Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Bob Lutz and GM Ambivalent About the Chevy Volt

June 7th, 2009 | Posted in: Public Opinion

The Washington Post has just published one of the most intensive and thoughtful articles about the Chevy Volt and what it means for GM I have ever seen. The story is based on an interview with GM vice chairman Bob Lutz.

The story begins pointing out that the Chevrolet Camaro SS is GM’s latest muscle car that flies in the face of all the environmental talk going on these days. “Sexy with charisma,” says Lutz, but admits “Some people don’t care for those kinds of descriptions today — it’s a different time.”

Lutz counters “But we have new vehicles, too. We have the Volt. We are committed to the electrification of the automobile. We know this is the time.”

Extensively described is how the Volt came to be. The author confirms what we already know, Lutz didnt commission the Volt to fight global warming which he calls a ‘crock.’

“If you look at most of the mainstream media, you get the impression that 95 percent of Americans today want a vehicle like the Chevrolet Volt or a [hybrid such as the] Toyota Prius,” says Lutz. “And that, by God, the reason General Motors is in trouble, is that we have not offered a vehicle like that. But when you look at the reality, at today’s fuel prices, most Americans still want a conventional car.”

Lutz says why the Volt was really developed, “Because it is an important symbol. We need it. It has a chance to change our image.”

However, Lutz intends the Volt to lead the way for a pure electric future. He says the Volt not only represents GM’s commitment to change but call it “the first generation of an electric vehicle from GM” leading to successively more enhanced Volts eventually resulting in a pure electric with more than 150 miles of range.

Lutz recounts what happened when Toyota first introduced the Prius in Japan in 1997. The GM board met and asked if they should do the same thing.

“Somebody said, ‘Do we have [hybrid] technology?’ ” recalls Lutz. ” ‘Oh, yeah,’ was the answer. ‘Oh, yeah, we got the technology. We’ve been building hybrid prototypes since the late ’60s.’ ”

However, it was decided the cost, then about $600 to $700 million wasn’t justified as it was expected the cars would lose money. Wagoner decided ‘We can’t do that’ and the decision to not go forward with a hybrid program was made.

After watching the Prius’ halo effect drive sales of other Toyota cars and make the company a media and environmental sweetheart, by 2006 Lutz had finally had enough.

He told GM VP Jon Lauckner, known as ‘the Wizard’ he wanted a “game changing” electric car that would leapfrog the Prius and deliver 150 miles of pure electric range. Lauckner said it would be “too expensive” and furiously scribbled calculations that would be his solution of the Volt’s range extender design.

It is written that GM’s plan to build a limited first year run of 10,000 copies of the Volt at around $40,000 exudes caution. Lutz isn’t worried though. He expects all 10,000 cars to be purchased quickly by “well-heeled electric car die-hards.” This will lead to economy of scale cost reductions that will eventually get the car into the $25,000 to $30,000 price range he says.

Producing the car he feels is an absolute necessity for GM. “We’re talking about our image here — about remaking GM; it is essential to get this done,” says Lutz. “We can’t make any mistakes with the Volt.”

Lutz believes an artificial market is being created for electric cars driven by “influential environmentalists and the intellectual establishment” who want electric cars to succeed, and Obama’s stated goal of 1 million electric cars on the road by 2015.

Lutz although excited about the Volt is already mourning the loss of the high-power, gas-guzzling, dazzling machines of old. “In time, the government is going to legislate out of existence cars like the Camaro, the Corvette, the Cadillac CTS — all these acclaimed vehicles that have lately gotten rave reviews from the automotive press around the world,” predicts Lutz. “So, ultimately, we are driven by legislation into the kind of excitement provided by the Volt.”

And for demand. He says “it’s probably just 5 percent of the public that desperately wants something environmentally sound and is willing to pay a premium for it,” and notes “the customer will never recover the premium paid for the hybrid system in fuel economy.”

Lutz believes the electric car marketplace is skewed to the coasts. “I would say the East and West Coast intellectual establishment kind of lives in its own world. When you get to the broad American marketplace, excitement is still kind of defined in the way it used to be.”

And with that the 77 year-old Lutz set off on his 60 mile drive home saying “nice afternoon for a drive.”

Lutz, GM, and the country it appears are thus ambivalent about the greening of the automobile.

Source (Washington Post)

Posted by: Lyle

194 Responses to “Bob Lutz and GM Ambivalent About the Chevy Volt”

NZDavid Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:07 am

Pickens said that based on the latest figures from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. imported 65 percent of its oil, or 366 million barrels, in May 2009, sending approximately $21.6 billion, or $484,087 per minute, overseas to foreign governments.

And further:

For the first five months of this year, the U.S. has imported 1.874 billion barrels, after spending approximately $475 billion on imported oil in 2008.

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20090605005354&newsLang=en

I think many people are not ambivalent about the amount of oil being purchased for offshore, and the potential of Voltec to reduce this burden.

(Quote)
old man Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:15 am

NZDavid

I agree with you. When the price gets down to $30,000.00 GM will not be able to keep up with demand. And the next embargo by opec will seal the lid of doom for the nonelectric automobile. Tho I think E-REV will be with us for a long time.

(Quote)
Bob Lutz and GM ambivalent about the Volt - GM Inside News Forum Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:17 am
jan Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:18 am

Nice, straight-forward assessment by Lutz.

(Quote)
Luke Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:26 am

“the customer will never recover the premium paid for the hybrid system in fuel economy.”

What about the military and environmental costs of keeping that oil supply steady and cheap? The cost may be indirect, but I pay those, too, in addition to what I pay at the pump…

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:26 am

And Bob, I sure don’t have any problem with a Voltec Corvette either!

Just build it already.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:29 am

Luke @ 5 says What about the military and environmental costs of keeping that oil supply steady and cheap? I pay those, too, in addition to what I pay at the pump…

Exactly.

(Quote)
NZDavid Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:44 am

Think about this Bob. No wonder you guys went bust!

Toyota’s efforts to roll out more affordable hybrids have paid off. It received 80,000 prelaunch orders for the new Prius–an unprecedented number for a new model.

That lifted total orders for Toyota vehicles by 20 percent in April over the same month a year earlier to their highest level in four years.

The latest Prius model represents one-fifth of the Toyota’s total domestic production, pushing it closer to the carmaker’s mainstay Corolla.

And behold the Insight killer!
Toyota’s future hybrids will likely come with a lower sticker price. A smaller hybrid is in the works, aimed at offering more than 40 km per liter. The model, due in 2011, will sell for 1.7 million yen or so.

Toyota is confident it can lead the race in the global eco-car market with hybrids alone, ruling out the need to add electric vehicles or other types to its lineup

The last paragraph basically discounts Voltec. This is a mistake, Voltec represents GM’s last chance to get back into the game.

OK I am off to bed now.

Link: http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200906060042.html

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:52 am

Oh boy.

There’s enough material in that interview for about 5 threads.

I could think of a few words beyond “ambivalent” to describe Lutz in this interview. Honest, out-dated, and conflicted to the point of hypocritical come to mind.

I think Lutz, like most Americans, just can’t bring himself to admit that that oil is a limited resource and that fuel prices have no where to go but up. After all, a lifetime of accomplishment, status, and wealth has been directly dependent upon cheap gas.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:06 am

#6 NZDavid Says:
And Bob, I sure don’t have any problem with a Voltec Corvette either!
……………………………………………….

Or a Camaro!.. and the $$$ options they could offer!, small high power battery packs to keep the weight down, optional 4wd, rear wheel drive for true sport car handling and better weight balance… and no expensive transmissions needed.

Spreading the motors and inverters across more car lines would drop the cost of those components.

Stick a couple of Volt motors on the rear wheels of the Corvette, small 5-10 mile range battery pack (with different high power cells) keep the same 4 cyl engine and generator and see what it could do. Most of the components and software should be usable from the Volt parts bin. The genset algorithm would be different, more closely coupled to the throttle pedal for sound effects and to provide the needed power.

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:10 am

And as far as the future of “voltec”?

Lutz’s comments that the volt is a stepping stone to a 150 mi. pure EV pretty much says it all, doesn’t it?

(Quote)
Texas Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:12 am

Just because most Americans are completely ignorant to our energy problems and that they can’t even grasp the concept of true costs doesn’t mean we’re not digging our economic grave like experts.

(Quote)
la_lang Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:17 am

The future of Volt look bright, go GM go.
Check this out about the future of ELECTRIC CARS

http://www.ted.com/talks/shai_agassi_on_electric_cars.html

(Quote)
guido Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:23 am

Wow – just squint a little bit and you can see General George S. Patton come into focus. Lutz has never been slandered as a politician ( Nazi Pelosi and her refusal to stand behind her “CIA misled us ” comments come to mind ). His head is in the right place, even if his heart is moored to the I.C. engine. The wapo is fish wrap at it’s best, btw – just like it’s komrade paper the NY Times.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:29 am

Is anyone really surprised about what Lutz thinks? He’s a “car guy” who a) designed the viper, and b)flies jet planes for fun.

The problem is, IMHO, that he’s right about American preferences when gasoline is $2.00 a gallon. In that case, the Volt would stay a niche vehicle for a very long time. Unfortunately, while I believe we are approaching peak oil, that doesn’t mean that we can’t have low gasoline prices for the next two or three years. (The markets can stay irrational for a very long time. And a huge part of $4.00 gasoline was trader speculation.)

This is one reason why, IMHO, we need a gas tax. First of all, there are all the issues that aren’t reflected in the price at the pump. And, second, It’s better for everyone if the rise in gasoline prices is gradual so that people have time to adjust their investment decisions. $6.00 gasoline is going to happen. It’s just a question of when. And if it happens overnight, our economy will go into free fall yet again. And, the profits will go to OPEC rather than the US government.

I am happy that he thinks they can get the price down to #25,000-30,000 just through economies of scale. Hopefully, that means that when the Volt takes off, they will be able to a)ramp up production, and b)produce a relatively affordable Volt very quickly. And, when gas does hit $6.00 a gallon, hopefully, they’ll be prepared.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:34 am

#11 carcus1 Says:
Lutz’s comments that the volt is a stepping stone to a 150 mi. pure EV pretty much says it all, doesn’t it?
……………………………………..

We always have known the Volt range extender is a transitional tech, until the batteries improve.

To nitpick a bit, 150 mile range even with 10 minute recharges is going to be a pain for extended highway travel.. but to be honest I stop every 100 miles or so for coffee and bladder maintenance anyways.

(Quote)
Frank D Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:35 am

Industrialized western economies have been systematically marketed an unrealistic attitude about the car. reality has set in and our oil consumption has come at too great of a cost. The electrification of the car will ultimately be the best thing for those who prefer to view their car as something much more than just a car, and for those who view it as just transportation. Good design has no limits with the right infrastructure.

(Quote)
statik Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:51 am

“The Washington Post has just published one of the most intensive and thoughtful articles about the Chevy Volt and what it means for GM I have ever seen. The story is based on an interview with GM vice chairman Bob Lutz”
========================
Pretty sure those two sentence can’t exist in the same paragraph…and I expect my monitor to burst into flames at any time.

Seriously, there is enough in there to make any poster’s head explode, and a little bit for everyone to take (and quote) to support their positions, but at the same time forcing you to ignore something else, lol.

Potential topic we could discuss/argue over:

–Still with the global warming
–GM just building some cars to satisfying bogus mainstream media.
–Volt price is high…but could be low.
–Lutz wanted the Volt to be a BEV…and you can tell he is still kind of bitter.
–Volt was developed as a symbol…because that image made Toyota successful.
–He thinks the future is a full BEV.
–He thinks the Volt’s market is a “artificial market”….which is being created by “influential environmentalists and the intellectual establishment”
–He still really loves sport car gas pigs (but GM is building other stuff)
–there is a west/east (california vs everyone else I asuume) ‘war’ going on, but everything is still the way it was before, all smoke and mirrors
–America still wants a same old “conventional car”

How can you pick up any position of his and defend it when he surely has another opinion that runs counter to it right behind? It is like picking up a loaded gun, knowing full well your going to shoot yourself in the foot.

I’d love to tout, “hey, here is the ‘father’ of the Volt program, he wanted the Volt to be a pure BEV now…he thinks that is the future, and it comes soon with a 150 mile BEV Volt, ” but I can’t do it because…

/dude is crazy

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:57 am

_____________________________________________________
The Voltec Program – GM Halo or GM Savior?

I like Bob Lutz. He is my kind of guy.

GM owes Lutz much credit for getting the Voltec Program going.

Although positioning the Chevy Volt as a halo car may have made sense when the Volt was originally conceived, the world has since then changed. An Electric Car Revolution has taken hold. Many car makers are furiously working on producing Electric Cars as their primary model lineup rather than as their halo car.

The above Lutz piece by Lyle reaffirms that GM continues to view the Voltec Program as a “Halo” car.

The Voltec power train needs to be the revolutionary new GM drive train that will quickly (inside 10 years) become available across GM’s entire portfolio lineup. GM’s Henderson recently stated that the Voltec power-train will “not likely” ever make it to GM’s iconic cars such as the Camaro. Do GM’s top executives understand that taking such a view is the same as commencing the digging of a shallow grave for the Camaro? Do they understand that soon kick-as* sporty Electric Cars will be coming to market that will outperform the Camaro; the kind of sporty cars that will appeal to today’s Camaro lovers?

I question if GM’s top executives fully appreciate the scale or rapidity of the Electric Car Revolution.

GM has in the past been the dominant automaker and therefore GM executives were not required to look far past their own backyard to survey the auto industry landscape. Have GM executives come to terms that by definition they are today a market follower and not a market leader? Is GM sufficiently looking past its own backyard to see the evidence of the Electric Car Revolution that may trample over GM?

The Voltec Program needs to be redefined by GM from being a demonstration halo car “appealing to the %5 influential environmentalists and the intellectual establishment” (as characterized by Lutz) to being the future power train powering GM’s entire portfolio line. Probing GM on the future application of the Voltec power train only returns response such as “possible”, “depends if we get government funding to do that”, “prototype”, “eventually”, “may consider that”, etc….

Although GM has come up with an amazing Electric Car platform as a result of the Voltec Program, I question if GM’s top executives have the vision and determination to quickly leverage the Voltec Program in sufficient scale to survive the Electric Car Revolution.

Time will tell.
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
eightjack Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:59 am

Lutz is clearly, clearly out of touch. It’s true that the masses are less willing than the “elite” minority to personally stick their necks out in order to support environmentalism But even though they wouldn’t actually pay too much extra for a low-gas or gas-free car, they now WANT one. The idea that oil-dependence is dangerous, and that gas-guzzlers are wicked, has percolated throughout the population. In other words, the company that first delivers a super-low or gas-free car with reasonable performance, wins the game. Period. Right now, that’s looking like Toyota. Several other makers “have the technology”, but if they aren’t actually delivering a flood of vehicles, what does it matter? Think Henry Ford vs. dozens of other brands that quickly ceased to exist.
Meanwhile, Grandpa Lutz natters on despondently about “sexy” and “character”. He’s an idiot. The Camaro never had any “character”, unless you consider the feathered roachclip, mullet-wearing crowd trend-setters who the kids yearn to emulate.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:59 am

Nice article, Lyle!

I understand Bob’s position and I wish we could continue to drive muscle cars forever, but unfortunately oil supply is neither infinite nor under our control.

Interesting that even Bob admits the E-Rev is the stepping stone to BEV. Here I agree with him 100%.

The E-Rev can be the bridge to the future, but will eventually become as unnecessary as the ICE, IMO.

So the old saying “There’s no replacement, for displacement” now needs to be revised to “You ain’t got a lot, unless you got lots of watts”

(Quote)
Right Lane Cruiser Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:04 am

Interesting that he also completely ignored what a hotbed for hybrids and EVs the midwest is.

(Quote)
Van Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:06 am

So now we know why GM has been slow-playing the Volt concept, whereas before, we were only guessing. As has been said before, no plug, no sale – I await the Plug-in Prius performance numbers. America does not want to give up on the thrill of a powerful car, but it does want to end its addiction to foreign oil. Pretty simple really.

(Quote)
greg woulf Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:18 am

I think the majority of you are blinded by your own interest. I want EV’s, I put up my first solar panels in 1982 and am strongly in favor of the whole movement. That doesn’t blind me to the facts and Lutz has his facts straight.

Most people don’t care, or only care if they make money on the deal. Sure, people want EV’s, and GM is the bad guy in the movies, but ask them to pay a bit more for a car up front and recoup the costs and they’re not so eager to sign.

It will take a fleet of cars like the Volt to change public opinion, if it can be changed. I think Lutz is stupid to be so blunt, it hurts his position in regards to the enviromentalists, but I think he’s right in his opinion.

(Quote)
SteveK9 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:25 am

It’s just those weirdo’s on the East and West Coasts – where do you think the majority of the people in the country live? Electric vehicles will soon be as exciting as any ‘Bob Lutz’ could want. I’m optimistic that battery technology is going to progress fast enough that these cars will not be in a ‘niche’ for a long period – and that is independent of the price of gas. In ~25 years (that is a short time guys) I would guess that electric cars will consitute over half of the cars on the road.

(Quote)
Exp_EngTech Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:31 am

I enjoyed the part about the coasts “living in their own world” and the “artificial market” comment. Surely Lutz was mistaken there. There has to be hundreds of thousands of folks (with average incomes) living in the heartland who are quietly setting aside bucks in order to pre-order a $100K Tesla. Yeah right…. that’s the 2 seat electric car with the 6800+ hand soldered laptop batteries.

The Reality.
We gotta get off oil very soon for a lot of important reasons.

Kudo’s to Tesla. They annoyed / inspired Lutz into pushing and asking “why not ?”

(Quote)
Thomas Gilling Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:33 am

OK cool! I hope the Volt sells! I wonder if they will knock £2000 off the car under the gov scrappage scheme. There doing it with Chevy’s now, I wonder if EV’s are another story though? Does anyone have info?

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:42 am

He is definitely crazy, like a fox
I like him..
quote:

“Lutz thinks something else is working on his side and that of the Volt: “Obama has said that he wants a million plug-in vehicles on the market by 2015.” The federal government, which will effectively own about 70 percent of GM, must be heeded now, he realizes. For now, Lutz views the Volt as nothing less than the vehicle that helped deliver a government life preserver to a drowning corporation. “Think where GM would be now if we had not made the decision to productionize the Volt, a year and a half ago,” he says and leans back in his chair. “That is the real question. You could argue that we were late but that the Volt has now become the focal point, the rallying point for the pro-GM forces. We can say, ‘See, we can transform the automobile; we can be the company that electrifies the automobile.’ We can say, ‘Yes, we can.’ ”
Lutz grins.”

(Quote)
Guy Incognito Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:45 am

The last 4 paragraphs of this article sum up how Lutz really feels about the Volt, Hybrids, and electric vehicles in general.

The demand for Hybrids & Battery Electric Vehicles Bob Lutz ‘blames’ on “influential environmentalists and the intellectual establishment” as well as the East & West Coasts “I would say the East and West Coast intellectual establishment kind of lives in its own world. When you get to the broad American marketplace, excitement is still kind of defined in the way it used to be.”

Bob Lutz, the man who I thought was the Volt’s biggest supporter, is really just another misinformed turd in a long line of turds.

Bob Lutz, may you live forever

(Quote)
Lwesson Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:55 am

Static #18 says the guy is crazy. Lutz’s dizzying jumble of das profundus about decisions made from the crumbling Mount Olympus halls of GM says worlds as to why GM is broken.

Luke #5 is spot on about the hidden costs for the price of a gallon of gas or a barrel of oil. That the nut case Middle East can build nuclear bombs, snow ski palaces… and command our attention in blood and countless wealth is, well, crazy but then we must do this so that those that profit from it can continue to do so.

Here in Houston, I see Toyota Prius’s all about the city and no doubt the Volt would be popular here. So what planet does Lutz reside on???

Lutz did not mention that the multi trillion dollar industry has every intent of not seeing the cash cow of the ICE autocar go away!

Carcus1, please place the site you have for the connect the dots about OIL and the Auto industry. Most telling.

Today’s Volt site has my head hurting with Zeus and Apollo whining.———-Higgins

(Quote)
Monroe Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:59 am

It’s about what you value. You’ll never recover the “premium” you pay for a Corvette. (I mean, how long does it take for sexiness and muscle to pay for itself, hmmm?) But somehow it’s worth it to you. Bob Lutz just can’t get his head around why people would value an energy-efficient car or the quiet smoothness of electric propulsion. He deludes himself into thinking his preferences are based on objective standards. But they are just his preferences.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:08 am

When there is an Electric Camaro for sale I will start believing in miracles.

Today’s Reality: Pre-sold Orders = 20….. Deliveries from Factory = 0

The Electric Camaro Rollout needs the following:

> No promises of early ‘April’ deliveries to consumers. Let them arrive when they normally arrive and AFTER they do their 3rd round of QC checks.

> A movie ‘tie-in’ with “Transformers 6: Electrification”

> A TV Commercial with Megan Fox as the ’spokeswoman’

> Fritz appearing on ‘The Tonight Show with Conan Obrien’ with a detailed and factual demo of the Camaro EREV system

> A demo Camaro for me

(Quote)
Exp_EngTech Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:10 am

Regarding this articles spin on Lutz and the Volt, they really missed something important that most of us know….

The very recent creation of Large Format (NanoTech Tweaked) Lithium cells. They make everything possible.

Some day that piece of paper that Lauckner “scribbled on” will be framed and in a Tech Museum. Sort of a Shroud of Turin to some of us.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:13 am

The attention to “image” is a huge concern. Selling lots of mid-size, mid-price, mid-appeal vehicles is what the competitors do a great job at… and consequently sustain their business well with.

The “awe” inspired by vehicles like Volt & Camaro stirs much excitement but high-volume sales simply are not realistic. A plug-in vehicle priced well above average and a guzzler in the time resource & environmental concerns don’t make sense. In fact, that’s the very mindset which the old GM struggled with. Will the new GM repeat those very same mistakes?

If the goal of Volt is to truly make a difference, that means it must be able to reach a large consumer base. So far, no high-volume commitment has been made. The abandonment of the original intent of being priced “nicely under $30,000” confirms a lack-of-reach priority. In fact, making the technology in Volt ubiquitous seems to be something GM is attempting to avoid. Rather than attempting to replace a large chunk of their fleet with it, they do all they can to draw attention to its uniqueness.

How will GM compete? Do they really think image will help sell what they currently offer?

(Quote)
an_outsider Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:17 am

Remember this 1998 GM’s press release about “Earth friendly vehicles” ?

EV1 with NiMH batteries 160 miles Highway (140 miles City).
http://www.evnut.com/docs/GM%20EV1%20press%20release%2002041998.pdf
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/avta/pdfs/fsev/eva_results/ev1_eva.pdf
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
He told GM VP Jon Lauckner, known as ‘the Wizard’ he wanted a “game changing” electric car that would leapfrog the Prius and deliver 150 miles of pure electric range. Lauckner said it would be “too expensive” and furiously scribbled calculations that would be his solution of the Volt’s range extender design.
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
I do not know the exact time frame on this above citation but they were different drivetrain prototypes of the EV1, if we can trust Wikipedia but for sure, we all know how the EV1 story ended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV-1#EV1_drivetrain_prototypes

So, BEV with 150 miles range was already technically feasible more than 10 years ago, we can only expect a large economy of scale driven batteries cost down to bring BEV back one day to become affordable enough for most of us. It never happened before they gave up on EV1 / NiMH batteries.

I only hope the “new” GM won’t waste its best card on hand with the Voltec E-REV technology.

(Quote)
Gary Palaniuk Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:20 am

I can totally agree with the statement “I would say the East and West Coast intellectual establishment kind of lives in its own world.”

Visiting my brother’s wedding in Seattle this weekend with a lot of guests from New York City, it’s very apparent that people from these big cities are very conscious of having a sophisticated image, following the lastest trends, and literally buying into them.

GM will sell all 10,000 Volts in the first year with no problem whatsoever.

(Quote)
PHEVadvocate Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:25 am

No clue, the Midwest is interested in Hybrids and electric cars too!

http://www.greendriveexpo.com

GM is even listed as a sponsor, but as usual allways listed behind Toyota.

(Quote)
guido Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:37 am

eightjack Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Meanwhile, Grandpa Lutz natters on despondently about “sexy” and “character”. He’s an idiot. The Camaro never had any “character”, unless you consider the feathered roachclip, mullet-wearing crowd trend-setters who the kids yearn to emulate.
———-
Written by an out-of-touch elitist geek, no doubt – I see they’ve got a new animated series written about a family just like his – I think it is called “The Waxman’s” .

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:38 am

#32 CorvetteGuy Says:

When there is an Electric Camaro for sale I will start believing in miracles.
Today’s Reality: Pre-sold Orders = 20….. Deliveries from Factory = 0
The Electric Camaro Rollout needs the following

………………………………………….

They need to do a concept, low key.. then show a video with the silly thing doing donuts in the middle of an immense cloud of tire smoke.. with a 4 cyl engine!

The eco chicks would be all over you!.. talk about a halo car.

(Quote)
Gary Palaniuk Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:39 am

34 John1701a: The “awe” inspired by vehicles like … Camaro stirs much excitement but high-volume sales simply are not realistic. …a guzzler in the time resource & environmental concerns don’t make sense. In fact, that’s the very mindset which the old GM struggled with.

Stating those words again and again like some sort of cliché keeps the general populace’s mindset the same. A car that gets about 30 miles per gallon is not a gas guzzler. A Toyota Sequoia or Tundra with a halo on top that gets mid-teen MPG which usually carries only the driver and rarely carries any significant amount of cargo is a gas guzzler.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:46 am

Lutz has changed my mind. I don’t want Voltec any more. I want something big, loud, fast, and flashy. The more imposing, the better; I’m a man! I may live on a coast, but I’m a real American now.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:54 am

#35 an_outsider Says:
So, BEV with 150 miles range was already technically feasible more than 10 years ago, we can only expect a large economy of scale driven batteries cost down to bring BEV back one day to become affordable enough for most of us. It never happened before they gave up on EV1 / NiMH batteries.
………………………………………………….

It was not feasible with a decent sized car, only with a very small two seater.. getting 150 miles using nimh would have taken about a ton of batteries, thats 2000 lbs.. even using lithium cells today it still is heavy and expensive.. just barely possible.

(Quote)
nataraj Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

Lutz believes the electric car marketplace is skewed to the coasts. “I would say the East and West Coast intellectual establishment kind of lives in its own world. When you get to the broad American marketplace, excitement is still kind of defined in the way it used to be.”
—
Echoes of Palin’s “Real America” here. Lutz is obviously still living in Bush’s America – rejecting reality of climate change and pimping for gas guzzlers.

(Quote)
RB Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:03 pm

This post is a great one. Thanks Lyle.

1) The headline says “GM Ambivalent”

2) The post quotes Lutz as saying “Producing the car he feels is an absolutely necessity for GM. “We’re talking about our image here — about remaking GM; it is essential to get this done,” says Lutz. “We can’t make any mistakes with the Volt.”

The editorial statement (1) conflicts with the actual quotation (2). There is no ambivalence in Lutz’s comments.

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:07 pm

Bob’s picture in front of his jet aircraft above says volumes about the past directives for GM to remain committed to high horsepower from fossil fuels. Now I see at least part of the past reasons for GM’s situation.

I was thinking on the way home from church this morning what a great competition it would be to have electric vehicle races with high electric horsepower instead of obnoxiously deafening Internal Combustion Engined races of high horsepower.

Inside cameras would let us have a glimpse of what quickly moving through the wind would be like. (High Definition with 5.1 surround please.) Imagine all the extremely cool technical terms regarding electric propulsion to come forward out of the “pit crews” and the drivers? THAT WOULD BE BREATHTAKING TO ME! (Media needs to get on the ball). Sponsors ought to look at folks like Austin EV and fund them extremely well! And yes, I would be riveted to know who those sponsors ARE.

Regarding the market bias of electric vehicles toward the East and West coasts, those markets need less electric range.

The argument for Texas and other large, central States is self- explanatory regarding much further-needed-distances requiring a Genset.

There are just as many of us “green electric motoring” people here in Central America as there are anywhere else, if not far, far more.

This is proved because Texas lawmakers and Texas publicly-owned utilities had committed, and, are in the very process of completing infrastructures to serve the electrification of the Automobile, as Bob knew of these processes way back when (about 3 or 4 years ago).

The widespread complaint in Texas, back in 1999 regarding the Prius “battery car” was that “But you can’t plug it in”.

Hindsight ought to be 20/20 to objectivity. Other OEM’s who are not on this EREV pathway ought to be really worried.

As far as natural gas for automotive, yes it has been done before, and, it takes 15% of the electrical energy to compress natural gas as compared to a battery just having you drive your Volt. Also, at the same time the ng ICE throws away 85 percent of that energy out the exhaust and cooling system.

Plus, someone ought to reveal if there are other things composite to natural gas. Last Winter, when I was cooking something on my gas stove, the natural gas flames were yellow, indicating incomplete combustion. I checked the burners underneath and they were clean. I wondered if it was carbon monoxide coming through the lines along with the natural gas.

It would be exceptionally-more appropriate and the right thing to do for natural gas to completely displace coal-fired power plants. That is what Pickens plan OUGHT to be about. That’s how he should be making more money, it really seems to me. He should talk to conservatives to stop using the mantra of “more expensive energy”. If there was anything at all that we SHOULD indeed pay more money for it is less-harmful-carbon-based energy. I don’t care who makes the money as long as there is less carbon produced from the making of that money. If competition in the marketplace means less carbon dioxide, then he should make that money and not coal, and I would gladly pay him and his companies.

(I wonder if those really kind and nice execs over a Honda would really have done a ng Civic on their own, or if they were pressured into doing those couple of thousand that maybe they would not have normally done on their own? I ask that in my technical opinion with the working experience of Honda’s high safety record).

I wonder if Bob had ever been pressured by big oil to keep fuel consumption high, (via high horsepower), especially when I get threatened under no uncertain terms by fossil energy interests myself.
Dan Petit Austin TX

(Quote)
eightzero Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:10 pm

Lutz says global warming is a crock. I have real concerns about buying technology from someone that doesn’t understand facts and science.

(Quote)
an_outsider Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:23 pm

Herm #42
I’m a commuter and most of time, like most of other drivers around me, I’m alone onboard. The EV1 size (internal space) by itself was, I think because I never seat in, pretty close to my ‘95 Saturn SW1.

As per the second link in my previous post, it said 220 miles @ constant speed of 45 mph. Was it so bad?

I likes this citation from the movie “Who killed the electric car?”
“The electric cars are not for everybody. Given the limited range, it can only meet the needs of 90% of the population.”

Cheers

(Quote)
RIck Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:24 pm

The major weakness in the Volt is that HUGE 1.4L pollution generating legacy gas guzzling motor. That is going to require more maintenance than the rest of the car put together. The toxic emissions from that motor easily cancel out any environmental benefit of this car. Too bad Lutz original vision to emulate the Tesla Roadster with a pure electric wasn’t politically correct at the time. This corporate decision will come back to haunt them. With 200+ mile range in EV on the road today there is no “range anxiety” at all (just ask an owner, they will tell you). This entire range anxiety is just a way to justify a compromised design.
Also the 40 mile range that 70 percent of american drive is another totally unproven number (done by GM Marketing surveys, and we all know how they can be rigged). GM should (and IMO will eventually) build EV closer to the Tesla S than the old technology found in the hybrid gen 1 Volt.

(Quote)
crew Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:25 pm

I am severely let down that Lutz has labeled Global Warming as a Crock. This is extremely irresponsible and self serving. I can’t believe a person with insufficient intelligence to interpret solid and overwhelming scientific evidence would find themselves in Lutz’s position – so I will deduct that he is dishonest and has ill intent.

Sorry, Lutz, but you asked for it. If you are half the human you’d have us believe you are, then it’s time to take a mature stand.

This really turns me off to GM and I hope others take similar notice.

(Quote)
Frank D Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:25 pm

When a person uses “lust” in describing a product, he (Bob Lutz) reveals his out dated button pushing mentality that sees consumers as easily manipulated cattle. To many people have fallen for that madison avenue drivel.

(Quote)
syj Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

He speaks the truth and people don’t want to hear it. Hybrids were 2.5% of the market last year and we have folks here contending that Lutz is out of touch with what Americans want. No, you are out of touch if you think the average American is clamoring for a pricey electric or hybrid car. Prius sales have TANKED in the last 6 months so all the Toyota fan boys bragging about pre-orders for the 2010 model need to get a grip. Japan has higher fuel costs and incentives for green cars which has driven demand in that country for the Prius and Insight. Here in the US Prius sales have taken a severe nosedive and Toyota has resorted to incentives.

And spare us the talk about the “true” costs of oil. American does not have to fight wars to get oil. We invaded Iraq for a host of reasons but securing oil was not one of them. We don’t even get the majority of our oil from the middle east so this idea that we should buy hybrids and electrics in order to “punish” our enemies is ludicrous. Its a disgrace how Americans are so quick to buy into nonsensical theories and then fight vigorously to uphold these theories. Most of our oil comes from the Western Hemisphere and the country we hate the most (Iran) doesn’t get any oil money from US. We have no trade relations with Iran.

(Quote)
theflew Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

Lutz is right. Say what you want but every year horsepower on cars go up. If we really wanted to reduce our dependency on oil we could take all the 200+ HP “family” cars and put 150 HP engines and instantly reduce are dependency on foreign oil and manufacturers wouldn’t even have to work that hard to do it. No hybrid necessary. Even the Prius is gaining HP with every generation. If the next Corvette came out with a 250HP engine people would go crazy. Even though that’s enough to do want most people normally do in their cars.

This forum represents a very small, narrow, focused view of reality and car buying in the US. Yes the Prius sells ok, but Toyota sells alot of Camrys, Corrollas and SUV/Trucks.

Also, I still don’t see many families of 4 driving Prius’. It’s going to take some high gas prices over time to convince people it is time for real change – not just last years jump. At that point people will stop making car buying decisions based on HP, status, and perceived necessity and get cars that truly fit their lifestyles and wallets.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:35 pm

A car that gets about 30 miles per gallon is not a gas guzzler.
__________________________

You’ve been greenwashed to actually believe that.

The typical commute and non-utility vehicle should get well above that. Prius and Fusion-Hybrid do a great job of setting expectations for the standard now.

Why not a minimum of 40 MPG?

Heck, my 2010 Prius is delivering well over 50 MPG.

(Quote)
Neil Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

This article was quite interesting. And it makes it clear to me that I won’t have the opportunity to get a Volt for some time since I’m not in the ideological US coast areas.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:43 pm

#49 crew Says:
I am severely let down that Lutz has labeled Global Warming as a Crock. This is extremely irresponsible and self serving. I can’t believe a person with insufficient intelligence to interpret solid and overwhelming scientific evidence would find themselves in Lutz’s position – so I will deduct that he is dishonest and has ill intent.
………………………………………..

Crew you need to be more open minded and tolerant, lots of credible people are agnostic on this subject.. Lutz just happens not to be too diplomatic about anything.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:44 pm

Yes the Prius sells ok, but Toyota sells alot of Camrys, Corrollas and SUV/Trucks.
_______________________

The actual data contradicts that claim. Here’s the top-10 from Toyota/Lexus for 2008:

436,617 Camry
351,007 Corolla/Matrix
158,884 Prius
144,655 Tacoma
137,249 Tundra
137,020 Rav4
115,944 Sienna
104,661 Highlander
102,328 Yaris
84,181 Lexus RX

And for 2007:

473,108 Camry
371,390 Corolla/Matrix
196,555 Tundra
181,221 Prius
173,238 Tacoma
172,752 Rav4
138,162 Sienna
127,878 Highlander
103,340 Lexus RX
87,718 4Runner

This is why I keep pushing for high-volume for Volt. With the planned numbers so small (10,000 first year), it won’t get much attention compared to the rapidly growing market for Prius-like hybrids.

(Quote)
statik Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

#32 CorvetteGuy said:

When there is an Electric Camaro for sale I will start believing in miracles.

Today’s Reality: Pre-sold Orders = 20….. Deliveries from Factory = 0
================

Wow…still nothing? GM must really hate you guys, lol.

Seriously though, what GM did with the Camaro and pre-orders was really evil…and a terrible PR move. Those buyers (over 20K now) they are angering are the highest end, premium paying, mostly GM loyal followers, repeat customers.

Exactly the guys they need to keep in the stable, and they are burning them. (I’m sure you know that/experiencing that first hand)

#45 Dan Petit: Freaking awesome use of the ‘enter’ key my friend…I enjoyed reading your post much more. (=

(Quote)
koz Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 1:25 pm

I read this article early this AM and thought it was very relevent to this blog. Glad to see Lyle found it too. Another article from this AM that was also relevent, but in a different way is this one:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31121449

Looks like the legal issues are still impeding the “good” Chrysler from exiting bankruptcy but the courts are siding with Chrysler thus far. GM has the same issues but once the legal decisions have been made in the Chrysler cases, there is less likelihood of the same challenges happening in GM’s bankruptcy.

(Quote)
statik Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 1:28 pm

#40 Gary Palaniuk said:

Stating those words again and again like some sort of cliché keeps the general populace’s mindset the same. A car that gets about 30 miles per gallon is not a gas guzzler. A Toyota Sequoia or Tundra with a halo on top that gets mid-teen MPG which usually carries only the driver and rarely carries any significant amount of cargo is a gas guzzler.
=======================
I guess GM saying the wolds ‘almost 30 MPG’ over and over again has clouded your reality of the car. Personally, I think talking about MPG on a sportscar is ridiculous, for GM or myself. Who cares, really? Your buying muscle here. But facts are facts nonetheless.

The Camaro doesn’t get 30 miles per gallon. It gets 29 on the highway on the low end V6 model, but 17 in the city…for a combined TWENTY-ONE (21) MPG. (New 2010 mileage ratings are out BTW on the gov site)

The more popular V8 gets 16/24 for a combined NINETEEN (19)

Camaro 6 cyclinder 17/29…21 combined:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2008car1tablef.jsp?id=26427

Camaro 8 cyclinder 16/24…19 combined:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2008car1tablef.jsp?id=26429

/yet another example of ‘image’ over substance. And I’m not knocking GM on this one, or saying GM is wrong to do it…thats how you sell cars today…sadly.

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

Lwesson @ 30,

Sorry, I don’t (but probably should) keep a file on those links, can’t seem to find it.

(Quote)
Darius Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 1:33 pm

#18 Statik,

It is your best post I have ever seen. You are very talented in finding exact definitios.
Back to the subject. This is reality. This why we simply need current crisis and GM bankrupcy – just in order to survive in long run.

(Quote)
Exp_EngTech Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 1:43 pm

We should go easy on the West Coast people here. Especially the rich ones.

The affluent “Eco-Conscious” will likely be snapping up Volts at a brisk pace. We need these early adopters to help drive production costs downward. If this happens, us “flyover country” folks might some day be able to buy a Voltec vehicle with 8 year financing.

The Volt makes a lot of sense for them anyway. Why ? The answer is “The Big One”.

See…. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Andreas_fault

Recent quakes in Mexico and Honduras. When the long overdue “Big One” hits in Southern California, the West Coast grid will go down with a thud, and stay down for some time. Finding gas out there will be tough. Electricity ? The beauty of the Voltec platform.

The Governator thinks he has problems now……

(Quote)
carcus1 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 2:00 pm

I know what GM can give Bob for his retirement gift. . .the car he always really wanted:

http://www.teslamotors.com/models/index.php

(Quote)
Noah Nehm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 2:01 pm

In the recent Consumer Reports Detroit Report Card, GM’s issues are described as follows:

What’s right
Ride comfort, controls, acceleration, quietness, handling, powertrains, fit and finish

What’s wrong
Fuel economy, reliability, wide turning circles

For me, reliability is the number one issue, and for that reason I’ve avoided GM cars. I think that sentiment goes for a lot of other people too. Lutz’s problem, I think, is that he and many like him play to GM’s strengths (above), and fail to address its weaknesses in a significant way.

This brings me to the Volt. GM has a chance to reset consumers’ expectations with the Volt. If the Volt is a rock-solid, bullet-proof car, then GM will have taken the first steps on the road to recovery. If, on the other hand, it is plagued with reliability issues, GM will be written off as unreformable.

(Quote)
Lutz Lier Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 2:03 pm

It is Bob Lutz bulldozed the tech people at GM to announce they will produce the PHEV in 10/2010, let me tell you, Crook Lutz: You will get shit over your face next year when GM either fail to deliver the product or the battery has service life issues.

Most people here are totally have no clue and plain stupid, I dare to say no one here tested battery before. If you check the Post report, Wagoner questioned the launch date of 01/2010, but the crooked Lutz pushed him to say it is feasible.

It is irresponsible to announce GM will produce the PHEV in 2010, GM will pay a price for it and folks here will get shit on their face. GM folks at Tech Center have been pushed to the brink of collapse.

The Post also clearly demonstrated that GM has no real intention of making high mileage cars. If you consider that in 1997, gas price is low, and Toyota management pushed Prius because they were concerned about running out of oil in the future (end of gas-enginer power auto business). Toyota is NOT a company dedicated to zero pollution, it is a company with extreme long-term view of social issues and aggressively addresses them, their bottom-line is to make $$, in 10 years and in 50 years. GM’s goal is always to make $$$ NOW. It is not a long-term company and is destined for failure, so is the US auto industry.

(Quote)
cjohn1 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 2:07 pm

How can Lutz believe that he can be an honest steward of this program? If he cannot see his limitations and resign, then his continuation indicates that upper management holds the same core beliefs.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 2:24 pm

Technology issues for getting the VOLT produced, whether on time or not, will eventually be resolved.

What GM needs to focus on is sales. And sales happen if the customer WANTS IT BAD ENOUGH. (Read: ADVERTISE !)

So let’s throw one against the wall and see if it sticks:

Commercial #1

[FADE IN]
A white, featureless room just like Apple uses for their Mac vs. PC ads… Actor Kevin Dunn, who plays the father “Ron Witwicky” in the Transformers movies, is standing next to the character “JOLT” from “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”.

[RON]
I’m here to introduce you to the most advanced vehicle you can drive today.

(JOLT looks down to Ron who motions to JOLT)

[RON]
Well, go ahead. Show them.

(JOLT transforms into the 2011 Chevrolet VOLT)

[RON]
Take a look at the All-New Chevy VOLT, a 5-passenger sedan with all the luxury, power and performance you would find in most German or Japanese cars.

(CUT TO INTERIOR)

[RON: VOICE OVER]
This spacious interior has plenty of high-tech features to make your daily drive as comfortable and productive as possible, including wireless ‘BlueTooth Interface’ and ‘Personal Device Interface Manager’.

(CUT TO EXTERIOR)
Ron is now holding the Power Plug Cable for the VOLT.

[RON]
The VOLT does everything a family car should do, except use a lot of gas because the VOLT runs on electricity. So, if your daily drive is about 40 miles or less everyday like mine, then you don’t use any gas at all. Just plug it in to recharge when you get home.

(Ron attaches the Power Plug Cable to the side outlet)

[RON]
And if you do need to drive further at any time, there is a small on-board generator to keep you going up to 400 miles on a small 7-gallon tank gas; helping to reduce our country’s dependency on foreign oil. Best of all, this advanced vehicle is built in America.

(The VOLT transforms back into JOLT and makes some robot noises)

[RON]
That’s right. America. Not Cybertron.

(CUT TO EXTERIOR CLOSE-UP OF VOLT)

[RON: VOICE OVER]
Test drive the All-New Chevy VOLT at your Southern California Chevy Dealer today.
It’s one of the Next Generation of cars and trucks from the “New GM”.

(Quote)
George K Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 3:08 pm

#46 eightzero
“Lutz says global warming is a crock. I have real concerns about buying technology from someone that doesn’t understand facts and science.”
- – - – - – - – -

Sorry to burst your global bubble. But global warming is NOT a fact, it is a theory. If it were a fact, scientists wouldn’t be arguing about it.

You are not alone as a victim of the biased, left leaning media who believe in global warming caused by man, facts asside, which helps fuel the environmentalist movement.

Don’t mean to get into a G. W. arguement, there are theorys on both sides of the issue.

My take: it hasn’t been proven either way for me. I want the Volt for a cleaner atmosphere, and less dependence on foreign oil. (I remember the 1973-4 Arab Oil Embargo.). Plus, it’s the best combination of technology and practicality ever in a car!

Check out this then famous Time Magazine article – June 24, ‘74…

“…when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe, they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive,
for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age. ”

From the Boston Globe, Jan 6, 2008,

” BBC News reported on Jan. 4, 2007. Citing experts in the British government’s Meteorological Office, the story announced that “the world is likely to experience the warmest year on record in 2007,” surpassing the all-time high reached in 1998. But a funny thing happened on the way to the planetary hot flash: Much of the planet grew bitterly cold.
In South America, for example, the start of winter last year was one of the coldest ever observed…

Check out the graphs:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2008/040408_cools_off.htm

(Quote)
CDAVIS Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 3:24 pm

______________________________________________________
#63 carcus1 Said:
“I know what GM can give Bob for his retirement gift. . .the car he always really wanted:
http://www.teslamotors.com/models/index.php
———

Spot on.

A Tesla Model S type car, if GM had the vision and desire, could be rolling off the GM production line in 2010. GM could utilize the Voltec power train technology (sans ICE-RE) in an existing Cadillac model shell. A very doable thing but it won’t happen because senior GM executives won’t approve it. I’m sure it irks Lutz to no end knowing that the technical ability for GM to produce a Tesla Model S car is there but the senior executive vision is not.
_____________________________________________________

(Quote)
ccombs Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 3:38 pm

As much as I wish it were not the case, Lutz is being honest about American preferences and is spot-on about the current situation. The popular argument that GM failed cause it didn’t produce enough hybrids is ridiculous, and they are still very much niche vehicles. HOWEVER, even though I agree with his assessment of current reality, I strongly disagree with his nostalgia. That is why, unlike Lutz who seems bitterly resigned to the future, I am ecstatic that he sees the future as moving towards 100% electrified autos. It gives me hope that we’re not just willing ourselves to believe that, but even skeptics of eco-cars do.

(Quote)
solo Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 3:55 pm

The popularity of electric vehicles and cars like the Volt will be directly proportional to the cost of gas.

With government meddling, the price of gas will go up along with CAFE standards and should make electric cars, while not mainstream, at least noticeable. In 10 years, Volt like cars and pure electric cars will be about as visible as a 2010 Chevy Camaro or a new Dodge Challenger. When you see one, you will instantly notice it because it is different and cool. But they will not be mainstream.

Another possibility is that HIGH PERFORMANCE cars will be the ONLY Volt like or Hybrid vehicles in order to get them to meet CAFE standards. More common cars will look a lot like a Fit, Smart, etc. Little economy boxes with no power and poor comfort but really loud stereos.

A third possibility, (the most likely), the U.S. dollar will collapse like the German Mark in the 1920’s and nobody will be able to afford a car.

(Quote)
charlie h Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 4:05 pm

From the Washington Post article: “Somebody said, ‘Do we have [hybrid] technology?’ ” recalls Lutz. ” ‘Oh, yeah,’ was the answer. ‘Oh, yeah, we got the technology. We’ve been building hybrid prototypes since the late ’60s.’ ”

Proof GM lives in a dream world… Sure they have hybrid technology. Except they can’t build it at a price anybody can afford. For an allegedly money-making enterprise, no commercially viable hybrid technology is the same as no hybrid technology. GM preferred to think that no one could build hybrids profitably than spend time and energy figuring out how to do it themselves. Then, when push came to shove, they were forced to build unprofitable hybrid technology. Lookin’ good, GM!

The Volt is just Phase II of this idiocy. Rather than figure out how to build an advanced tech car for the masses, they’re going to sidestep the issue with a limited production “halo” vehicle. Halo vehicles are for inompetent auto manufacturers whose mainstream vehicles can’t compete. Toyota and Honda do fine without them becase their mainstream vehicles are extremely good. The Prius isn’t a “halo” vehicle, no matter how much GM like to believe it is, it is a mainstream vehicle which is sold to help the bottom line. And it does.

From the Washington Post article: “Lutz believes the electric car marketplace is skewed to the coasts. “I would say the East and West Coast intellectual establishment kind of lives in its own world. When you get to the broad American marketplace, excitement is still kind of defined in the way it used to be.””

Those snooty East and Left Coast intellectuals… always thinking about the future and the ramifications of our current policies and actions. What a bunch of forward-thinking twerps. Right-thinking people will just suck up the oil and damn the consequences, as good Americans should.

Memo to Bob: I live in the Midwest. PLENTY OF PRIUS CARS HAVE BEEN SOLD HERE. PLENTY.

(Quote)
Anthony BC Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 4:20 pm

See, even Bobby knows that the VOLT Gen 2 will be a hit in 2014 when it sells for $25,000 and that it’ll be a BEV with 150 mile range!!!

If you’re a one car family/individual then buy a VOLT or if you’re a two car family/individual then buy a BEV and keep the gas machine for 20% of your trips which are over 40 miles – or better yet, just rent the gas guzzler when you need it (less maintenance issues!).

Rick # 48 pretty much sums it up !!!
GO EV !!!

(Quote)
Peter M Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 4:53 pm

George K Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
#46 eightzero
“Lutz says global warming is a crock. I have real concerns about buying technology from someone that doesn’t understand facts and science.”
- – - – - – - – -
Sorry to burst your global bubble. But global warming is NOT a fact, it is a theory. If it were a fact, scientists wouldn’t be arguing about it.
————–
Actually in science, a theory is stronger than a fact. A theory has thousands (millions) of facts that make it up. Let’s not forget that gravity is also a theory, I don’t see politicians fighting the theory of gravity. There are only 2 scientific theory that have disagreements in the media, and conveniently they are the 2 that are used for political purposes. Seems pretty obvious to me why.

(Quote)
GeorgeB Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 4:54 pm

“And that, by God, the reason General Motors is in trouble, is that we have not offered a vehicle like that. But when you look at the reality, at today’s fuel prices, most Americans still want a conventional car.”
——————————————–

This is a disappointing remark. My understanding of the specs on the Volt is that it will offer 40 miles all electric range, adequate for most daily trips, and 50 mpg thereafter. All this with good off the line performance and a comfortable ride. ANYONE would be interested in a vehicle such as this, regardless of gas price, especially as mass production brings down the price.

I also feel a little irked by Mr. Lutz’s apparent belief that, aside from sophisticated folks on the East and West Coast, most people want conventional cars. If the Volt is all that we expect, Chevrolet (I can’t bring myself to say GM anymore) won’t be able to make them fast enough. The problem is that this vehicle DOES NOT EXIST YET, Mr. Lutz. That is the reality. If the Volt meets expectations, it will be a sure succcess.

LJGTVWOTR and the buyers will come.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 5:12 pm

My understanding of the specs on the Volt is that it will offer 40 miles all electric range, adequate for most daily trips, and 50 mpg thereafter.
_______________________________

If that were true, offering smaller battery-pack option would immediately make the vehicle cost-competitive.

Consumers would then have a choice, while at the same time contributing to both automaker profit and the gains from mass production.

So far, resistance to that idea has been fierce and data to support the 50 mpg estimate absent.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 5:39 pm

#76 john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 5:12 pm

So far, resistance to that idea has been fierce and data to support the 50 mpg estimate absent.
………………………………….

John, you worry far too much about the highway mileage of the Volt past the first 40 miles.. it is a fact that 78% of the public will not use a drop of gas in the first 40 miles, thus mileage of infinity trumps the Prius 58mpg

(Quote)
DonC Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 5:42 pm

The rule on appeal in a legal case is that the appellate court can affirm the lower court on any ground, including those that were neither argued nor even presented. IOW it’s important that you do the right result but unimportant that you do the right thing for the right reason. We should apply this reasoning here. What does it matter that Lutz thinks (incorrectly) that global warming is a crock? Who cares? He got the ball rolling on the Volt.

He is astute on the point about image, however. GM does have some good vehicles, but unless people visit showrooms it doesn’t matter overly much. The Volt will help with this. And since we taxpayers now own a good part of GM I guess we should all applaud this. (Maybe they can work that into the advertising — LOL).

I’m also not surprised the Auto Task Force underestimated the costs of the Volt and new technologies. The Obama Campaign thought it would cost maybe $150B to transition to new alternative energy sources. Most people working on the issue outside of the Campaign thought the number was more likely $150B/year. This stuff is not going to be cheap.

On the loss of the performance cars, it’s unclear why EVs can’t be performance driven. Moreover, if you want a performance car driven on liquid fuels there is a simple solution. It’s called “bio-fuel.”

(Quote)
Van Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 5:46 pm

Noah @ 64, hammer, nail, head!!

(Quote)
CS Guy Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 5:48 pm

Mr. Lutz said:
“If you look at most of the mainstream media, you get the impression that 95 percent of Americans today want a vehicle like the Chevrolet Volt… But when you look at the reality, at today’s fuel prices, most Americans still want a conventional car.”

What a self-contradictory statement, and just plain wrong.

The only people who wouldn’t want a Voltec type drivetrain in their car, truck or SUV are people with a financial interest in oil companies.

Electric drive is the only system that can give maximum torque at any rpm range. That is why they are used in trains. To say that Americans do not want an engine in our vehicle like those that power a freight train is just stating that you don’t know us at all. Speed junkies, would-be racers, people who haul heavy loads, etc. would kill to have a vehicle like that.

A person who loves to drive fast cars would positively love to have 100% of the engine torque available right off the line. In a truck, you’d get increased towing and payload versus a gas or diesel ICE model if the Voltec system were sized right for the job. Nobody said that the electric motor in the Volt can power a train, nor the battery pack. That’s the beauty of the Voltec system; it is scalable to virtually any size you want.

Refer to the 100 MPG Hummer (google it or youtube it). Do you think a monster like that can get great gas mileage and still have all its power? Well, you wouldn’t until you see the video anyway. It has a larger electric motor and 3 (THREE!) battery packs.

Get your mind out of the past, Mr. Lutz. It’s time you retire or open up to new ways of thinking. I hope your role in The New GM is very limited or nonexistent because you are the problem not the solution.

I believe that GM would be foolish to NOT put Voltec into every vehicle they make. Here’s why:
#1 More vehicle models with Voltec means higher production which leads to lower per unit costs. It’ll get to parity with ICE eventually.
#2 Having a commercial where your full sized pickup truck carrying a full load of (whatever) screams off the line and completely dusts the competitors would be a powerful message. People respond to that kind of advertising. Our truck is tough and as fast as you need it to be.
#3 Being able to say you have the only vehicle line in history that uses NO GAS for the first ‘X’ miles. Can you say PR win, win?
#4 Being able to go to congress and ASK for increased fuel efficiency standards because your Voltec powered vehicles already get double the mileage. Stick it to your competitors and make them bleed for a change.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 6:01 pm

it is a fact that 78% of the public will not use a drop of gas in the first 40 miles
_____________________

What does that have to do with how much a consumer is willing/able to pay for the ability?

Don’t avoid the issue of concern: PRICE

GM can’t expect to sell mainstream quantity if the price is beyond the reach most consumers.

(Quote)
CS Guy Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 6:30 pm

John’s “GM can’t expect to sell mainstream quantity if the price is beyond the reach most consumers” just made my point. Thank you very much by the way.

Roll out Voltec across the entire GM line of vehicles and you’ll have the price reduction due to mass production.

GM Voltec vehicles should eventually be less expensive than regular ICE vehicles due to the standardization of the parts and even the ICE genset in the Voltec vehicle (notice I am not saying “car” I do mean put Voltec onto EVERY vehicle you make, car, truck or SUV/crossover or whatever). You will set the bar for others to follow.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 6:33 pm

#81 john1701a Says:

What does that have to do with how much a consumer is willing/able to pay for the ability?
Don’t avoid the issue of concern: PRICE
………………………………………………..

I was just having fun with you, yes price is important but you seem to always worry about the highway mileage of the Volt, relax.. its not that critical for most people.. for 78% of them exactly

Also, Obama will just adjust the price when its necessary.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 6:46 pm

#74 Peter M

Almost right.

A theory can be proven or disproven.
If it is proven, it is a Fact.
If it is disproven, then it is just a theory.

Gravity is a fact. It exists.
What ’causes’ gravity may have more than one theory.

My ex-wife is a bitch. That is a fact.
What causes her to be that way also has many theories.

(Quote)
Ed M Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 7:29 pm

Here’s a few numbers I’ve compiled that I think you’ll enjoy.
Currently America imports 87 million barrels of oil per day.
Out of that we get about 43 million gallons of gas.
There’s about 62 million cars in the US.

This works out to about 2/3 of a gallon of gas from imported oil per vehicle per day.
A Chevy Volt will save at least a gallon of gas per driver or at least 62 million gallons per day.

If everyone were to buy Volt then we wouldn’t need to import a drop of oil from unfriendly nations and the US would not need to send a trillion $ per year to foreign governments for oil purchases.
You can see what this will do to the price of oil for guys like Chavez.
Go Volt Go

CS Guy #82 I’m in agreement with you.

(Quote)
Ed M Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 7:42 pm

#84 CorvetteGuy

Love these debates.
A theory can be proven or disproven.
but only until a new theory comes along.
If it is disproven, then it’s just nonsence.

Your ex-wife is a bitch is your perception.
I happen to think she’s wonderful.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:06 pm

78 DonC
“…He is astute on the point about image, however. ”
=======================================================
Don, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot just pick out things that suit your way of thinking and then attack his other points as being without merit.

Oh, yeah, hows that math coming on calculating the mpc for the Volt? Just wondering…

(Quote)
Dick G. Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 8:29 pm

Oil consumption can be greatly reduced by implementing solar and wind energy. Electrification of the automobile is a $7.5 trillion industry. Supplying enough solar and wind energy to move these EV’s the first 40 miles each day is a $5 trillion industry. What could these 2 industries do for our economy?

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:07 pm

53.
john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:35 pm .A car that gets about 30 miles per gallon is not a gas guzzler.
__________________________

You’ve been greenwashed to actually believe that.

The typical commute and non-utility vehicle should get well above that. Prius and Fusion-Hybrid do a great job of setting expectations for the standard now.

Why not a minimum of 40 MPG?

Heck, my 2010 Prius is delivering well over 50 MPG.
———————-

Going for 30mpg to 40mpg only saves about 83gallons/year
But going from 10mpg to 20mph would save 500gallons/year.
I think a lot more is accomplished by improving the fuel economies of Sports cars, Trucks, and SUV’s then small micro-commuters.

(Quote)
bruce g Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

Lets get real,
Who would want to drive a Volt at the weekend if they could fly a jet fighter instead.
Lutz is absolutely entited to his nostalgia for the days of American Grafetti. In fact , likewise, in my little town the good old boys still drive fabulously restored 60’s Thunderbirds and Laurentians around at the weekend.
Good luck to them, the few miles they do will never make any difference to the enviroment.

(Quote)
koz Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:30 pm

Wow…I mean WOW!

Like others have already commented, there is soo much in this article it is hard to know where to start. I hope the Washington Post got it wrong, but given Lutz’s past comments and actions I believe this article is mostly accurate. I guess deep down I felt that GM (Lutz) thought this way but I believed for a time that they had develop a deeper understanding of their market and the issues that are important to many buyers. This a powerful testament to the shortcomings of GM’s managment that have contributed to bring them to the point where they now find themselves (BK and dwindling market share).

This not to say that Lutz is all wrong or an idiot. He is a very charasmatic, intelligent executive. It is just sad and frustrating that his perception is so fixed and blinding. It is very difficult for someone with this vision to effectively guide the product development in today’s environment and especially tomorrow’s. If one only, or mainly, sees the value of the Volt as a halo car, then it’s concept and development has been executed excellently. This is why the Volt is being developed as a Chevy and not a Cadillac. This is why they stuck adamantly to 40 miles AER and sacrificed significant style for a little range. This is why it started out as it did..a publicity stunt. This is why the motor output has been downgraded from 120KW to 110KW and not upgraded to 130KW. This is why they have not yet selected what the second Voltec vehicle will be. It had to stick to 40 AER and a Chevy badge to have maximum halo effect.

The part that Lutz is most missing, that GM is most missing, is that many Prius buyers and other supporters of high efficiency vehicles are not all members of some tightly knit fringe movement or some arrogant elitists. I get the impression he feels Prius buyers and EV supporters are all a bunch misguided environmentalists. GM needs to open it’s eyes and realize there are a myriad of reasons that ALL consumers ALL over the WORLD value economy. The do so to greatly differing degrees, some place a very low value on it and some place it at the top of their list. It runs the gamut and so do the reasons why consumers value economy. Some want to use the least amount of gas (none) and the smallest ecologic footprint possible. Some would only choose a more efficient model of everything else were equal with comparable vehicles. Does anybody actually desire to produce more pollution or burn more gas? Of course not.

THE TREND ACROSS THE ENTIRE GLOBE IS TO BE MORE COGNIZANT OF POLLUTION OF ALL TYPES AND ALL COSTS AND RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH BEING RELIANT ON GASOLINE.

People recognize that $400+B dollars/yr are flowing out of the US annually to pay for foreign oil. People recognize that national security is seriously at risk when more than 20% of our oil source is overseas. People understand the pollution (not CO2) associated ICE vehicles and the adverse health effects and costs. Many people believe anthropogenic CO2 is risk to be acted upon. Many people understand the simplicity of EV drive, the benefits of regen braking, and the other EV benefits. People understand gas prices are going up and battery prices are coming down. People understand oil is a finite and most believe that the bulk of the easily (cheaper) recoverable oil has already be found and much has been consumed. Many people understand the synergy between plug-ins and intermittent power sources. Many people understand that EV’s don’t have the same level of tradeoffs between price, performance, and efficiency that ICE’s do. BOB LUTZ, you have stated some of these things yourself, why do believe most people place no value in any of these?

Statik, I have given you some slack at times regarding your perspective on GM’s management. Not that I thought or said they have had a stellar record but I was giving them the benefit of the doubt as far as the Volt was concerned. No more! They deserve every criticism and persuasive argument to help enlighten them about the large and growing market that they appear to be nearly clueless about.

Time for GM to start conceiving, developing, and marketing their hybrids and Voltec’s for real markets, not posers. Oh…and like someone mentioned earlier in this thread, Toyota hasn’t been kicking your a$$ because of greenwashing sleight of hand. They have consistantly been building more relevent and higher quality vehicles than GM for a long time. Wake up, recognize this or GM will die!

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:33 pm

CorvetteGuy Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 6:46 pm .#74 Peter M

Almost right.

A theory can be proven or disproven.
If it is proven, it is a Fact.
If it is disproven, then it is just a theory.

Gravity is a fact. It exists.
What ’causes’ gravity may have more than one theory.

——

Gravity is the curvature of space-time. Something that is observed in nature… not sure if its a “fact”.

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:36 pm

80 CS Guy
…. The only people who wouldn’t want a Voltec type drivetrain in their car, truck or SUV are people with a financial interest in oil companies…..

——————

Or people that dont have $40,000

(Quote)
Harrier1970 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:37 pm

We will get our Volt, no doubt about that. I look forward to that day!

What I find intersting about this whole article is that GM was never interested in pushing forward with cutting edge technology they they themselves had developed. How many of you know that GM put Serial Hybrid Diesel/Electric drive in our Submarines well prior to the start of WWII? This technology has been here, what was lacking was merely the imagination and the will to execute.

Many people like to talk about being free of middle east oil and the associated military, economic and environmental costs associated with it. What did GM care where the fuel came from, so long as fuel was cheap and people were buying the shitty vehicles they made? No lesson was learned from the OPEC embargo of the 1970’s.

The arrogance of the executives at GM is astounding. They think that they know what we want… we should want what THEY tell us we should want. After all, THEY are GM! It was the “Halo effect” that the Prius generated that prompted Mr Lutz into action!?! It was Tesla saying that they could build a sexy electric car using laptop batteries that prompted Mr. Lutz and GM into action!?!? The amazing support and enthusiasm behind the Volt is STILL a mystery to the executives at GM. Support for the Volt (and electric cars for that matter..according the Mr. Lutz) are apparently being fostered on the American public by a vocal minority on the coasts and through Government legislation. Thank you Mr. Lutz, but I would remind you that most of the people in this country LIVE ON or NEAR the coasts and those people like to drive and they have not been driving GM cars. They also like to do this think called voting, and the party of hidden energy policies, and oil executives lost. Why do you suppose that is?

GM has stumbled onto an amazing thing with the Volt. Really, how many cars with no legacy have had the kind of interest and support that this car has generated? The Volt program is used by GM to show how they are serious about the electrification of the automobile. How serious would they be if not for the circumstances that they currently find themselves in? This project has gone from a PR project to “quiet the hippies” and give GM some well needed green publicity to a Hail Mary that will lead GM to victory. I think that GM needs to replace the aging Neaderthals in their boardroom as well as the rest of their product lineup if they are going to be a “leaner, meaner” GM.

I will not be sad to see Mr. Lutz retire so that leaders with true vision can replace him and the rest of the fools who have driven GM into the ground.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:38 pm

91 koz
“Wake up, recognize this or GM will die!”
===================================================

I agree with your assessment of Bob and GM. But, GM has already died, and is now being brought back to life by you and I. Mouth-to-mouth resuscitation seems to be in order. If that fails, bring out the paddles and lets give that a try.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:48 pm

It seems GM doesn’t fully know what they have with the Volt. People are going to buy this car. A lot of people. Mainstream people, not just eco-geeks. By late 2011, GM will be singing a different tune. They will be scrambling to build enough EREVs to keep up with demand. This car is going to change everything…

(Quote)
Harrier1970 Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:52 pm

#67 CorvetteGuy

BTW, brilliant idea for a commercial.

1) Milk the Transformers II tie in.

2) Appeal to the next generation of consumers.

3) attention getting (geardo’s and gizmo freaks wil love it)

4) Both cool and the right thing to do (by purchasing a Volt).

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 9:58 pm

#68 George K

Actually, around 98% of reputable scientists have agreed on global warming. Yes. There are scientists who will argue otherwise–it’s amazing how flexible people can be in interpreting facts when their paychecks depend on it. There were also scientists who argued that smoking didn’t cause cancer long after the link was accepted in the scientific and other communities.

Bottom line: People believe what they want to believe. If you’re Bob Lutz, and you love driving sports cars for the sake of driving, and flying jet airplanes,you’re not going to want to believe in global warming. Ditto for many other people who believe they are entitled to continue to guzzle gas at the current rate. Basically, it’s a lot easier to deny that global warming is real, than to accept that it is, and we need to do whatever we can to mitigate it.

By the way, even if you believe that there is a serious scientific dispute about global warming, then that means that there is a certain percentage chance that it is. Given the consequences if it is true, isn’t even a 20% chance that global warming is real, enough to justify a significant attempt to prevent it? If you had a 20% chance of developing cancer in the next five years, wouldn’t you be wiling to pay a lot of money to reduce that risk? Shouldn’t we do the same when the entire planet is at risk?

(Quote)
Tom Harwick Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:02 pm

I think Lutz, like most Americans, just can’t bring himself to admit that that oil is a limited resource and that fuel prices have no where to go but up. After all, a lifetime of accomplishment, status, and wealth has been directly dependent upon cheap gas.

or the first five months of this year, the U.S. has imported 1.874 billion barrels, after spending approximately $475 billion on imported oil in 2008.

lhttp://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20090605005354&newsLang=en

I think many people are not ambivalent about the amount of oil being purchased for offshore, and the potential of Voltec to reduce this burden.

=====================================
It think Lutz understands something than many posters on this board have missed.

The economic cost of importing a half trillion $ of oil per year, soon to rise to a trillion, has probably not escaped Bob’s notice.
But he is concerned about whether Voltec will sell millions of cars per year starting about 2014 or so.

That absolutely will not happen for a car selling for $40k, which saves $1,000 per year over a $25k Prius.

In that scenario, the Volt is a niche product, selling 10,000 per year to the technophiles who read this site, and the small fraction of tree-huggers who can afford a $40k car.

The reason that ending oil imports will not motivate the average Joe to buy a $40k Volt is called the tragedy of the commons. If he spends $40k vs $25k he severely impairs his family’s standard of living with higher car payments, but oil imports change an imperceptible 0.00001%. If hundreds of millions of Americans dont jump on the bandwagon, he has wasted his family’s money, and gotten nothing of value to him in return.

There is hope for the Volt, but one of these things has to happen:

Price down to $29k
Gas up to $20 per gallon
Government subsidies or mandates (they would have to be severe, CAFE wont do it at 36 MPG)

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:03 pm

By late 2011, GM will be singing a different tune.
_________________________

That’s an understatement!

The stubborn resistance to offer a CHOICE will finally be overcome by then.

(Quote)
Lev Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:08 pm

It seems that Lutz does not know exactly what is good on any level – automotive, commercial, and economical. Sure, there is room for muscle cars, but the Volt is not simply a niche vehicle to satisfy some weird leftists. His opinion is obviously conflicted, and he can’t seem to move in to the current era of automotive design. And he still does not believe in global warming. Such nearsightedness is dangerous in a leader.

I’m afraid that with his and the current board’s demise, American car companies may close the door on muscle cars forever. The newer, young generation will simply focus on electric only. I honestly thought Lutz was more of a visionary than he has proven himself to be.

(Quote)
Jeff Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:10 pm

Sounds like “old GM”…but it is hard to please everyone. It seems a torch exists in every corner for a specific cause.

