact otherwise this website would be in its infancy (oldest article dates back to Jan 2007).

Also, the Edsel was a failure AFTER it hit showroom floors. Give the Volt a chance people, it’s a step in the right direction.

(Quote)
George Says:
April 15th, 2009 at 11:48 am

Darren says: “opinions are like assholes…”

Sure are and ironically websites like WSJ don’t let you post an opinion of someone else’s opinion. Guess your say only counts if you are being paid for it…..

(Quote)
Mike Says:
April 15th, 2009 at 3:09 pm

FYI for all:
The price of oil isn’t set by OPEC, it is set by Futures traders in NYC. OPEC sets a demand for their own minimum price, but 70% of the US oil doesn’t come from OPEC. It comes from Canada and Mexico.

Poor oversight in the futures market provided us with the pricing problem most recently. The futures market is a steam engine. If the price hints at going up and there is money sitting in investment funds, they get put into the market driving the price up like crazy. The price then crashes as people become more reluctant to invest in that market and hold out for months to buy.

Also note that it is a Futures market. Which means prices for today were set 3+ months ago. So when the market begins to fall, little is purchased from the high point until it is really needed. I think you need to remove the middle man who buys a future just to resell it at a higher profit to the refineries. Keep out the guys looking for a quick buck.

Ok, off the oil-market soap box with my somewhat ill-informed view. Back to the Volt. Let us all remember that the Edsel was less in demand. And it was a line of cars. The volt has a religulous following here, as the prius has had for the past half-decade. Bring on the electrics!

If only as much focus was made on Cd as it is on what is under the hood we’d ALL have cars with better mileage. 10 to 20% increase in gas mileage if you simply add a boattail to the back, or hulls around the wheels, and a solid undertray. I wonder how much attention is paid to these details on the Volt?

(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

Wall Street Journal Editor Explains His Volt the Next Edsel Statement

115 Responses to “Wall Street Journal Editor Explains His Volt the Next Edsel Statement”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts