AND 
GM Exec: Chevy Volt Program Unaffected by Bankruptcy
GM’s bankruptcy filing doesn’t spell an end to the company but actually a new beginning. The Chevy Volt remains a critical element of GM’s future and therefore the program will not be affected in any way by the filing.
Jon Lauckner is GM’s VP of product development and along with Bob Lutz, co-inventor of the Chevy Volt.
“We’re closing one chapter and opening a new chapter,” he said. “This is really a defining moment for us. Its new future for the company. It going to let us solve problems that have been with us for many many years and really its a once in a lifetime opportunity to reinvent the company for the next 100 years.”
“We in product development really need to stay focused on the future,” said Lauckner. “We are moving valuable assets into the new GM, we’re going to have a more focused product portfolio, a smaller, nimbler, faster moving company; and that’s all part of the reinvention of GM. Over the next 60 to 90 days all of that will take place and we’ll emerge a faster leaner enterprise.”
“We are still open for business,” he said. “We are out there to make sure that we satisfy customers and that we are backing all of our vehicles with warranty coverage and that we are working on our future portfolio.”
I asked the following questions of Mr. Lauckner.
Are you confident if everything goes to plan and made lean that GM will be able to be profitable even at 10 million SAAR?
Yes, because the viability plan has GM downsized to the point where we can break even at an industry volume of 10 million units, more or less where we are running today. That means as the economy recovers in the US, and industry volumes increase, that really sets the stage for us to generate significant profitability and cash flow. When you look at how the company is going to be resized and refocused we really have a tremendous opportunity to generate the kind of profitability the old company wouldn’t have been able to generate.
How will bankruptcy and government intervention affect the Volt program or will it in any way?
It won’t in any way impact the Volt program.
Production volume plans wont be affected?
Anything material that we’ve had as the plan for the Volt will not be changed. This does not change anything that we’ve set up in terms of the Volt.
The government questioned the Volt’s profitability at one point, does the government now support it fully?
I don’t know if it makes sense for me to speak for the government. The point is that everybody understands the Volt shows the way forward. You go back to the original introduction of the car in 2007 and you look at what’s taken place since then and every one agrees that the the question of electrification of the automobile is not a question of if, it has changed to a question of when.
It makes no sense for us to take a fundamentally different approach on the Volt as compared to where we were before today.
In 5 to 10 years what percentage of GM’s total portfolio will be Voltec vehicles?
That’s almost impossible for me to forecast with any certainty. We’re out there with the Volt and we are working on other potential applications of the Voltec propulsion system, and those studies continue. We’ll just have to see how the whole story develops. Its more fundamental than talking about what the Volt is going to do by itself, but more how the whole environment develops over the next few years.
Are you hopeful Voltec could become quickly a large segment of vehilce sales?
We see it as a very key technology going forward, and while we are in the late stages of the development of the generation one Volt, we are already looking into generation two that would have technology that might allow us to have better performance and lower cost.
This is something that we’re going to continue to work on. We know that no doubt as good as the Volt is in employing the very latest and greatest technology that’s out there, things will move forward in the next few years and there will be future developments that we will incorporate into the next generation of the car.
What is the time line of generation 2?
It depends on what you want to characterize as generation 2. There is the car and the technology and they may not line up. We have the propulsion system and it may make sense to make some interim improvements in some of the elements of the propulsion system within a year or two after start of production. And then longer term you talk about the lifecycle of the car itself. I don’t think you can make the evolutionary improvements that may take place in the propulsion system and just roll that up to the car level.
We have to take a look at it and we haven’t got all the work done, and we know we have to make cost reductions and that will involve changes and then of course you have the next generation of the complete car that we typically have on longer lifecycles than 1 to 2 years.
Will GM leapfrog to Volt and skip the small sedan hybrid?
We haven’t excluded any sort of hybrid propulsion systems from our thinking process in terms of what we might do in the future.
What about a pure EV without the generator?
We haven’t announced anything like that.
Is the Cadillac Converj greenlighted?
No the status of the Converj hasn’t changed.
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:59 am
first
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:04 am
its to bad that great cars are going to be lost in the transition but i can’t wait to see what the future for gm brings (starting with the volt)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:16 am
GM’s bankruptcy filing doesn’t spell an end to the company but actually a new beginning. The Chevy Volt remains a critical element of GM’s future and therefore the program will not be affected in any way by the filing.
———————————————————–
I don’t believe it. GM is a company that has a recent history filled with statements that proved to be entirely wrong. The question is whether those speaking them knew they were not true when they made these mis-statements. Did Mr Wagoner believe what he was saying when he said, in 2008, that GM had enough liquidity lined up to be fine through 2009? So maybe the GM people quoted today believe what they are saying is true, but that does not make it so.
“The GM that let too many of you down is history,” said CEO Frederick “Fritz” Henderson, Yes the old GM is history, but yes, it did let down it’s shareholders, those who had loaned it money (including many retirees and retirement funds), its own dealers, and its customers. We are embarrassed to have been associated with it.
Imagining that the Volt will keep sailing on undisturbed within a corporation that is in the midst of a painful split into good and bad parts is just too much. There is going to be endless acrimony. Volt is hardly going to be unaffected.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:23 am
Great interview, Lyle. Good, probing questions.
Perhaps Laukner’s most pertinent comment vis-a-vis the future of the company (and the automobile, per se) was this: “….every one agrees that the the question of electrification of the automobile is not a question of if, it has changed to a question of when.”
That’s why I find the Wall Street Journal’s recent dissing of the Volt such a curiosity. Killing the Volt for near-term savings would be penny wise and thousands of pounds foolish.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/05/29/wsj-keeping-the-chevy-volt-alive-doesnt-make-sense-for-governm/
However, I disagree with the headline: Will bankruptcy affect the Volt? It seems inevitable that it will affect it, some way, somehow.
PS: Cute graphic with the headline
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:23 am
It’s a wonderful graphic at the top of this post, more about the government than about GM. It pays to have friends in high places.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:29 am
#4 FME III said
However, I disagree with the headline: Will bankruptcy affect the Volt? It seems inevitable that it will affect it, some way, somehow.
——————————
Note how carefully Lyle has worded the headline. It is a GM Exec that has said that it will be unaffected, not anyone here. Smart guy, that Lyle. That is, maybe you can agree that Jon Lauckner said it (and I would, based his previously quoted comments), even if you disagree with what he said.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:32 am
No quibbles with your point, RB. GM’s authorship of that claim is implicit in the wording of the headline…
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:35 am
Wow, the graphics department here at GM-volt.com has really come along!
…although I’m nostalgic for the oversized Volt photochopped onto a snowy road.
http://www.gm-volt.com/o/vcold.jpg
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:44 am
Sounds to me that the Volt itself is untouched but that the everything around (on top of a voltec drivetrain) was/is still on hold… What was the last “green light” at GM?
NPNS
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:44 am
Why do idiots continue to post pointless posts with “first!” , “second” or whatever. Who cares?
Huge mistake to not allow “reverse flow”. One could make the case that buying a Volt would avoid expending $25,000 on a standby generator, making the car hugely affordable even at $40,000. In a lot of places where emergency power is critical, that would be a no-brainer purchase.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:53 am
My hope is GM will commit to more than the Volt. There are 5 distinct electric models that can reach different segments of demand. By targetting all 5, the economies of scale will spur battery development in a very short time.
The 5 models are:
- Luxury Compact REV (Volt)
- Simple Compact BEV (cheap electric car for daily short trips. Virtually every family that lives in a house can have a second car that is electric only for driving around town)
- SUV REV (Families with more means can have their cake and eat it too)
- Luxury REV (Electric Cadalacs)
- Pickup REV (There is no reason a pickup truck cannot be a REV).
If GM could get a full production launch by 2012 of the above 5 models, then the common technologies employed should bring the costs down to where I can see easily over a million electric cars sold by GM in 2013, with a rapid increase above that.
Of course the reason I think this with confidence is because I am very confident gas prices will be very far north of $4/gallon by 2013. Car companies may not want to risk their very existence on the expectation of rising gas prices, but GM doesn’t have any other choice.
Toyota is probably gambling that gas prices won’t go much higher than $3-$4 gallon over next couple years, which makes cars like the Prius the logical choice for many. But once gas starts hitting like $5 a gallon and up, everyone can learn to do the math real quick.
40 miles a day, $8 in your 2005 Taurus, $4 in a prius, $1 in a Volt or a simple BEV.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:57 am
GM knows the battery won’t last 10 years. If they can’t deliver the product, there will be addititional 2,786,482 folks to boycott them!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:05 am
Good interview and Q& A with Lauckner though Lyle.
—
On one of the Volt specific questions, you ask, “Production volume plans wont be affected?” Which is a nice follow-up question btw…. but he throws back the mother of all fortune cookie of answers, “Anything material that we’ve had as the plan for the Volt will not be changed. This does not change anything that we’ve set up in terms of the Volt.”
Translation: “Look at my mouth…it is moving during this period when you expect a answer”
—
On this question, “Are you confident if everything goes to plan and made lean that GM will be able to be profitable even at 10 million SAAR?” Lauckner answers, “Yes, because the viability plan has GM downsized to the point where we can break even at an industry volume of 10 million units, more or less where we are running today.”
I would have asked him where this ‘viability plan’ can be found…I know they are cutting a whole heap of production, as a REACTION to current conditions being at 10 million SAAR, and they have torched all the R&D to save money…but that really isn’t a plan. A plan is what are you going to do after you ‘right-size’ yourself.
…things like moving the HQ from the Ren Centre and taking Warren up on its tax free ‘for life’ (well, 25 years).
..and maybe killing off all those extra execs you still have lying around, you know the ones Fritz said they didn’t need to…they will just leave by attrition-ie) getting old and dying
…or maybe exploring a ’strategic alliance’ with a small car maker
…or how about axing those dealers now, instead of in the fall of 2010 (GM confirmed they were staying on until their contracts expire, bankruptcy or not…which is ludacris)
…taking Toyota up on its offer of ‘help’ and making use of your joint NUMMI plant when the VIbe goes down (or how about licensing the Prius tech whilst you wait for Voltec to be profitable in 2015?)
Etc, etc, etc.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:06 am
Hilarious Graphic Lyle! Add the background music and we’re set.
Regarding the Converj, I thought I read somewhere that it was a `GO’? Did anyone else hear/see that? What’s the hold-up? (I mean other than one of the largest corporate bankruptcies in history).
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:13 am
Can’t GM just keep separate books, so to speak, for the Volt? So the bean counters can say “Yep, we are now making a profit with all of our ‘regular’ products. Oh the Volt R&D project, that is coming along nicely, and we have 10,000 on the roads now. We expect to add it to the ‘regular’ products next year for Gen 2 (when they are profitable).” In my company, we call this hiding the turd, but it works.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:15 am
#14 Schmeltz said:
Hilarious Graphic Lyle! Add the background music and we’re set.
Regarding the Converj, I thought I read somewhere that it was a `GO’? Did anyone else hear/see that? What’s the hold-up? (I mean other than one of the largest corporate bankruptcies in history).
====================
It is a ‘go’ once they get a extra 2.6 billion dollars, lol. Which of course will be job 1 outside of bankruptcy…not building the Converj, but getting the DoE’s money.
The total request is 10.3 billion out of the DoE…but that also gets us a third ‘mystery’ EREV.
http://www.motorauthority.com/gm-asks-doe-for-another-26-billion-to-build-two-new-hybrids.html
/nothing like getting out of debt…then immediately saddling yourself back down
This is getting back to having a coherent ‘plan’ again. As in, what is the plan for profitability/payback on the Volt/VOLTEC? We are not talking about making dollar number 1…but dollar number 10.3 billion +interest +money already invested. If GM were making 2,500 a car, they’d have to sell about 5 million of them to break even and start making their first dollar. Have they got that kind of time?
Clearly grabbing for every nickel in loans you can is still ‘old GM’ thinking.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:25 am
______________________________________________________
Good interview Lyle!
Lauckner Said:
“…“We are moving valuable assets into the new GM, we’re going to have a more focused product portfolio, a smaller, nimbler, faster moving company; and that’s all part of the reinvention of GM. Over the next 60 to 90 days all of that will take place and we’ll emerge a faster leaner enterprise.”
Looks like GM may be serious about moving quickly to get more focused….
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — General Motors Corp. said Tuesday that it has signed a deal to sell its Hummer truck unit, just one day after filing for bankruptcy.
Source:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/02/news/companies/gm_hummer/index.htm?postversion=2009060207
______________________________________________________
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:32 am
Great interview Lyle. I do worry about a GM that only breaks even at 10 million unit annual market, but politically they couldn’t cut any deeper.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:35 am
CDAVIS
interesting on the Hummer. How will that work w/GM still building them? Is this mystery company basically just responsible for everything else, and GM is selling the trucks to them at 2% over cost?
edit: “Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) was financial adviser in GM’s Hummer deal. ”
(Didnt they just get delisted too?)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:43 am
Hypothetically, let’s say this economy has recovered nicely by 2015, and the grass is much greener for GM. Say they are turning a nice profit, but want to close a plant that makes a low-selling car. Will the UAW strike? What if they want better healthcare or higher wages, or whatever? How do you prevent old habits?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:49 am
#20 k-dawg asks whether a UAW strike in 2015 is likely.
—————————————-
There is another deadline that comes sooner. I believe a new UAW contract is to be negotiated in the year of the next presidential election. Will GM resist UAW demands that year?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:52 am
#20 k-dawg said:
Hypothetically, let’s say this economy has recovered nicely by 2015, and the grass is much greener for GM. Say they are turning a nice profit, but want to close a plant that makes a low-selling car. Will the UAW strike? What if they want better healthcare or higher wages, or whatever? How do you prevent old habits?
=======================
They could sub-contract out everything to Wal-Mart. GM currently has a ‘no-strike’ deal with the UAW until 2015 (which was ratified last wednesday)…so not like the union could do anything to stop them, lol…Wal-Mart seems to be pretty good at keeping unions at bay and costs down.
(j/k)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:55 am
Does anyone know what has become of gmcard rewards?
I assume they have been reset to zero, but is that true?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:56 am
Yeah, i picked 2015 because of the no-strike clause. Just wondering what happens after that. Especially if the VEBA/FED have sold off all of their ownership by then and the company is actually owned by bond/stockholders.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:59 am
23 ardvark Says:
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:55 am .Does anyone know what has become of gmcard rewards?
I assume they have been reset to zero, but is that true?
=============
I see offers on the GM cards “If you buy a new car they will max out your earnings at $2000 off”
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:04 am
Another question on the Hummer deal. If, say, an Arab company bought the Hummer, does that mean the US Army will now order their Hummers from an Arab Company?
(I think the Army doesnt use the Hummer anymore though? not sure)
Nevermind : http://www.defenselink.mil/home/features/2008/0108_mrap/
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:07 am
#26 k-dawg asks “Another question on the Hummer deal. If, say, an Arab company bought the Hummer, does that mean the US Army will now order their Hummers from an Arab Company?”
——————————–
Is it the case that the Army Hummers are different from the GM Hummers and come from a different company already?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:09 am
“There is the car and the technology and they may not line up. We have the propulsion system and it may make sense to make some interim improvements in some of the elements of the propulsion system within a year . . .”
____
So what are we talking about here that “may not line up”? I’d like to have heard that subject expanded on.
Toyota got 4 and 6 year runs out of Gen 1 and Gen 2 of the Prius. That sounds more like what I’d expect from a profitable company. Not 1 or 2 years.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:10 am
Tough group here today…..
I guess I have been pushed into a “wait and see” mode.
If there is a GM in late 2010, and if they have started production of the Volt, and if there is a local Chevy dealership in my area, and if they have a Volt for sale, and if the car is still priced so I can afford it, and if the car works as promised, and if it has a workable warranty, and most importantly, if the Volt is sky blue metallic with a black center console, then I will plunk down the cash to buy it!!!
Show Me The Car!!!!
NPNS
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:14 am
“….you have the next generation of the complete car…..”
____________
I find the use of the word “complete” a little odd here.
To me, Mr. Lauckner’s comments strongly suggest the production run of the “incomplete” (?) Gen 1 Volt will be very limited.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:21 am
GM needs a 5 passenger REV — ASAP!!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:26 am
I LIKE! I am hearing and possibly even seeing some spirit!!!! More like the old GM that I remember after WWII when GM was somewhat small but getting traction fast. I think the message in the Logo just might have a way of instilling some esprit de corps hopefully in all that cares about GM.
I am very pleased to hear of the commitment by Jon Lauckner to the Volt project and they need to be kicking ass on this now! The Volt is a one of a kind auto very unlike the other hybrids.
I vision the Volt getting out to the public with the possiblity of future improvements to come. In-Fact, that needs to be part of the selling strategy that GM will make future improvements for at least a fixed period of time. I’ve got a feeling of excitiment over the Volt and yes, I have intentions of purchasing one.
If the Volt is the car that I believe it will be, at my age, it will be the last automobile that I will own. I can be a great source of advertisement and promotion of the Volt.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:28 am
I find it interesting that GM will break even at a market of 10 million cars a year. Does that mean that if Toyota sold 9,999,999 cars and GM sold one they would break even? Of course not. The estimate implies that GM maintains their current market share. GM wants to increase their share. How do they do this? They do this by developing cars that people want to buy more than they want to buy other makers’ cars. For that you need R&D. Kill R&D and you kill the company.
The volt is not going to make money for several years. What do people expect? It is a new technology and the production cost is too high. The costs will only go down with volume. To get that volume you have to sell at a loss or offer something else to warrant a premium. For the Volt a premium price will work for a few years but, after that, the price will have to come down.
I believe that GM will not be making the Volt in 10 years. Either it is a flop, GM fails, or (hopefully) it is a smashing success and the basic technology is the default for all GM mid-size or smaller cars. The Malibu, the Lucerne, the STS will all be Volt technology.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:28 am
#13 statik says regarding GM making plans for cost reductions
…things like moving the HQ from the Ren Centre and taking Warren up on its tax free ‘for life’ (well, 25 years).
—————————-
The WSJ reports on its editorial page today that President Obama has personally assured the mayor of detroit that GM’s headquarters will stay at the Ren Centre. Of course the President, as he said in his speech, is not getting involved in GM’s management….or maybe just this one time (smile).
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:28 am
30 Carcus
I think he’s just trying to separate cosmetic changes from powertrain changes.
After 3+ years of the same body style they would make changes (prob to keep up w/whats popular and for marketing, maybe to shed more Cd)
However it sounds like they plan to make continuous improvements in the drivetrain.
I think of it like software. You have Ver 1.0… then 1.1.. then 1.15, then when a major change happens you get 2.0.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:31 am
Why isn’t GM looking at making this a drop in power module. I remember as a kid that when people went into dealerships they ordered a car with the powertrain that they wanted, not just was available in stock. Unions and “brand ambiguity” are killing GM! I am almost to the point where I will go and get either a hybrid Jeep or the Ford Hybrid… Move the release date forward!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:32 am
So basically,
No BEV, no fuel efficient hybrid, and only a very limited production run of an incomplete EREV car. Meanwhile, oil is trading at near $70 a barrel.
I’m not so sure the new GM “gets it”.
If Toyota really is offering to license their HSD technology, maybe GM ought to just take it and not look this gift horse in the mouth. They need some kind of short term survival plan if gas heads back up to $4.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:34 am
#16 statik says
As in, what is the plan for profitability/payback on the Volt/VOLTEC? We are not talking about making dollar number 1…but dollar number 10.3 billion +interest +money already invested. If GM were making 2,500 a car, they’d have to sell about 5 million of them to break even and start making their first dollar. Have they got that kind of time?
————————————
With greatest respect, I don’t think that would be the right way to do the accounting. The money already invested is washed away with the old GM (really).
The question going forward is whether the costs incurred going forward to set up the factory, make, and deliver the Volt are offset by Volt sales. Even that looks doubtful to me, but that would be what’s needed to show Volt as profitable. Fritz or somebody might want to look back at the whole picture before deciding on whether to go forward with Converj, but that will be internal and informal.
In any event, since New GM is a private company and will be for a while, I don’t see any reason why they will be making financials public. All we will get is Mark LeNeve and happy talk (smile).
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:37 am
When the New GM stock becomes available, you could expect it to go up appreciably. This is what Moore and his wall streeters are waiting for. They will snap up GM stock as fast as it becomes available, all, basically due to the technological credibility of Voltec. (The hypocrites).
But the true winners are going to be those who are able to get Voltec vehicles. Work harder and smarter. Save your money and kill the bills that will get in the way of your Volt. Take very good care of what you are currently driving. Pay strict attention to the scheduled maintenance section of your owners manual, the section that details more frequent and sooner (mileage-wise) for
“severe”
vehicle usage.
That way, you can head off costly damages had you forgotten to ask for the comprehensive 30,000, 60,000, 90,000, or 120,000 service intervals. (Not just
“Does everything ‘look’ ok?”
at a simple oil change facility when at those mileages!! NOT OK!!)
(The transmission fluid changes are the ones that, failing those intervals every 20,000 miles, will
“get you”
to the tune of $2,800 at the time of a battery change, when mal-adapted-learned pressure shift-points are “lost” due to excessively thick fluid pressure-maladapted-learned-values, esp. Volvo).
As well, if there is even a slight regular miss, that has a regular “beat” as heard at the tailpipe, your catalytic converter is getting ruined, even though the “check engine” light is not yet on.
(Sometimes, an OEM software subcontractor will set a threshold to turn on a “check engine light” on
excessively too late.
This is so as to avoid the risk of being backbilled for a Malfunction Indicator Light coming on slightly too soon when customers return under warranty.
Most of the time, the software code as written 5 years in the “past” attempts to “look” 5 years into the “future”, (being now), when the check engine light is/isn’t on “now”, and, the conditions to set the light “on” can not be precisely accurate as to future-threshold “turn-on”).
So, if any ICE is not as smooth at warm-idle as possible, then accelerate your service intervals to “severe”, as this helps greatly to solve at least *part* of the problem
75 percent of the time.
(You were supposed to spend that money on those things anyway).
Dan Petit Austin TX,
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:46 am
This is good talk. If we have any smarts at all, we know GM cannot continue to do what it has always done in the near past. GM has to be inovative and the Volt is the best thing on the plate that they have. The old BIG cars and trucks just did not seem to work anymore.
Anybody that believes that the fuel prices will not keep rising at the OIL INDUSTRY’s will is a damn fool. For years I have went to work and been in many traffic jams to be surrounded by big vehilcles carrying 1 person, the driver. Yes, I was there also adding to the stupidy of man and of course, to the wealth of the OIL KINGS.
VOLT! VOLT! is a start on the answer to what is more than just an oil over consumption problem, it can give us that freedom but also we need to clean up our air. I am sure there is much more that I can’t see.
I want to see some demonstrators on the showroom floors soon!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:50 am
#35 K-dawg,
Ok. That makes more sense. But still, a planned 1 or 2 year production run seems short to me.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:51 am
Volvo announced today it will start selling an EREV version of its S60 model in 2012.
Sounds like a total rip-off of the Volt concept.
Several news agencies were confused by the fact that the concept car displayed yesterday was only an EV. They failed to hear (well, the announcement was in Swedish) that the final car released in 2012 will in fact be a true EREV, with batteries for 50km of electric drive, and then the 1,9L/100km diesel engine kicks in.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:53 am
RB @ #27 – HMMWVs (ph. Humvees) are the military version, and they are made by AM General. AM General is an off-shoot of American Motors Corp. So by “corporate geneology” AMC is a relative of Jeep, not GM/Hummer. The Humvee was envisioned as a more rugged, modern alternative to the Jeep. Iraq has demonstrated its extreme weaknesses (vulnerability to improvised mines) and other alternatives will probably be used in the future.
Jim I @ #29 – “Now that’s thinkin with your dipstick Jimmy!”
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:54 am
#10 ozonelevel –
It is actually quite smart for GM to prevent people from using the Volt as a home generator. The health of the battery depends very strictly on computer controls of charge and discharge management, and not allowing things like excessive depletion. They can’t allow any activity that may circumvent these tight controls or battery life and performance will suffer.
Furthermore, the battery will have a 150,000 mile warranty, yet when you are using the battery to run your house the car is logging no “miles”. The end result would be the apparent premature death of the battery well before the car hit 150,000 miles (even though it operated as designed), and the very people who destroyed their batteries would be the exact same people shouting “my battery died early!”
As much as some people do not like this, it is very smart for GM to follow this path.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:57 am
#16 Statik said:
“If GM were making 2,500 a car, they’d have to sell about 5 million of them to break even and start making their first dollar. Have they got that kind of time?”
GM, urrhh sorry, NEW GM could make potentially much, much more than $2500 per car if the Converj was offered. The Converj could “pay the rent” for the Volt at least for gen. 1. Making the Converj is a gigantic no-brainer to me. Ask Jeep if they regret the 4-door Unlimited Wrangler—another gigantic no-brainer.
All that being said, I agree it will take substantial volume to achieve payback on this platform regardless if a Cadillac or Chevy badge hangs on the hood. I just see a huge benefit in selling a Caddy version of the Voltec platform to get this concept moving quicker to profits.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:58 am
#43 MarkinWI
Hummer’s manufacturer AM General is an off-shoot of AMC? I did not know that. I now have renewed hope that someday we will see a civilian version of the military’s Gremlin.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:00 am
#13 Statik
I think keeping the dealerships open a few extra months is a PR move. There are a lot of people very angry with Chrysler over the way they closed certain dealerships. (At least according to an article I read somewhere.) So GM is trying to be “classier” about it.
#34 RB
I don’t think GM ever seriously considered moving. It would be too much of a distraction right now. I think they were just trying to use Warren’s offer to get taxbreaks from Detriot. (And it worked.) Hopefully, they’ll still get them in spite of Obama’s intereference.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200990601086
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:01 am
#13 statik said
..and maybe killing off all those extra execs you still have lying around, you know the ones Fritz said they didn’t need to…they will just leave by attrition-ie) getting old and dying
———————————-
As I understood Fritz yesterday, he said some big fraction of the non-union staff will be cut in the next 60 days, presumably including some of these execs Many engineers and designers likely are included, as well as office staff.
Not much external is going to be happening at GM in the next 60 days — everyone is going to focus on their own survival. After that, things will grow very acrimonious between old and new GM. They will be formally separate, so the continuing interaction, which has to happen for a while, will involve buying and selling, i.e. win/lose, no longer any joint interest. It will be what happens among ex-spouses after a divorce, much of it in continuing battles over money. It’s going to be hard for new GM to settle down and focus on selling or making new products.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:02 am
The Volt program will however be affected by the lack of electrical generation capabilty, that poor industry and goverment planning has wrought. With the lack of a responsible energy policy for many years, it’s not going to be feasible for many years to come, for a mass produced plugin vehicle. Utilities need to institute rolling brownouts when the wheather gets hot in the summer now.
How is everyone going to charge up their Volt too? I’m all for the car and the technology, I’m afraid we are got our sacks caught on a hook, until we get electrical capacity up to snuff.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:02 am
40 Fran McFall
“For years I have went to work and been in many traffic jams to be surrounded by big vehilcles carrying 1 person, the driver.”
————-
That would have been interesting if it hadn’t been the driver
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:09 am
#43 MarkinWI On the manufacturer of the military hummer.
————————–
Thank you! Once I had known what you said, but I had forgotten.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:11 am
#47 LauraM said
I don’t think GM ever seriously considered moving. It would be too much of a distraction right now. I think they were just trying to use Warren’s offer to get taxbreaks from Detriot. (And it worked.) Hopefully, they’ll still get them in spite of Obama’s interference
————–
Agreed. Now the Mayor has a trump card, though
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:12 am
What’s truly outrageous is that none of the UAW is affected by the bankruptcy. Considering the fact that ALL of GM’s $40 billion debt
is because of those pirates at the UAW, this must go down as one of the most gigantic financial injustices of all time. I expect GM to have zero ability to finance their future union-based costs and fail again. The company remains in the same relative finacial position as before, with the same mediocre executives at the wheel, including some new mediocre Fed directors, who hilariously believe that small green cars are the road to salvation. Time for a reality check, folks. GM is no better offf than before and in many ways, worse than before. I see that Fritz is claiming that they will do better because they can “focus” on fewer models.Unfortunately, there are a lot fewer folks to do the focusing.And many problems they faced had nothing to do with the number of different models, but with things like engines and trannies that weren’t even model specific. There is only one GM drivetrain division. So how is reducing dealerships and models going to help there? And I notice that even when the entire corporation is focused on one model (i.e. the Volt), that didn’t prevent them from screwing up the main reason people were attracted to it – its style. Where before young flks were attracted, they have now left the room and only hohum greenies are still here. The redesign has been a disaster, while incompetent Tesla Motors brought out a great design for their Model S , done by, guess who?
The same guy who designed one of the few truly stunning cars GM has come up with in the past 30 years (the Solstice/ Sky). Naturally, someone with that much talent had to leave GM. These
jerks in the GM executive offices don’t understand that making cars that people really want is all about style. They just don’t get it. But they will. Right when they are forced to go to the inhospitable bond market for cash. GM will remain standing only for as long as they are propped up by Obama, who doesn’t want any harm to befall all those UAW campaign contributors. Obama is their lackey.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 am
This is a VOLT-related website, but the VOLT is not the only vehicle GM makes. The GM plan is to reduce production costs across the board. This should mean that they can be competitive with ALL brands and makes.
I’m hoping they will be able to reduce the MSRP on Silverado Trucks, (Chevy’s biggest seller as far as I know), and still be profitable. I see too many people leave the lot to buy Fords because they are CHEAPER, not because they like them better.
And if anyone from GM is reading this: How about putting the 2-Mode Hybrid powertrain in a BASE MODEL truck? No ‘touch-screen navigation’, no ‘leather interior’, no ‘4-wheel drive’. Just a plain, no-frills truck that gets great gas mileage!!?? Huh?! How ’bout it?!!!!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 am
#47 LauraM said
I think keeping the dealerships open a few extra months is a PR move. There are a lot of people very angry with Chrysler over the way they closed certain dealerships. (At least according to an article I read somewhere.) So GM is trying to be “classier” about it.
———————————————
Also Fritz’s comments yesterday about transitioning the inventory of the closed dealerships made it seem that Fritz was trying to avoid having a huge inventory dumped abruptly. GM’s way has the downside of creating prolonged uncertainty about the survival of particular dealerships (directly affects me).
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:15 am
I see the “Sunshine Boys” are out in force today. Ba ha ha ha ha ha!
This is an interesting interview. The fact that the Volt will not be affected is not that interesting since it more or less confirms what we knew. The fact that GM is hiring for the Volt program (Sexton blog) was one big clue and the picture of the Volt front and center at Fritz’s press conference (nice catch nasaman) was something even more definitive. But the fact the powertrain would be fairly quickly upgraded — in a year to two — is new. Some speculated this would happen though others thought Gen II would be at least 4 years out. This interview suggest an 18-24 month cycle for Gen II and Gen II. Same body but a different powertrain, the primary purpose of which we can assume is to reduce costs. Just like the old HP Laserjets! (Though they had new bodies as well).
GM does need to get moving on new product. They have some breathing room because their new product is decent and they can rebadge some of the existing product which is appealing. But AFAIK everything but the Volt has been put on hold, and the Volt and the Camaro alone will not carry them forever.
Hopefully they will have the necessary funds to carry this off. Seems to me that GM will be profitable. A run rate of 10M vehicles won’t be with us forever. A run rate of 17M is probably not in the cards over the next few years but something in between these numbers seems likely. For those asking why it will be different this time, the reason is that the company has now been right sized. Previously the debt burden made it impossible for GM to spend heavily enough on R&D and new product development, and the costs of rightsizing — UAW and dealer buyouts — made it impossible for them to get small enough to run efficiently. With lower labor rates and a smaller but more productive dealer base, GM going forward can be a formidable competitor.
Finally, I doubt the government will sell its shares immediately. My guess is that it will wait until the UAW starts to sell, which it will need to do in order to fund its retirement obligations.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:16 am
Now that GM and Chrysler know that going along with the oil companies wish to have all vehicles get crappy gas mileage brings them nothing but bankruptcy and ruin…
Here’s a link about the 100MPG Hummer, converted to a hybrid by a company called Raser, and was unveiled in Detroit in April…
“The prototype we’ll see in Detroit at the Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress on Monday features a series-hybrid drive train similar to the Voltec system in the Chevrolet Volt. Like the Volt, the H3 will be driven solely by electricity. The engine — the 260-horsepower 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder used in the Pontiac Solstice — will drive a 100-kilowatt generator to recharge the three lithium-ion battery packs. Fisker Automotive is using the same engine in its Karma range-extended EV.”
Link to wired story:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/04/behold-americas/
also their video: http://www.rasertech.com/media/videos/hummer-fuel-economy-explained
This just shows it is doable to drive a badazz rig and get excellent fuel economy. I bet this thing will cost a mint but as a first step (or for those with buckets of money now) it is a reminder of what America can do when we put our mind to it!
We’re rooting for you GM and Chrysler. We know you can build great cars when you want to. Now is the time for you to show America that you are our partner in getting off oil. The 100MPG Hummer just shows that cars don’t have to be tiny, cramped or crummy to get great mileage.
NPNS::Electric Cars + Nuclear Power + Solar + Wind + Geothermal = American Energy Independence
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:24 am
#42 Tibor,
“Volvo announced today it will start selling an EREV version of its S60 model in 2012.
Sounds like a total rip-off of the Volt concept.”
__________________
Got a link for that?
I haven’t seen anything other than a series/parallel, albeit a different configuration (diesel driving front wheels, electric driving rear) from Volvo.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:25 am
RB re “Tough room”
Amen! (but ain’t it always (lol)
Statik re interview question suggestions:
I’m certain you’d do a fantastic interview, but you better choose the person carefully. It’d be the last interview you get. I guess I’m just saying that Lyle can’t alienate the sources of info which are available to US.
Have a great day,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:25 am
GM will NEVER be able to pay back the estimated $100 Billion that WE will have loaned them by the time this is all done. Since the Volt will lose money the first 5 years and then only show a small profit after that …. say $2500 per copy it will take over 40,000,000 Volts to break even not counting interest or losing any money in the first 5 years. If GM produces 150,000 volts a year it will only take 267 years to pay back the loan. I hope my Children’s, children’s, children’s, children’s, children like what Obama has done.
Sure GM sells other autos but those may just maintain GM. The Volt is the savior … right?
Yes we can? BS
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:32 am
I am ready for the Volt, whatever happens with Government Motors (GM). What would be a really usable electric vehicle that has a good range, would be a 100% electric SUV. Lets call it The “GigaAmp” or something.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:33 am
43 MarkinWI Says:
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:53 am .RB @ #27 – HMMWVs (ph. Humvees) are the military version, and they are made by AM General. AM General is an off-shoot of American Motors Corp. So by “corporate geneology” AMC is a relative of Jeep, not GM/Hummer. The Humvee was envisioned as a more rugged, modern alternative to the Jeep. Iraq has demonstrated its extreme weaknesses (vulnerability to improvised mines) and other alternatives will probably be used in the future.
—————————-
Isn’t the Army/Marines using MRAP vehicles and also products from General Dynamics now?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:34 am
I’m sorry but this “first” crap never gets old, it cracks me up every time!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:35 am
GM mannagement is it’s own worst emeny. At one time, they had the LEAD in EV technology. But a serious brain fart who ran GM wound up destroying most but not all of the EV-1’s. They cried that the platform was not a viable working addition to the GM fleet. What they meant was it wasn’t making tons of money!
Well, You have to get behind a product and push it before it will become a success. There was only one push for the EV-1, to the crusher! In the present day car industry, it is unheard of when drivers are willing to file lawsuits to keep their car leases, GM hasn’t learned a thing!
How did it feel GM, you were at the top and let everything slip right through your fingers.
Unbelieveable!
A life long GM man looking for a solutions.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:35 am
I noticed that yesterday, June 1, 2009, the day of GM bankruptsy that CNN run an all day special on the subject. However, I never herd them mention “Volt”. The small little toy car that is being proposed was mentioned often.
I guess the Volt is just not getting it’s time on the air. Why not?
I don’t think Fox put much effort into the GM subject. Not supprised considering the Media was first down on the Auto Industry for causing the problem and then they were down on Government for trying to help.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:39 am
Still not sure they get it. Last night I caught Bob Lutz being interviewed on CNBC. When asked directly why GM got into so much trouble the first thing he said (paraphrase) “we haven’t been putting enough into advertising so the consumer isn’t aware about what we are offering”. What a load of crap – as if I haven’t seen enough GM ads over the last few years. The problem is that they can’t make money on small cars like the competition (toyota, honda, et. al.) can…and the small cars they produce either don’t interest the average car buyer or the quality doesn’t match the competition. Advertising? Seriously? I was floored when I heard that – especially in light of the bankruptcy filing. Good thing Mr. Lutz is retiring, IMO.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:46 am
#65
“I never herd them mention “Volt””
_________
Here’s another goodfella that never mentions the “V” word:
Editor-in-Chief Eddie Alterman Interviews GM’s Mark LaNeve – Car and Driver
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8J0R7clXCA
(about 9:30 on is energy related)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:48 am
#45 Schmeltz said it right.
It makes far better sense to introduce a new, initially expensive, technology (VOLTEC) in a Cadillac than in a Chevrolet.
I believe ther are more people willing and able to pay a premium price for the Converj than the Chevy Volt.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:51 am
#54 Corvette Guy said:
“And if anyone from GM is reading this: How about putting the 2-Mode Hybrid powertrain in a BASE MODEL truck? No ‘touch-screen navigation’, no ‘leather interior’, no ‘4-wheel drive’. Just a plain, no-frills truck that gets great gas mileage!!?? Huh?! How ’bout it?!!!!”
Well said! Gee whiz, Just make a hybrid vehicle that people can afford to sell along side the more posh versions–it just makes sense. Hybrids should be viewed as just another engine option, i.e. for the Silverado example you listed, offer a regular V6, V8, and 2-mode V-6 and/or V8. Interior options should not come into play here. What is so difficult???
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:02 am
Just heard Hummer has a buyer. Next up Saturn.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:04 am
Those of us who do not make UAW wages are forced to pay taxes to support those who do make UAW wages and benefits. Where is the logic and justice in this.? Some of us will remember, when and if we ever purchase another auto again!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:05 am
Two years and then a refresh would be a damn fine idea… there are ALWAYS those who will buy the new model, and this would create a used Volt market sooner as well. (as well as a used year specific parts market) It worked in the 50’s and 60’s… (got a turn signal for a 68′ Camaro?)
I think that the ‘current’ Volt is an introductory platform, it’s a nice small commuter size car and will fit the needs of a lot of people.
Develpoing the Cadillac model right now would be a media nightmare they would have a field day.
If an EREV small pickup and a people mover (CUV/minivan) arn’t already on the table they really should be!
But having said that they really need to concentrate on the first model (The Volt) because it absolutely has to be hit out of the park.
I’m ready and willing to buy.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:07 am
>> Q: What about a pure EV without the generator?
>> A: We haven’t announced anything like that.
“…announced…”
Interesting choice of words.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:09 am
#59 Tagamet said:
RB re “Tough room”
Amen! (but ain’t it always (lol)
Statik re interview question suggestions:
I’m certain you’d do a fantastic interview, but you better choose the person carefully. It’d be the last interview you get. I guess I’m just saying that Lyle can’t alienate the sources of info which are available to US.
Have a great day,
Tagamet
LJGTVWOTR!!**********NPNS
======================================
There are two kinds of interviews. I’m very aware of them both.
A) The kind you do to get a story and make press for yourself, your cause, or whoever you work for, and to try and suss out a new piece of information along the way…while leaving the door open for further access and interaction.
B) Then there is the kind of interview where you already know what the answer is to your question, and you know they don’t want to answer it/be truthful…and you still corner the subject before ripping his/her heart out.
Obviously, if Lyle (or anyone) hears a answer like Lauckner’s “Anything material that we’ve had as the plan for the Volt will not be changed. This does not change anything that we’ve set up in terms of the Volt…” you just want to reach out and slap him in the face. Being a detached 3rd party here, lets us virtually do that with impunity. Not so much if you are doing the interview.
In the real world, my interview would be very little different than anyone else…certainly they would not be as worded here, lol The only difference is I would probably shoot out more ‘papercut questions’-reasonable questions to expect a answer to, that are also mildly annoying…but leave no deep scars.
The beauty of these ’soft’ interviews, is that the person being interviewed does not perceive themselves as being on the hot seat…so when they put up a weaksauce answer, full of double-talk, those of us who have no personal interest in whether or not we are loved or hated can read between the lines almost instantly and invariably, they answer the question without uddering the words themselves.
Sidenote to Lyle: Please don’t take my comments that start with, “I would have…” as to say you are not doing a good job. You are doing a great job, your jovial disposition and easy going nature in dealing with GM has given us (and led to) more information than the whole rest of the websphere combined. It is easy to be a ‘internet warrior’…not so much in the real world. Keep up the good work.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:11 am
statik:
“On one of the Volt specific questions, you ask, “Production volume plans wont be affected?” Which is a nice follow-up question btw…. but he throws back the mother of all fortune cookie of answers, “Anything material that we’ve had as the plan for the Volt will not be changed. This does not change anything that we’ve set up in terms of the Volt.”
Translation: “Look at my mouth…it is moving during this period when you expect a answer”
——————————————————————————————————————-
Hilarious. I laughed out loud. I thought the same thing when I read this line. We’ve never seen anything remotely detailed in terms of a plan – only a “target” of 10,000 units in 2011. I personally doubt we’ll see that. But here’s hoping.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:15 am
#66 JohnL
Well, from what I’ve seen, their advertising is horrendous. And advertising is very important. Admittedly, I don’t watch too much TV, but the couple I’ve caught-they basically list deals. (The most recent prefaced it with “at chevy what we need is a comeback”–like that’s going to get people into showrooms.) They need to focus on convincing people that their cars are worth owning on their own merits–and maybe on improving their image.
Ford’s ads are a little better, but not much. Toyota’s ads definately the best of the lot.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:16 am
Good interview. I wish you’d had asked him about recent innovations such as regen shock absorbers (www.gizmag.com/hydraulic-regenerative-shock-absorber-mit/10968/), two-speed electric vehicle transmissions (www.greencarcongress.com/2009/05/vocis-20090512.html) and a hybrid battery-ultracapacitor system (www.greencarcongress.com/2009/04/batteryultracapacitor-system-for-small-electric-vehicles.html).
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:22 am
There’s nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again
No, no!
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
The Who
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:24 am
#77 coffeetime (GREAT HANDLE!)
I see the regen shocks as an option (yes a profit centre…)
we will not see a transmission in gen1, but there was a little chat about the ultracaps a while ago.
I can’t wait to see some pictures from the assembly line!
I’d like to echo thanks to Lyle as well, even with a bunch of gloomy news this week I look forward to this forum each day.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:28 am
k-dawg@#62 – I understood that they would be going to MRAPs. I don’t know how many are on the ground. I’m not sure that we are even past the days of jerry-rigged armour for Humvees. Hopefully the IAVA is monitoring the issue.
kent@#53 – Or it could be that large numbers of UAW members are and have lost jobs as GM down-sizes to a “smaller leaner” company, and it could be the GM retirees took a big gamble by swapping debt for equity in the new company, which now has to fund health care for retirees for the remainder of their life-spans.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:28 am
Too Little…Too Late…
I’m so upset with the way GM has been running I doubt I would be interested if they were giving them away for free…
$40,000 is still out of my price range. They should have kept on working on the EV-1, if they did, by now they could have made the technology more cost effective.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:29 am
On May 27, Lyle posted an article that said they would start assembling the first IVER (production intent integration vehicle). The article said the first ones take about two weeks to build, but the goal was to driving more than one by July 4. That works out to be about 19 days for each of the first two. Bottom line, by June 17th, if Lyle cannot someone from the “new” GM to go on the record about the size of the IVER gas tank, he should write President Obama and demand under the freedom of information act an answer.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:35 am
#55 RB says:
“Also Fritz’s comments yesterday about transitioning the inventory of the closed dealerships made it seem that Fritz was trying to avoid having a huge inventory dumped abruptly. GM’s way has the downside of creating prolonged uncertainty about the survival of particular dealerships (directly affects me).”
———————————
But that’s temporary. The agreements are renewed in October, but I think you’ll be able to figure out who’s staying and who’s going in a couple of months. I doubt the cancelled dealers will be getting any new inventory.
Besides right now, they’re doing a review process, and dealers are allowed to appeal the decision. So, it would be premature to make any announcements before its finished. I doubt they’ll make too many changes, but I think it’s smart. It makes the whole process a lot less arbitrary.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:35 am
Hi Bad News, the $40,000 price was the “old” GM price. Now after rinsing off 172 billion in debt, firing all the dead word in engineering, and squeezing the suppliers, the “new” GM price should be about $32,000 or twenty percent less than the cost of the “old” GM.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:35 am
easyray Says:
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:04 am
Those of us who do not make UAW wages are forced to pay taxes to support those who do make UAW wages and benefits. Where is the logic and justice in this.? Some of us will remember, when and if we ever purchase another auto again!
———-
Don’t forget Ospenda ! He is the guy making sure his UAW voters all get paid-in-full with OUR money !
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:41 am
#81 “Too Little…Too Late…
I’m so upset with the way GM has been running I doubt I would be interested if they were giving them away for free…”
I couldn’t agree more. Just doesn’t matter what they do now. It’s like dealing with an addict, at some point you have to cut them off no matter what they keep promising in the future.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:49 am
Statik @72
Very well put .
Be well,
Tagamet
/brevity offset of wordiness (g)
LJGTVWOTR!!***************NPNS
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:50 am
You talk about the converj but what about the opel ampera. Will they now be selling the chevy volt in europe instead of the opel?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:50 am
Hey carcus1, here’s that article on Volvo’s PHEV…
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/06/01/volvo-and-vattenfall-team-up-to-develop-plug-in-hybrid-w-video/
“What about a pure EV without the generator?
We haven’t announced anything like that.”
Something to make you go , Hmmmmmm…..
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:52 am
How is Ford doing in this Survivor competition? Are they going to be spending time on Bankruptcy Island and getting the government immunity bailout? Or can they keep the torch lit and walk off with a large enough customer base to avoid a federal overseer?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:59 am
#80 MarkinWI
Neither the current workers nor the retirees had much choice in the matter. If GM liquidated, all the current workers would lose their jobs with no severance, and largely reduced pensions and health care benefits.
As far as the retirees–if GM liquidated, their health benefits would be drastically reduced. (They’d get the same amount per dollar as the other bondholders.) And their pensions would be passed on to the PBGC. Not only would that mean reduced pensions (PBGC benefits are very low for early retirement), but the PBGC itself is in major trouble.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:04 am
#53 kent beuchert
None of the UAW is affected by the bankruptcy? Are you sure? I seem to recall some concessions. If I could find an instance where UAW was affected by the bankruptcy, would you admit that you were wrong?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:07 am
#82 Van
I take it you are joking of course, the fuel tank can now initially be designed with the car ‘mostly’ together.
They couldn’t/still can’t give us a solid capacity number because they really don’t know until the integration is complete. There will likely be several revisions as they work out the real world maintenance requirements. If things go incredibly well they ‘might’ know the final number late fall. But more likely the final size will be set shortly prior to mass production kick off.
I do not work for GM, but I have worked in R&D and this is how the development cycle works.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:12 am
No Converj? I thought GM said at one time that the Converj was ready for production as well as the Volt? That’s not good news, the Converj has the the styling that the Volts severely lacks. I’m bummed.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:16 am
For years now, GM management has said that the Volt is the “bet the company” product. I think now it truly is. I believe that I could take GM at its word that it will be putting everything possible into the Volt to make it a success. It will be the unique differentiator that GM could ride to profitability. Now if we nitpick and say will it be totally untouched by the Bankruptcy, then perhaps there is some small way that its marketing might be affected. But I really believe they are putting everything they have into the Volt, because at this point it’s really the only way for GM to stand out from its competition.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:17 am
Just thought I’d mention…although it is the worst kept secret ever. (Mostly because it was ‘accidently leaked’ our of GM China first… HUMMER is official ‘bought’ by a Chinese company, Sichuan Tengzhong
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:17 am
Interesting Fritz comment in NPR interview. Paraphrased from my memory…
Q: Will GM be able to pay back the money it received from the government?
A: Yes. GM will quickly return to profitability and be able to return the investment to the American taxpayers, the $8 Billion that we expect to receive in loans as a new company.
So here’s me, sitting in my car, begging through the radio for the interviewer to ask about all the money borrowed BEFORE the new GM exists, as opposed to future loans that don’t even exist yet. Of course I already know the answer, but it would have been nice for a journalist to, oh I dunno, do their job.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:18 am
Here’s the live chat w/Jon Lauckner from a couple weeks ago.
Some pretty intersting stuff if you missed it.
http://jalopnik.com/5174000/jalopnikautoblogkicking-tires-live+chat-with-gms-jon-lauckner
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:19 am
CaptJack @ 89,
Thanks for the link.
Looks like the same thing they’d talked about at the end of last year. It’s not a series hybrid (no genset involved), but sort of a “split” design. ICE drives the front wheels. BEV drives the back. (A mullet hybrid, if you will: diesel business up front, green party in the back)
Nasaman should appreciate this design as it would likely have full redundancy. If either one of the two power trains are down, you still get to launch. Very safe . . very Volvo-esque.
On GM’s BEV: I expect they’ll have to announce one sooner or later. Nearly every other auto manufacturer on the planet has one in the works.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:20 am
Same press release Napoleon issued at Waterloo.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:23 am
I can’t help it.
I can’t say, “Chinese Hummer” without cracking myself up.
Go ahead. Try it yourself.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:24 am
GM’s bankruptcy filing doesn’t spell an end to the company but actually a new beginning. The Chevy Volt remains a critical element of GM’s future and therefore the program will not be affected in any way by the filing.
———————————————————–
Just like RB (#3), I don’t believe it either. We have a auto company controlled by a government who is pretty well controlled by environmental groups who think we should all be driving beer can size cars to save the planet. Of course, many of these environmental leaders are driving big cars and trucks or SUVs and flying around the world in their private planes while living in homes that are an acre in size. Yeah, Al, I am talking about you.
I just don’t see them changing their closed minds after taking control of the largest auto manufacturer the world has ever known. (Yeah, Toyota, I know, I know.) We already see some of this with the agreement with the UAW to produce 160,000 ultra-compact cars. That will be just the beginning. The auto task force members don’t even drive American cars. I will take a wait and see attitude on GM for several years. If it goes the way I think it will the Volt will not see the light of day until mid-2011 or even later. It might be considered too expensive to manufacture when they decide they can produce 4 or5 of the ultra-compact cars for each Volt. And the government believes in numbers, especially these kinds of numbers that support their base.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:25 am
Linkage to HUMMER sale:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31065937
—
Chinese Industrial Company is Buyer for Hummer
General Motors has reached a preliminary agreement for the sale of its Hummer brand of large sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks to a machinery company in western China with ambitions to become a carmaker, a person familiar with the Chinese government approval process said Tuesday.
Sichuan Tengzhong is a privately owned company, but Tuesday’s deal required preliminary vetting by Beijing officials, who retain the right to veto any attempt at an overseas acquisition by a Chinese company and who give special attention to deals over $100 million.
G.M. announced the deal early Tuesday morning in Detroit but said that the memorandum of understanding would not allow it to reveal the buyer or the price.
Sichuan Tengzhong is a privately owned company, but Tuesday’s deal required preliminary vetting by Beijing officials, who retain the right to veto any attempt at an overseas acquisition by a Chinese company and who give special attention to deals over $100 million.
G.M. announced the deal early Tuesday morning in Detroit but said that the memorandum of understanding would not allow it to reveal the buyer or the price.
G.M. said the deal would save about 3,000 jobs in the United States, including those at its 153 domestic dealerships, and that Hummer would remain based in the United States.
“Overall, we’re pretty pleased,” said a spokesman for Hummer, Nick Richards, without identifying the buyer. “If you think about the qualities we’d want in a new owner for the brand, this buyer really met all the criteria. They’ve got a proven track record in international business, and they’ve got a long-term vision for the brand. They’ve got the capital to invest in more efficient vehicles, which is what’s necessary to grow the brand.”
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:25 am
#94 Frank B:
I’m bummed too. Now’s a great time for GM to be looking into a Voltec vehicle for every garage, so to speak. Put it in pick-up/SUV platforms, Crossovers, luxury cars, mid size cars—-you get the picture. But, first get out the Volt, and very shortly thereafter, the Converj. As I said earlier in this thread, the Converj could at least help to pay the rent for the Voltec platform, if not altogether depending on how many they can sell.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:27 am
I truly believe that unless the UAW goes away, or at least has a complete, drastic, and sever makeover, anything that is done to help GM will be short lived. The UAW is sucking more money out of GM that a good economy can hope to overcome.
It’s time for the UAW to realize that their goal shouldn’t be to get the highest wages possible for its members but to simply ensure fair and safe working practices. And of course these things are guaranteed by other organizations which is why Unions these days, or at least the UAW, have seriously outlived their usefulness to anyone but its own members.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:39 am
Sichuan Tengzhong bought Hummer, so I guess Changfeng lost out. One interesting thing about this is, Hummers made in the USA will be shipped to China for sale (for now anyway). That will put a nano-sized dent in the trade gap.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:50 am
@N Riley 102
“Of course, many of these environmental leaders are driving big cars and trucks or SUVs and flying around the world in their private planes while living in homes that are an acre in size. Yeah, Al, I am talking about you.”
Yeah, and here’s how his estate celebrated “Earth Day”…
http://politics.nashvillepost.com/2009/03/29/al-gore-will-leave-the-lights-on-for-ya/
lol….
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:50 am
#83 LauraM on dealerships
—————————————-
Good points. I am persuaded.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:51 am
If possible, the people who are working on the Volt should reform as an independent company without ties to G.M. The sort of thinking that is required to produce fresh new products cannot thrive in the GM environment.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 11:54 am
The New York times, on 6-1-2009 announced that the Volt really was not viable for production in the future. The Times, which unabashedly treats Obama as if he were the CEO/Chairman, sees a very much reduced Government Motors in the future. IMHO, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, and VW should be able to take up the auto demand slack with no problem. Just remember, Jaguar was a great marque until the Labour Party took control of it after WWII. It never recovered.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:04 pm
I want my Converj. I could definitely justify the extra cost for one of those bad boys.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:07 pm
#110 Arshavin — Could you say a little more specifically where in the NYT it said the Volt was not viable for production? I was looking but did not find it, but no doubt I just missed it.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Also from NYT 6/2/2009 saying much the same as Lyle but more voices
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/gm-says-chevy-volt-is-still-on-track/?scp=1&sq=Chevrolet%20Volt&st=cse
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:19 pm
#102 N Riley
I don’t see you changing your mind either.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Additionally, it is once again that time…car sales reports:
As always out of the gate first is Ford, with a -24%
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fords-May-sales-fall-24-apf-15413949.html;_ylt=ApETAsKFNcmbgy4pRWDOaRe7YWsA?sec=topStories&pos=2&asset=&ccode=
They also introduced another, money is no object plan to buy a Ford plan…this time it is, they pay the first 3 months (up to $2,100)…and everyone’s favorite, zero percent financing on the model’s that aren’t popular.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:32 pm
More Volt news from CNN’s American Morning Show (today)….
http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/02/gm-cfo-we-admit-errors-in-the-past/
“Chetry: Speaking of risks, one of them could possibly be the Chevy Volt. This is the plug-in hybrid you guys are touting. Reportedly, the retail price is $40,000. If you contrast that with the Toyota Prius, that’s selling for $25,000. One “Washington Post” columnist said it’s a lot to pay for altruism. How do you stay competitive with a car like the Prius if your Volt is going to be several thousand dollars more?
Young: Well Kiran, we haven’t talked about the selling price of the Volt yet. What we’re working on is the battery technology, bringing down the cost of the vehicle, going through the learning cycles. We think the Volt is going to be a revolutionary vehicle. It’s not a hybrid vehicle. It’s an extended-range electric vehicle. We have a lot of confidence in this product, a lot of confidence in this technology. We actually think it’s going to be revolutionary in both the U.S. and global markets.”
CaptJack…we still have a chance?
Wishful thinking.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:38 pm
@David K (CT) 116
If they want to drop the price, offer us the following….
No Power Windows
No Power Adjust Seats
No Power Side view mirrors
No Power Sunroof (Actually No Sunroof at all)
No Power Door Locks
No Power Trunk lock
No Radio (Remember that fiasco? – Get an iPod)
No Heated Seats
No MuthaF@#$&# OnStar!!!
Make the garbage I listed, but another mans treasure, an “Upgrade” for those who want these creature comforts.
Standard Features:
4 Wheels
Highway Capable
AC
Heater
Defogger Front/Rear
Quit luxurizing “Pat Publics” affordable car!!!
The ICEAge is over, Embrace the VoltAge.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:42 pm
CaptJack @ 117
I thought it was Pat Sixpack?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Oh yeah….
Ooopsie….
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Static @ 115
RE: Ford Sales
Hey, what about their sales being the best since July ‘08?
Have we reached the BOTTOM?
GM Sales -29% (Ouch)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:53 pm
I think we’ve reached the bottom and we’re going to be scraping it till third quarter 2010. That’s just my unscientific, non financial expertise wishfull thinking SWAG.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:54 pm
#116
#117
You left out Power Windshield Wipers and a cupholder good for a Super Big Gulp without tipping. That’s a properly equipped auto.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:54 pm
CaptJack @121
Wow…another year an a half of this?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:59 pm
LaruaM @ #91 – You need to look at my post in the context of Kent’s, who started out “none of the UAW was affected by the bankruptcy…” Kent’s opening salvo is patently ridiculous and unfair. I’ve got no problem with valid criticisms, but I see way too many comments that are just pure bigotry.
Your point is mostly about choice, and that’s a different issue. I more or less agree with what you’re saying. As a practical matter the UAW had little choice but to make some contract concessions, accept that there are going to be some massive job losses, and that their retirees are going to have to trade hope in the form of their stake in GM for actual cash.
But they also did not take the route of many bondholders, who played chicken until the last week in order to squeeze the most out of the deal. The UAW came to the table first for both Chrysler and GM. Some will say that Obama rigged it for them, but I guarantee that there were some in the UAW who wanted them to play the game harder and get more anyway, just like the bondholders were doing. Cooler heads prevailed, and that is a good thing.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Toyota and Honda off big time as well,
-40.7% and -41.5% respectively
Honda:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/honda-us-may-sales-fall-415
Toyota:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/toyota-us-may-sales-fall-407?siteid=yhoof2
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
After a few more months it will feel like normal business as usual….
lol
Then when it takes the upswing it will feel better. Kindof like the a bad cut. You have to suffer through to a point till it starts to feel better.
I say third quarter of 2010 because if it doesn’t turn around, I’ll probably get laid off, even after 10 years of slavery…..uh…..errr……..service, yeah that’s the word.
lol
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:04 pm
GM Sales -29% re: David K
DETROIT – General Motors dealers in the United States delivered 191,875 vehicles in May, down 29.6 percent compared with a year ago. However, when comparing GM’s May sales with April, total volume was up 11 percent, or about 19,000 cars, crossovers and trucks resulting in the best monthly sales performance so far in 2009.
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewmonthlyreleasedetail.do?domain=3&docid=54740
Marketing guru master, Mark LaNeve’s bullet points of happiness this month:
“We were able to record our best monthly sales result of the year in May as we are seeing more positive signs in housing and consumer confidence in the market”
“Those signs, along with more clarity on the New GM, are providing some additional consumer confidence. With GM’s reinvention, the company has cleared a path for future success….”
“What was lost in all the financial turmoil is that our outstanding products continue to compete strongly in the market and Camaro is a red-hot example…”
—–
Only Chrysler left…should be the nightmare of the sector. Never a good sign when they say they are going to talk about it on the conference call, lol. (not that it matters too much atm)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:04 pm
@CorvetteGuy 122
You left out Power Windshield Wipers and a cupholder good for a Super Big Gulp without tipping.
YOU’RE RIGHT!!
How could I have missed the cup holders. Gotta have those. I remember the big deal in how each mfgr had to “Engineer” them into the cars…..lol, then it was a selling point “Our car has X amount of cup holders….”
Added them to my list.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:06 pm
#11, gas prices will continue to climb. Granted if we start now by having oil companies drill in the US for our own oil, develop fuel cells, and further price reduction from the unrealistic price point, by 2013 or 2014 we would have lower gas prices and ease the future fuel cell in the distribution grid.
But since we still have a silly energy plan for the USA, oh well.
Make mine Ford until the government owns 0% of GM…
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:07 pm
@ statik
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Toyota and Honda off big time as well,
-40.7% and -41.5% respectively
——————————————————-
Holy Guacamole!!!
I though our home team got slammed!?!?!?!
Goes to show you, we’re all just human.
OK, early lunch time, boss is not in today.
Cheap Pizza and beer!!!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Carcus1@37 said:
“If Toyota really is offering to license their HSD technology, maybe GM ought to just take it and not look this gift horse in the mouth. They need some kind of short term survival plan if gas heads back up to $4.”
I agree with that. In the near/medium term I believe that several competing technologies are likely to advance. It wouldn’t hurt GM to be involved in more than one. It wouldn’t hurt them to take advantage of the trouble that Toyota has gone to with designing their hybrid system either. That is, if the technology is actually available to GM. Hedge, hedge, your bets!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
#123
Many economics see this positive economic uptick being tiny and then the world going back into another new recession.
If this does happen, 2010 could see conservatives taking the US house of reps. and in 2012 Obama is voted out. It would be the four years of Carter revisited. Who knows what government policies could still be in existence in this scenario.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:12 pm
I am soooo on board with CaptJackSparrow. You can keep the creature comforts. If I need music, I’ll buy an ipod. If I need to roll the windows down, I’ll use the armstrong crank.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:12 pm
#102 N Riley
Not to be too pessimistic–but the unions already effectively owned GM. This just formalized matters.
Every UAW strike that lasts longer than 2 weeks costs GM over a billion dollars. Not to mention market share and goodwill. And the UAW has been known to strike for months. You can say GM should have been tougher–but the UAW has enough reserves to pay the UAW salaries for longer than GM can hold out. It’s an unequal contest.
As long as the UAW exists, there’s no way anyone should buy stock in the new GM except as a trade. Or Ford for that matter. This may have taught them that they have to leave enough profits for R&D, product development, and salaries. But I don’t see them leaving enough for shareholder’s equity.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124389995447074461.html#mod=article-outset-box
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
#130 CaptJackSparrow said:
@ statik
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Toyota and Honda off big time as well,
-40.7% and -41.5% respectively
——————————————————-
Holy Guacamole!!!
I though our home team got slammed!?!?!?!
Goes to show you, we’re all just human.
OK, early lunch time, boss is not in today.
Cheap Pizza and beer!!!
=========================
Sorry, my bad, I didn’t adjust for selling days, Toyota should have been -38.4%.
/still bad, bad
Sidenote: We always end up at the same place, so I’ll do it ahead of time.
Prius Sales 2008: 10,098
Prius Sales 2009: 15,011
…and yeah, next gen is out now, so probably they get a 15-20K bump next month (and a extra 10-15K on average more going forward for the next calender year)
Overall sales were 96,650 vs 168,942 , so you are looking at the ‘next gen’ Prius bumping sales by around 10% per month looking ahead.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I Just put $5K down to pre-order my Tesla Model S yesterday.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:24 pm
134 LauraM
Exactly. What’s the solution? Its going to be the same thing all over again in 2015. UAW will strike as soon as they dont get their way. Why would I invest in GM/Ford/Chrysler? Can I buy a few shares of the ticker symbol UAW? It seems like they have more control of their profit
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:28 pm
There is no way that I will purchase this vehicle from GM. It was bad enough that the pricing is going to be more than the average family could afford,(which is where GM’s focus should have been), but now I would have to pay even more for the vehicle because of a bailout. GM and their product line from now on can bite me! Ford doesn’t take bailout, doesn’t have so many of the bunch that caused this mess in the first place staying right where they were, and had the foresight to clean things up before it got to be a mess for us! Up yours GM!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Speaking of 2-Mode Hybrid Trucks (like I did earlier…)
The Hybrid Trucks do not need “Touch-Screen Navigation with Backup Camera” in the dashboard to get the point across that its a Hybrid. Just add 3 little lights to the “Economy Guage” on the main cluster: YELLOW that reads “Auto-Stop”; GREEN for “Electric-Mode”; and BLUE for “Gas-Mode”. When the system is in both Electric and Gas mode, then 2 lights are on. In all other modes only 1 light is on. Simple. Effective. AND A LOT CHEAPER THAN THE FULL BLOWN LTZ PACKAGE.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:38 pm
#127, statik, “Mark LaNeve’s bullet points of happiness…”
Once again, ROTFLOL!
More seriously, I’m missing the conference call right now but I’ll catch the tape at 4:00. I wonder if the reporters participating will ask:
- What was your trend in incentives?
- What percentage went to fleets?
Key numbers-behind-the-numbers that are only rarely seen in one of LaNeve’s “bullet points of happiness.”
A more obscure but still very interesting number would be percentage of GM hybrid vehicles sold to fleets. I’d really like to know what that figure is. The only GM hybrids I’ve ever seen on the street were fleet vehicles.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 1:46 pm
#124 MarkinWI
You’re right. Obviously, the UAW was affected by the bankruptcy. But much less than most observers would have expected.
As far as the UAW playing chicken–they signed a deal about 3 days before the deadline. They had the chance to negotiate, and they got a really good deal. The bondholders, on the other hand, were originally offered a rediculous deal–they would have done better in a liquidation. The treasury upped the offer on Thursday with a Saturday deadline to something. And, the majority agreed.
I know I sound unsympathetic to union workers. But I do understand that these are real people who’s lives are being destroyed. And it’s really hard to adjust your income downward, And while $70,000-120,000 a year is much more than most Americans make, it still feels like middle class. But the kind of profits GM made in the 50s are gone for good. And so is that lifestyle.
They have to understand that those outsized benefits are directly responsible for Detriot’s downfall, so, that, hopefully, they won’t repeat the same mistakes. No. It wasn’t just them. Management also played a role. As did long term increases in the life expectancy and medical costs. But there’s no fixing Detriot unless the UAW understands that they have to let Detriot invest in R&D and product development.
The credit markets are probably permanently closed to all three companies. So they won’t be able to live on credit any longer. That means it’s up to the UAW. They have to decide if they’re willing to cooperate so that Detriot can prosper long term. Because if they’re not, we just wasted a lot of taxpayer money.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
#29 Jim I:
“Show me the car!!!!” Sums it up for me.
#54 CorvetteGuy:
Amen.
#114 ThombDbhomb:
LOL.
Thanks for your comment yesterday, asking whether people’s grievances with GM, real or imagined, justified buying Japanese cars. Even though I was at a loss to add anything at that moment, I really appreciated it.
I am convinced that our negative balance of payments will kill us as a society if we don’t get it under control. Ditto for the repatriated profits of the captive car plants here.
I used to tell myself that, as an individual consumer, I had no interest in buying American. I would buy the car which represented the best value for the money, no matter where it was made. I don’t believe that any more.
IMHO, everything we do which exacerbates the negative balance of payments is one more nick in the death of a thousand cuts of our standard of living and our society.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:07 pm
The Volt is the least of your American problems. I have missiles that can destroy anything, including your Volt if I decide to initiate an attack. Don’t be so stupid American.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:10 pm
If anyone really believes that the Volt is critical to GM’s future, they
better go sell any GM stock they own. The dangers the Volt faces
are many : a $21K BYD Volt-lookalike that has a 50% greater
electric driving range. The Volt cannot possibly compete against
that car. Period. Unless the unlikely scenario of an Edsel-like performance from same, But it is already being sold and debugged in vivo and will be quite mature by the time the Volt ever gets rolling. And there will be not one, but two such competiors from BYD. Danger number 2: an EEStor success. That leaves every major automaker, but especially high labor rate automakers (read : Detroit). extremely vulnerable. The big thing they have going for them now is their dealership networks and high cost of entry into their business. Cheap electrical storage devices completely changes all that. The unforeseen success of Tesla is a partial example of what can happen : anyone can order the very best electric motors, inwheel or otherwise from indepdendent, unaffiliated manufacturers. No tranny really needed, but when required, can be obtained often simply by checking a box on the electric motor order
form. Probably more than 70% of a Detroit vehicle can be identified as part and supporting parcel of the drivetrain. That would include HVAC. All those expensively engineered assets now become totally worthless. As is the need for all those extensive testing schedules in new car development. The cost to entry into the new world of electric cars is quite low – anyone can buy a drivetrain as good as that used by Lexus or Mecedes – they will all come from the same places. The auto gets a
WHOLE lot simpler when it becomes a battery-only electric. That means entry into the business is a whole lot less capital/engineering expertise intensive. Electric motor technology is over 140 years old and fully mature. And simple. No automaker has a chance of making those things any smoother (impossible) or more efficient (not without cost-prohibitive materials) and they already have a lifespan that goes beyond that of any car. And you and I can both buy electric motors that are as good as anything either Mercedes or Lexus can get their hands on. Ditto for HVAC systems, headlights, etc. etc.
And I can shoehorn in as many of the batteries as they can also and make my car just as fast as theirs.
In other words, almost everything they can do, I can do just as well.
And I don’t need 1000 engineers to do it. One good one will suffice.
Notice that in this brave new world, the stylist becomes VERY crucial for success, because no builder can cover up ugly with the cloak of reliability because ALL electric cars are going to be reliable. Reliability gets factored out of the car buying equation.
This change in the economics of automaking will prove to be one of the most interesting aspects of the new electrified auto age.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:16 pm
#90 Mark H
“How is Ford doing in this Survivor competition”
They don’t need the gubermint $$ as they mortgaged everything when the market was good including the blue oval.
In a sense Ford owns nothing of what it has…they got 23 Billion privately before the money markets tanked. Reality is they could not back any government loans with assets as they are all mortgaged right now.
GM and Chrysler could not get $ from the market due to the Collapse, so are getting the $ from the fed…and can put up assets as collateral because they still own them.
Its really a wash situation, but a perceptual difference. Ford’s money came from John Q public, but from a private source using JQP’s money invested with them instead of JQP’s money collected by the fed…
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Hmmm…
Hummer + China = EV Hummer?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Kent @ 144,
” All those expensively engineered assets now become totally worthless. As is the need for all those extensive testing schedules in new car development. The cost to entry into the new world of electric cars is quite low – anyone can buy a drivetrain as good as that used by Lexus or Mecedes – they will all come from the same places.”
______________________
I agree. Once pure BEV’s take hold, it’ll be like building/ordering a kitchen appliance with some extra safety features. This (along with low maintenance costs) is why the big push for BEV’s will come from manufacturers looking to gain market share. Not from manufacturers that already have the lion’s share. The big OEM’s will grudgingly be forced to react.
Giving Ford the benefit of the doubt, they may be handling this better than the rest. They may have recognized the catch22 and settled on subbing the whole electric car thing out. This allows them to keep their foot in the electric door without setting up a whole conflict of interest within the company. That actually makes sense to me.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:28 pm
#137 k-dawg
I don’t have a solution–other than to warn people not to buy the new GM stock or Ford’s for anything but a trade. Actually, I don’t believe in “buy and hold” in the first place, but that’s a completely different post.
For what’s it’s worth, I wouldn’t short them either. It’s the whole “the market can stay irrational longer than I can stay solvent” thing.
#142 noel park
I completely agree with you about balance of payments. i find the trade deficit much scarier than the government debt. Unfortunately, it’s the natural result of the Bretton Woods system. And I don’t see any good solutions there either.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:29 pm
This bankruptcy is the slap in the face GM needs (and deserves).
It’s near impossible to sell a car for $20,000 these days let alone $40,000
GM- DROP the bar a little on the Volt. Make it more accessible to consumers with a more realistic price point, dropping unnecessary features and gimmicks.
I heard the volt’s innards were going to also go into the next cadillac. Great. Another car none of us can afford will be even more unaffordable.
All you are R&Ding are nails for your own coffin if you do not wake up and REACT once and for all to the realities of the markets.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:32 pm
#145 Mitch
Actually, Chrysler had also already mortaged everything they owned. (It didn’t stop the US government from giving it lots of taxpayer money.) GM was the only one with “unencumbered assets.”
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Good News?
As of yesterday, the whole of GM has become an “alternative energy vehicle”.
Instead of being fueled by profits, it is now powered primarily by money forcibly taken from every US citizen via taxation, deficit spending and a general devaluation of the US dollar (the end result of printing more money).
The design, availability and, even more so, the profitability of the Volt and/or any other GM product is essentially irrelevant at this point.
The main purpose of the New GM is funneling a significant portion of the country’s remaining wealth to the union that helped elect our president, presumably in the hope that this very same political machine will, in turn, support and otherwise help re-elect him as well.
Meanwhile, the truly sad thing is that America’s auto workers themselves are being devalued and abused in the process.
By and large, these folks are dedicated, highly skilled, hard working men and women who are far more than capable of building world-class automobiles, if only given the chance to do so.
But, instead of being prized for their unmatched productivity, the primary output now demanded of past and present employees by the current leadership of the company/country are Votes – not Volts.
Makes sense, though. After all, unlike a Volt, apparently you can actually buy a Vote.
Yes, they have.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Hey Cap’n Jack at #89
Thanks ****greatly***** for your finding that link about the PHEV regarding the volvo.
That proves once again that GM had been on the right track all along, and, that the other OEM’s will fall into line, or, they will be in really really big trouble with their customers!
Other OEM’s ought to be very worried if they are not at least in the planning stages for EREV’s.
Dan Petit Austin TX.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:53 pm
#150 LauraM
Is it possible then that John Q. Public or Pat SixPack Public could eventually recover some value from the equity of GM or Ford? Are they in roughly an equal position?
Is the bankruptcy of Chrysler somehow more of a total loss?
Conversely, if the economy continues to flatline will Ford be tapping federal funds because Chysler set a precedent?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Chrysler finally dropped their number: -47%
http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/06-02-2009/0005037182&EDATE=
They announced the ‘best’ retail sales of the year…and also said they didn’t sell a single fleet vehicle, so 6 of one…half dozen of another.
Not sure if that is a product of defaults to rental companies, larger businesses, etc. or a corporate decision…maybe both, I dunno…I wasn’t interested enough to listen the conference call or dig up the info.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Hey, I just thought of something….
IF Chrysler & GM disappear and Ford is left as the grand pubah, wouldn’t that make them a Monopoly and therefore be forced to “Split” or somethin like that?
lol……gotta follow the rules.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:00 pm
I’m not sure exactly how GM should restructure the 4 divisions it has left but I do know that GM should at least TRY to take on Toyota and Honda in the smaller car segment … the cars that the high school crowd tends to drive. What is one of the most important things when you are in high school? Having a car that LOOKS COOL.
http://www.reuters.com/article/bigMoney/idUS282576929820090601
GM’s exterior and interior design people need to work long and hard on getting that “cool factor” into their vehicles. Especially the vehicles that the people from age 16 to 35 tend to drive. GM executives and design people should watch the “The Fast and the Furious” movies. There’s a whole subculture of people that like to soup up their 4 cylinder smaller cars and make their exteriors look cool. They should look to this crowd of “modders” for some ideas for upcoming small to mid size car designs.
Maybe GM needs to get some Apple executives to do some consulting at their design centers or something. Apple is pretty cool these days with their iPhone and iPods, etc. Lots of people say they are successful because they are good at DESIGN as well as engineering. When you mix art and science optimally you get hit products. That’s what GM needs to master.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Boring! GM’s wait and see philosophy is what’s gotten it into this mess in the first place. Get some Volts on the road! Green light the Caddy! If GM waits for someone else to prove that it’s do-able and profitable, they’re going to get smoked. Honestly, hype is over-hyped. Consumer’s are not as stupid as some exec’s seem to think, and buyers will take into consideration who is an innovator and who’s vehicles have the best track record over 5-10 years.
Tesla is already making some kick a** electrics, and the Karma is one of the prettiest cars I have ever seen. I’ve been holding my breath for the Volt for years, and it’s looking like by the time it actually gets on the road someone else will have beaten GM to the punch.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:07 pm
#151 Tommo
Personally, I like energy-efficient cars and a robust middle class.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:08 pm
#150 Laura.
Can you provide a source? I know Chrysler leveraged some assets, but not everything like Ford did…
curiosity as I have not hear that. Some yes, but not all.
Thank you.
Mitch
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:11 pm
I was really looking forward to the Volt, but since the company is now a government-owned entity, I don’t trust ANY plans they come up with. The company will certainly not be able to plan independently of Obama input. I regret that the Volt (or any GM car)is on my list.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:13 pm
@GM Volt Fan 156
I brought that up before but not as elegant as you did. A good example is the Scion Culture. These folks love to work and tweak their cars. They sometimes conveine at the grcery store in the early evenings with their crowd showing off thier rides. As I understand it, they like the cars because they are easy to work on and have plenty of add on mods and other crap, even from Toyota.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:20 pm
kent @ 144 said
And I don’t need 1000 engineers to do it. One good one will suffice.
—————————–
Well maybe 2 or 3, you know, say one for mechanical, one for electrical, then since there are batteries somebody who knows about chemistry or chemical engineering, and then there are pesky safety standards so maybe some biomedical engineering (biomechanics) ….
/good to simplify, but to over-simplify is to fail
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:21 pm
GM Volt Fan & CapnJack
You guys are basically describing the Chevy Spark.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:23 pm
One thing surprising me about the sales numbers today is that most of the Amercian companies are down less than 30% (GM -29%; Ford -24%), while most of the Japanese companies are down more than 40% (Toyota, Honda, Mazda). Do the business gurus here know the answer(s) yet as to why? Are we (gasp) seeing a resurgence of “buy American” sentiment, or is this just the GM and Ford discounted the heck out of everything?
LauraM @ 141 – Fair enough.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:31 pm
MarkinWI @ 164…
I was wondering that myself.
I really don’t think that Ford & GM “discounted the heck out of everything.”
Maybe peoples perception about getting a good deal nudge them into buying a Ford or GM… I dunno.
Anyone have the answer?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:36 pm
@k-dawg 163
Then they should EREV that thing and leave it open so some tweakers can either add a nother pack via a DC buss to the controllers or add their own bank of UltraCaps. Since it would have an ICE they tweak that thang too. I dunno much about ICE.
I prefer the Spark to be a BEV myself.
@MarkinWI 164
“or is this just the GM and Ford discounted the heck out of everything?”
I think it’s because the home team is offering to pay for their product for you if you lose your job as well as discounted the heck out of them. That kind of sounds like “We’ll buy the car for you…”
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:36 pm
#135, Statik,
You reversed the numbers on the Prius. It was at 15,011 in 2008 and is at 10,091 this year.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Here’s a story that immediately made me think of you CaptJack…you may have seen this already, but I thought I would share it for anyone else who’s interested.
A guy in Indiana, with no special skills or tools has converted a Ford Escort into an all-electric vehicle that’s legal, safe, and freeway capable! The car and the conversion cost him $13,000 and 10 weeks. Here’s the link.
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/19633781/detail.html
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:13 pm
What exactly does it mean to say “license the Toyota technology”?.
1. Design your own drive train using Toyota’s patents.
2. Reverse engineer the Toyota drive train
3. Buy prebuilt drive trains from Toyota and somehow cram them into an existing model.
None of these ideas would get you a car on the road before 2012 except maybe #3. Even then, Toyota might have to construct additional capacity to meet the additional demand.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:19 pm
#43 MarkinWI Says, “… HMMWVs (ph. Humvees) are the military version, and they are made by AM General … The Humvee was envisioned as a more rugged, modern alternative to the Jeep. Iraq has demonstrated its extreme weaknesses (vulnerability to improvised mines) and other alternatives will probably be used in the future.”
It’s a “High Mobility Vehicle,” not a tank. Calling its vulnerability to mines an “extreme weakness” is like calling a fighter jet’s lack of cargo capacity an extreme weakness.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:22 pm
#81 BadNews Says, “…They should have kept on working on the EV-1, if they did, by now they could have made the technology more cost effective.”
Why aren’t *you* building a BEV and selling it for under $20,000?! Those of us who have actually developed complex products understand how much work is involved. Simply *wishing* it to be true and beating up those few heroes (like GM) who try and fail doesn’t bring a product to market. The technology *must* be ready and the economics *must* be viable, or it is simply a dream.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:22 pm
#153 MarkH wrote:
Is it possible then that John Q. Public or Pat SixPack Public could eventually recover some value from the equity of GM or Ford? Are they in roughly an equal position?
Is the bankruptcy of Chrysler somehow more of a total loss?
Conversely, if the economy continues to flatline will Ford be tapping federal funds because Chrysler set a precedent?
————–
Ford is in better shape than GM–as in they haven’t gone bankrupt just yet. But, no, the shareholders are very unlikely to recovery any value from the equity.
As far as Chrysler–it depends on how you define loss. For the equity holders–zero is still zero. As far as the taxpayer and the US economy–probably. The US government had to write off some of those loans completely. Unlike GM where the government used it to take a share of the equity. And I think the new GM stands a much better share of becoming a viable company than the new Fiat/Chrysler. (Not that I think GM’s chances are all that great, but Fiat/Chrysler’s chances are practically non-existent.)
Without an economic recovery and further concessions from the UAW, Ford will probably wind up in bankruptcy court the same way GM and Chrysler did. Regardless of what happened with Chrysler. I doubt that the administration will give them any loans first though.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Dan Petit @ 152,
Uhhh, that’s not an EREV.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:47 pm
# 173 LauraM
Thanks for the reply.
Assuming no restructuring loans to Ford, bankruptcy would not then follow the same path either would it? Following bankruptcy, Ford would not necessarily have the federal government as the majority shareholder.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:49 pm
GM Volt Fan @ 156
CaptJackSparrow @ 161
K-dawg @ 163
A small, stylish fast and furious 4 cylinder (or how about 5)?
Some are calling for Ford to bring their latest Focus RS from across the pond. Obviously, regular focus or spark are not in the same league, but it could give the Focus some “cool by association”. Maybe GM should have been working performance from this angle instead of 4,000 lb camaros.
Focused Focus: Focus RS Test Drive in Europe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS6bhb1NxP8
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:49 pm
“We’re closing one chapter and opening a new chapter,”
So… this is Chapter 12, then? Which would logically come after Chapter 11, of course. =P
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:50 pm
#173.
If you click on the very first photo in the lower photo gallery in the link provided by Cap’n Jack, and study it very carefully, you will see that the components are all there, and,
you will find out that indeed it certainly is an EREV.
Now what do you think?
Dan.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
#159 Mitch
I’m just going by what Nardelli said during the bailout hearings when congress asked for assets to secure the loans. (They were going to write a bankruptcy chapter 11 sub c or something to deal with it. But since they wound up getting the money from the president, it never happened.) I believe its still on Cspan if you want to watch them.
http://www.cspan.org/Watch/Media/2008/11/18/HP/A/12771/Senate+Banking+Hearing+on+the+Auto+Industry.aspx
This is the closest I could find in terms of an article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124113528027275219.html
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Dan Petit @ 177,
Can we put some money on this?
I think you’re wrong.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:07 pm
So, why is it that you say that it is not an EREV?
Dan.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:09 pm
#174 MarkH
Maybe. Maybe not. The government would still have to provide DIP financing. But the bondholders will likely wind up with a larger piece of the pie.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Look closely under the “Electric Drive Display” and you ought to see why. They say a 30 mile electric range. The “Diesel Engine/Electric Drive” display indication is technically-comparable to EREV.
But, as apparently a Ford buff, is Ford doing anything nowadays that will be comparable to Voltec or Volvo EREV’s, (technically like these)? It would sure be great if they did.
Dan.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Nice graphic Lyle, but ever notice how the winners on Survivor are never quite the same as they once were when they started to play the game? Hmmm. Things change….
Let Gen 2 arrive ASAP per Tom #11 suggestion.
GO EV!
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Dan Petit @ 180,
If you look very carefully at my posts 58 and 99 . . .
There is no generator.
It’s a diesel driving the front wheels and a battery driven motor turning the rear wheels.
Once the battery is depleted then you run on a regular diesel front wheel drive until you can plug in again.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:25 pm
#164 MarkinWI/ #165gm David K (CT)
My guess is that Ford is benefiting from people worried about GM and Chrysler. (The buy American crowd is now flocking to Ford.) GM is benefiting from the Camaro–they had 17,000 pre-sales I believe. And both are benefiting from lower gas prices. (Their line-ups are both still skewed towards trucks.)
Also, American cars tend to be cheaper, so they might be benefiting from the “trade-down” effect. Right now, people are more interested in deals than paying up for Toyota’s “superior quality.” (This was offset by bankruptcy fears earlier, but people might be more comfortable about it now?)
There might also be a resurgence of buy American, but it’s hard to tell.. (I know I would never have even considered an American car before this, and now–I would only buy an American car.)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:39 pm
You are absolutely correct. I am glad I didn’t take the bet.
The design still has a transmission. I am not a fan of Volvo transmissions whatsoever. They could loose the transmission and just put in a generator, while at the same time save more money dropping the front final-drive, CV joints, and a few other things.
A generator later might possibly their “second generation” sort of step, but, there is everything else there that could have it an EREV in the not too distant future. Generators are not a costly change from transmission/final drive/CV axle setups. Time will tell.
I’ll have to buy a bigger magnifying glass.
Maybe this might be a transition type of deal, but, as it seems to be just an add-on set of systems that I would be careful about if I were a regular Volvo customer.
But I still hold that it does represent another manufacturer attempting to *very closely* transition to what GM is doing, and, I am still impressed by that effort. I still reaffirm that any OEM that is not at least planning to transition to EREV like this ought to be VERY worried.
Dan Petit. Austin TX
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:40 pm
#182 Dan Petit,
“Look closely under the “Electric Drive Display” and you ought to see why. They say a 30 mile electric range. The “Diesel Engine/Electric Drive” display indication is technically-comparable to EREV.
But, as apparently a Ford buff, is Ford doing anything nowadays that will be comparable to Voltec or Volvo EREV’s, (technically like these)? It would sure be great if they did.
————————————
So we’ve established Volvo’s offering is not an EREV…. and you don’t get to welsh out with some “technically comparable” crap. It doesn’t have an onboard generator, it’s not an EREV. . . period.
Ford owns Volvo. I’m glad you think that’s great.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:40 pm
The new Chevy Cruze and Spark are totally rad. These may be the best cars EVER produced by the General. Bring them now. This is what the American People have wanted for a generation. Make it so, number one.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Looks like trading has been halted on ‘old’ GM stock. Checked stats at the end of the trading day and came back with minimal information. Last week a 1 for 100 reverse split was mentioned.
I believe the new GM will dazzle the world with most of their 2011 models being 35+ mpg and/or plug in.
BTW: The local Mobil just posted new pricing:
regular $2.95
middle $3.05
premium $3.15
=D~
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:50 pm
All right. Well disregard my 187. I was still in “argument mode”.
Biggest advantage I can see right off with the volvo design is manufacturing/design costs and redundancy.
You basically take a front wheel drive car and slap a battery/motor in the back and some integrating software in there and you’re done.
Later on, if the battery craps out you’ve still got regular front wheel drive car.
If the diesel goes on the blink then you can drive 30 miles a whack on the battery until you can get to the shop
/I’m starting to like this the more I think about it. Another advantage would be that you can pick your fuel souce. If diesel gets cheap and you want to run it that way to save battery cycles, you’ve got the option. If you start out on a windy headwind day or in the mountains, hopefully they’ll let you switch to diesel only mode saving the battery for slower speed or stop and go driving later in the trip.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
#187 carcust1
Do you think Ford will come out with an EREV and gradually test the components of the system in the Volvo wagon? That’s what the schematic looks like from my perspective.
I doubt Ford will do a BEV.
Dan.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Yes, it’s a new wonderful new day. The sun is shining bright (somewhere on the planet.) The VOLT is on target for November 2010. Let’s celebrate!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Best_Time_Of_Your_Life
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:00 pm
@Dan Petit 191
“I doubt Ford will do a BEV. ”
As I recall, Magna has taken this up for Ford. The Focus BEV is to be their car for 2011 or was it 12? Sh|t I can’t remember.
But as long as you have a BEV, then all you need is space for a small genset and you have an EREV….
http://www.evalbum.com/popupimg.php?11792
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Dan @ 191,
I have no idea if Ford will use the Volvo hybrid design in other models. Haven’t read anything about it.
Ford’s alt energy program chief chick has said they looked at EREV and didn’t like it. They’re going series/parallel plug in instead. (escape hybrid has been testing for a couple of years and they’re claiming 80 to 120 mpg on cycles of 30 miles between plug ins with a 10kwh battery).
Ford has 2 BEV’s already planned for production. A transit city van and a focus.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:06 pm
#175 carcus1, et al:
The Cobalt SS is a truly amazing little car. 260 hp turbo 4, and tuned suspension and brakes to match. 2 of the car mags have recently had track tests with 12-13 cars running back to back for lap times at Willow Springs and one of the eastern road courses. The Cobalt’s performance has been astounding, lapping quicker than much more expensive cars with great sporting pretensions. The Mitsu Evo and the top line WRX, just for starters.
It doesn’t seem to sell very well though. I think I read recently that at least the sedan version is going to be dropped.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:07 pm
# 193 Cap’n Jack
Was that a generator being towed? There were no comments with the photo. But that does say a lot that the OEM’s are moving ahead however they can with EV’ing. Apparently, there are all the different approaches converging toward the same goals it seems.
Thanks again, Cap’n Jack, for another link.
Dan.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Jack @ 193,
Or you could wait for this:
AVL Introduces New Modular Range Extender Technologies and Engineering Services
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/05/avl-re-20090517.html
I saw the pricing somewhere. Wasn’t cheap. (like $13k or more?)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:08 pm
I think it would be great if all the OEM’s could come out and give progress news for all the different EV projects they have, at one central link. It would make research a lot easier.
Dan.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
#189 Dave K:
Yup, I just paid $81 to fill up the shop pickup this PM. Here we go again.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:17 pm
200! yesssssssss.. . . . .
Dan @ 198,
I’ve seen a few lists online. But in the last year or so, things are changing so fast it would probably take a fully staffed office to keep it updated. Autobloggreen, EVworld and Lyle’s All Cars Electric (top of this page) are 3 of the best sources I know.
I don’t think any of them has an easily accessible list that’s updated regularly.
. .. anyone?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Dan Petit
Ford is working on a BEV. They announced it in Feb.
http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=29830
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:25 pm
198.
Dan Petit Says:
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:08 pm .I think it would be great if all the OEM’s could come out and give progress news for all the different EV projects they have, at one central link. It would make research a lot easier.
Dan.
————————-
You could start one? Format it however you want.
How about a spreadsheet. Manufacturers on the left and columns with facts/theories/prices/dates etc.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:35 pm
Oh man. I have to really start getting up early. I just read the article.
Nice job, Lyle. Great questions.
I don’t really see a point to waiting for Gen 2 unless I can’t buy a Gen 1.
I have faith that Voltec is the future and will be here a long time.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Plumbers make too much money. I h8tum.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Ford said they aren’t doing EREV because you can’t get away with putting in a genset that’s too small in a car and expect it to magically propel the car forward with decent performance (when in charge sustaining mode) under continuous moderate to heavy demand.
And Ford is right. There’s only so much buffer an empty battery has. Once that buffer is gone, you are stuck only with what a 1.4L engine can provide.
They also realized that it won’t be a money maker any time soon, so it’s not worth the risk, especially at this time.
I expect GM will have the same issues with the Volt. And I’m also wondering if the government will want to include a money-pit car that they themselves have declared “unviable in the short term”, into the “new” GM with only good assets.
It’s clear to me that the government doesn’t think the Volt is worth it, and that money would be better spent on traditional hybrids:
http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?section=resources/auto&id=6736527
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:55 pm
191 Dan
“I doubt Ford will do a BEV. ”
==================================================
Ford is planning a BEV for 2011/2012. Using the the Focus as the skeleton.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1721000/2012_ford_focus_bev_review.html
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:58 pm
How about Lyle?
Yeah, that’s it, Lyle.
Lyle could help us out here, couldn’t you Lyle?
You could have a matrix spread sheet.
Maybe a column about “possible designs” for OEM’s.
carcust1 is right that it would take a full timer.
(I’m in trouble today for taking too much time off as it is).
Dan
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:58 pm
There’s still one mess around that GM won’t be able to shed to make them competitive with Toyoto. That’s the army of GM retirees that continue to draw down GM funds, Same goes for Chrysler. American Toyoto plants are relatively new and won’t have this problem for some time to come. GM retirees must learn to live with less if the new company is to survive.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:00 pm
David Brooks column in today’s nyt
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/opinion/02brooks.html?_r=1
Concluding paragraph begins:
The end result is that G.M. will not become more like successful car companies. It will become less like them. The federal merger will not accelerate the company’s viability. It will impede it.
The nyt was and remains very much an obama paper. Before the election Brooks was an Obama supporter. (Check the link and read the whole column.)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:05 pm
#204 ThombDbhomb says
Plumbers make too much money. I h8tum.
————————————————————–
I smile. Then I remember that 3 professions use high-level outside accountants to do their taxes — surgeons, professional athletes, and plumbers. (smile, but true)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:05 pm
205 Kubel
I wonder about that.
My hope is that 1.4L running a generator is more effective than traditional transmission. But, I have not heard anything regarding how effective the generator will be at producing power.
Is it still to early to take a “Wait and see” attitude?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Still waiting for the test drive that allows someone to experience the ICE kicking in.
Did I miss it? I thought GM said it would demo it shortly after Dr. Lyle had his ride?
I expect it will provide a strange sensation, as the engine rev’s up to high rpm whilst your not even pressing the accelerator. Would this be the only issue GM is working on?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:31 pm
I doubt there will be any problems whatsoever that can not be absolutely factored out completely with software. The scenario of going up Pike’s Peak and needing to pass several Semi’s if the battery was completely depleted was a really large “stretching” of it for the Ford rep in the interview a few months ago.
The Volt software can anticipate for that as I discussed in that post.
I think that there were a combination of many *other* reasons why Ford chose not to do EREV in addition to some of the ones mentioned above. Entirely different technical changeovers are extremely difficult to do, and require time, patience, and extreme amounts of capital investment.
But GM is going EREV. I still think that BEV is very very technically-risky. But once again, time will tell, and I would be happy to be wrong about it if reliabilities and longevity could be achieved to the extent that the first and second owners do not have to suffer some extremely harsh financial burdens. That’s my only concern.
Maybe there will indeed be some exceptional “economies of scale” by the time BEV’s need servicing of the packs or new packs. I sure hope so.
But worry about a GM Voltec being reliable or powerful for exceptional performance is just something that does not hold any credibility for me whatever. I have complete technical confidence in the Voltec technologies, based on the 38 years I’ve been diagnosing the ways GM builds its advanced systems.
GM just does not mess around, and I expect that to prove-out in the long warranty for the Voltec vehicles.
Dan Petit. Austin Tx
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:37 pm
#209 RB
You’re right that the New York Times is a very liberal paper. However, David Brooks is their token resident republican. He’s a moderate, and I like him a lot. (And I’m very worried that he’s right about GM.) However, he definitely did not support Obama before the election.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26brooks.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/opinion/17brooks.html
That said, if you want a liberal critiquing the auto bailout-Tom Friedman wrote several:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/12/opinion/12friedman.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/opinion/10friedman.html
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:39 pm
JB 146,
“Hummer + China = EV Hummer?”
Hummer + China = Plastic body with small V6 @ 23 mpg?
=D~
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:58 pm
#214 LauraM —> So what did you think of Brooks’ column?
(I also read the Krugman ones.)
/ I shouldn’t have said anything about the election.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:50 pm
No affect —are they crazy? I don’t think the devastated bondholders, the total loss to the current shareholders, the employees that lost their jobs, the towns that lost the plants, the 50 year dealers that lost their business will ever buy a GM product in the future. I am a current shareholder and quite honestly the lies from GM and the idiotic involvlement of our government has convinced me to never ever buy a GM product. The Volt will be dead on arrival if it ever is delivered in the first place.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:56 pm
#216 RB
I think he makes some valid points. He might be right about the corporate culture. I certainly wouldn’t know. Certainly, enough people have said that about GM. But they also said it about Ford, and Mulally’s performed wonders there. (Although I don’t think it will be enough.) But corporate cultures can change. Even ones as entrenched as GM’s. And the massive layoffs of executives will probably help.
But I completely disagree with several of his points. First, private investors rarely challenge management. Private equity. Yes. Shareholders, and bondholders. No. Occasionally, you get an activist private investor. But so far none of them have made much of an impact on GM. So private ownership would not be a panacea.
Second, I don’t believe that GM is as cozy with Washington as he makes it sound. They are not safe from liquidation. At some point the government is going to pull the plug. And I think Fritz knows that. The US taxpayer is not going to subsidize the UAW forever. And I don’t think GM is going to be able to “see Washington as a prime revenue center” anymore than they already have. I certainly don’t see Obama passing any law that will put Ford at a disadvantage.
Third, the union did not lobby to move production back from overseas. They offered Fritz a plan where he could make small cars here–at a profit. (The 50% reduction in salary for new hires does that.) And I believe the “made in China” plan was always meant as a bargaining chip with the UAW. It’s the only leverage GM really has. But given the China’s reputation for poor quality–I don’t think that’s a move that GM ever really wanted to make. South Korea yes. But not China. Especially since if the renmimbi is ever allowed to float, China’s labor costs will quadruple in relation to the rest of the world.
Fourth, they are going to have to make more environmentally friendly cars. But since I believe that we’ve hit peak oil, I think that might actually help them. And I don’t think any company will have much choice about environmentally friendly anyway given the new regulations.
I agree with him about GM’s loss of focus. And I also agree about the UAW. Not the ownership so much–if anything that might restrain their more outrageous demands. But their continued existence and intransigence. I am also worried that short term low oil prices might make things difficult for smaller more fuel efficient cars in general (which why I think we need a gas tax). And I would have liked an outsider to take over–although now is a bad time to learn the ropes.
So, basically, at this point, I’m hoping for the best, and worried about the worst. It’s much too early to see where all this is going–at least IMHO. If the UAW has learned from this experience, and the government meant what it said about a) staying out of business decisions, and b)selling its stock ASAP, then I think that GM stands a reasonable chance of becoming a viable company again. (So far I’m not too encouraged on either front, but it’s still too soon to tell.)
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Take me off the list. I am not buying a vehicle from the government and I sure as heck am not buying Chinese.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Until that day comes… here’s a little video so you can sea how pleasant the electric car buying experience can be:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyJiA3BbKLo
Beer 10 cents, cops end up all wet . . . . looks good.
/now, confound it – - where’d I put my glasses? . . .
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:29 pm
#167 charlie h said:
#135, Statik,
You reversed the numbers on the Prius. It was at 15,011 in 2008 and is at 10,091 this year.
====================
Thanks for pointing that out…transposition error.
/my bad
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:47 pm
KEEP YOUR GOVERNMENT MOTORS VEHICLE!
UNTIL THE GOVERNMENT GETS OUT OF GM THEY CAN KEEP THE VOLT, AND THE NEW CAMARO I HAVE BEEN WAITING ON. SORRY, BUT SOME THINGS ARE MORE IMPORTANT… LIKE STOPPING OUR COUNTRY’S MARCH TOWARD SOCIALISM.
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:54 pm
#191 Dan Petit said:
#187 carcust1
Do you think Ford will come out with an EREV and gradually test the components of the system in the Volvo wagon? That’s what the schematic looks like from my perspective.
I doubt Ford will do a BEV.
Dan.
=================
Not only does Ford have a BEV, but it is real. They are plugging 550 million into the plant now…and they placed a order for 5,000 packs (minimum) for 5 years from Johnson-Saft which go into the 2012 Ford BEV.
Battery Contract:
http://www.thedeal.com/corporatedealmaker/2009/02/johnson_controls_wins_ford_bat.php
Assembly Plant:
http://ca.autos.yahoo.com/s/06052009/31/link-f-prnewswire-ford-invests-550-million-build-new-global-small.html?p=13
/behold the face of a project that is ‘on time,’ fully realized and funded…that is also coming to market in 36 months, but no worries for us, we got 17 months left…and Lauckner’s quotes of confidence:
“Anything material that we’ve had as the plan for the Volt will not be changed. This does not change anything that we’ve set up in terms of the Volt.”
At what point does the november deadline for the Volt become ridiculous for even the most ardent follower? Seriously…tick tock fellas. 17 months to go from nothing to production…on a non-traditional EREV.
Sidenote: By the month flipping to June, we just hit the SECOND anniversary of when the ONE year competition for a contract started. I know they picked LG to produce batteries (7 months late), but where is the actual contract to go with?
(Quote)
June 2nd, 2009 at 9:57 pm
B