(Quote)
Tom Harwick Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:12 pm

Lutz is clearly, clearly out of touch. It’s true that the masses are less willing than the “elite” minority to personally stick their necks out in order to support environmentalism But even though they wouldn’t actually pay too much extra for a low-gas or gas-free car, they now WANT one. The idea that oil-dependence is dangerous, and that gas-guzzlers are wicked, has percolated throughout the population. In other words, the company that first delivers a super-low or gas-free car with reasonable performance, wins the game.
————————————————————————————-
Judge the public by their behavior. The Democratic and Republican parties still get 99% of the votes, even though neither one supports any sort of policy which would eliminate the pure ICE car. Look at your parking lot at work. Still full of Suburbans, F350s and other gas guzzlers.

The public will pay a premium for fuel savings, but a Prius only needs 300 gallons in a 15,000 mile year, so the premium can only be a couple of thousand, not the $15,000 being projected as of today.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:14 pm

#94 Harrier1970

Actually, the US used to obtain almost all of its oil from Texas. I believe we hit peak oil in the 70s, but before that, we thought we could get most of our oil here.

And what does it matter what Bob Lutz or anyone else at GM thinks for that matter, as long as they product the Volt? Toyota clearly thought the same thing, or they wouldn’t have invested so much money on the Sequoia and the Tundra. Yes. The Prius is a bright spot for them right now. But that’s not going to get them to turn a profit anytime soon if the market for regular ICE cars doesn’t turn around.

(Quote)
Tom Harwick Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

It would be exceptionally-more appropriate and the right thing to do for natural gas to completely displace coal-fired power plants.
=======================================
You and Boone would make natural gas the corn ethanol of the future. The massive amount needed to displace coal would put a demand on the market that would drive the price through the roof.

Boone would be happy about that, just as ConAgra is happy about corn ethanol driving food prices through the roof.

But the average Joe would be a big loser if Boone gets his way.

Nuclear is the way to go for safe, cheap and abundant electricity. Edison electrified the lamp. The next step is to try to electrify the car at reasonable price, and use well established technologies to electrify heating as well.

(Quote)
Marcus Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:32 pm

NZDavid @1

Thanks for not babbling something about being “First!” like many of the other people on this site, and actually producing and interesting statement.

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:36 pm

I’ve heard Lutz talk about global warming before. I think he doesn’t believe in man-made global warming, not global warming in general.

As far as a pure BEV, i COULD go as low as 150miles AER, but only if the manufacturer could guarantee that range for 10 years, and in -20degree weather. I’d prefer 250 miles.

(Quote)
Open-Mind Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 10:44 pm

NZDavid (#8),

If Toyota is operating as well as you claim, why did they lose almost $8 BILLION dollars last quarter? That’s about $2 BILLION more than GM lost.

(Quote)
charlie h Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:03 pm

108, Open-Mind (that’s an ironic handle), writes… Nonsense about GM and Toyota profits.

Review the last few years’ of performance. Then get back to us.

Hint: GM is in bankruptcy; Toyota is not; GM had earth-shattering losses in 2008; Toyota did not.

(Quote)
Jacob Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 11:08 pm

At least we can finally put to rest that fact that you will never recoup the extra cost of a Volt in fuel savings.

(Quote)
George in Berkeley Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:10 am

Mr. Lutz’ retirement makes more sense now. Maybe he found himself championing a product that, if not ambivalent, he certainly felt conflicted about.

He resigns and it’s a win-win. If it flops he takes the “I knew it should have been all electric” position. It gets raves and he’s the father of the new American car industry. Fox-crazy.

(Quote)
Doug Korthof Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:16 am

Mr. Lutz is beginning to pull the rug out from under those hoaxed by the VOLT scheme.

Lutz is leaving this year; Wagoner is gone. When they quietly kill the VOLT in 2010, or sabotage it in 2011, Lutz will be able to say “it warn’t me!!”.

Notice the crap-talk, where Lutz downplays the importance of the VOLT, proclaiming it’s just a PR gambit.

DON’T SAY YOU WEREN’T TOLD, EVEN IF YOU STILL ARE GULLED AND SUCKED IN.

After all, Hitler stated exactly what he was going to do in his book Mein Kampf; those who didn’t read it could be excused, but those who read it and still got fooled have no one to blame but their own stupid selves.

Now Lutz has stated exactly what the VOLT means to GM, which is, NOTHING.

Sure, it’s a big thing for us, but Lutz doesn’t give a poop. At least, he does admit that serial hybrid technology, such as the VOLT, has been around since 1969 (we found an ad for an Oldsmobile that “makes its own electricity”).

Don’t believe GM, it’s a big liar, it’s just using Taxpayer money to pursue its losing big-oil policies. Rebates on gas-guzzlers and zero-interest loans to induce suckers to buy its big iron junkers are a DIRECT SUBSIDY TO BIG OIL, lowering the effective final cost of oil to the gas-guzzling driver.

(Quote)
Doug Korthof Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:53 am

Lutz, having led GM from a position of dominance to beggar status, really shouldn’t pontificate about what the customer wants.

After all, GM did arrest its own cash customers, not exactly good PR.

So Lutz still wants to build big cars, and thinks only granola-munchers want EV. Like I said, why would anyone listen to Lutz’ opiinion??

Lutz doesn’t even know, apparently, that GM sold NiMH, the battery needed for the Toyota Prius, to Chevron.

GM and Chevron cooperated to kill NiMH

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:06 am

#104
LauraM Actually, the US used to obtain almost all of its oil from Texas. I believe we hit peak oil in the 70s, but before that, we thought we could get most of our oil here
____________________________

Actually, the US used to obtain almost all of its oil from Ohio. Much of which was supplied by a group based in Cleveland. This group headed up by man named J. D. who was the head of household for the Rockefeller family on Euclid Street in Cleveland, members of the Erie street Baptist church, also in Cleveland.

It all sounds so quaint. Isn’t amazing how the little daily made decisions early on, can loom so large in history.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:09 am

#87 JEC says “Don, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot just pick out things that suit your way of thinking and then attack his other points as being without merit.”

It doesn’t make much sense to me that the governing principle would be that you either agree with everything someone says or nothing they say, but that I guess this is your experience. Not sure what “other points” I’m disagreeing with other than climate change but (1) my point was that it didn’t matter what his opinions were so long as he arrived at the right decision (IOW it’s moronic to argue over whether oil is an environmental or national defense problem); and (2) denying the climate change evidence at this point seems much like denying the link between smoking and cancer forty years ago — possible but not terribly reasonable. (FWIW I also think he’s missing a shift in consumer zeitgeist, but I don’t believe I mentioned that.)

As for the math needed to give a first approximation of the EV range for the Volt, you act like there is some big mystery. There isn’t. As you should for every EV using a Li-ion battery pack, take the battery back size in kWh. Multiply by .7. Divide by 250.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:38 am

To say Lutz and GM are ambivalent about the Volt implies that they should feel something more or something else about the Volt. Pray tell me, what do YOU think they should feel?

The 1st generation Volt will be break even in costs and low on volume. It help condition buyers to using an EV without giving up their safety / security / reliability / dependability of gasoline. It prepares a supplier base for GM to build alternative propulsion vehicles in high volume. It prepares dealers to sell and service alternative propulsion vehicles.

The Volt IS the stepping stone to rapid recharge battery electric vehicles and plug-in fuel cell electric vehicles. How is any part of that ambivalent?

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:40 am

The internet available video of Bob Lutz test driving the R&D (mule) Volt says it all. He is obviously very happy with the current stage of Volt development and with the quiet, peppy performance. Bob is smart to deflect the subject of global warming regarding motor vehicle pollution. Whether he believes gas guzzlers contribute to global green house effect or not, as a working part of the motor vehicle industry, he must deny all connections.

I hope part of Mr Henderson’s “will blow you away with what we have coming” projection includes a base model EREV. A Cruze SUV vehicle with EREV drive and an after tax credit price of $26,000 is a “blow you away” offering. The Volt at $33,000 will be very popular as well.

=D~

(Quote)
Jim in PA Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:33 am

Lutz is so full of self-contradiction. He describes the market for hybrids as an “artificial market”; presumably artificial because of the non-existence of global warming and because it is being driven by an influential group of people. Fine, whatever. Now let’s ask Bob about the artificial market for SUVs that are never ever driven off-road, making their primary selling point actually worthless. I got news for you Bob, sales is all about creating “artificial markets” to create demand where none necessarily exist. If we all bought cars based primarily on the “real” market value of being able to get from Point A to Point B, we’d all still be clinging to our ‘86 Corsicas.

(Quote)
Jim in PA Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:44 am

#109 charlie h – Thanks for asking us to review Toyota’s 2008 financials, rather than the damning 2009 operating losses. Toyota is in fact operating at a loss currently. None of your opinions can ever change that fact. Of course they are doing better than GM. But why is it so hard for you to admit that your vaunted heros are currently taking a financial beating?

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:19 am

I just hope GM succeeds. They have really raised awareness about EV’s.

Those of you that argue about Toyota. The Prius has really taught us that electrics do work. Yes, it is a very lame electric that gets 2 miles on battery, but the lesson is still there.

(Quote)
koz Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:33 am

This will be the third time I’ve posted this analyses of expected fuel efficiency for range extended mode. John1701a and other doubting Thomases, please feel free to criticize. GM has said what the power consumption will be for the EPA city and highway schedules, so is just a matter of interpolating what the genset efficiency will be. Hint: I think my generator efficiency # may be suspect.

“Debate keeps resurfacing in the threads about ER (or RE as I prefer) mode MPG, Cd, etc. I think we have enough information to calculate these within a reasonable amount of certainty if we take the latest comments from the engineers (not Lutz or some obscure reference) as accurate:

-Per Nick Zeilinksi, GM’s Director of Advanced Technology Vehicle Engineering, the Volt is achieving 40 miles AER on city and highway EPA schedules. http://gm-volt.com/2009/04/24/the-chevy-volts-electric-range-is-40-miles-in-both-highway-and-city-driving/

-ICE should be at least 35% efficient if Atkinson cycle is assumed and in Volt use should average more than 30%, assume 33% (Prius THS II max BSFC 37%). I know, I know Carcus1.. you don’t accept this but it would be monumentally foolish for GM not to use Atkinson.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption

-Automotive gasoline has a potential 36.6KWh/gal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline

-The generator is 95% efficient
http://www.teslamotors.com/efficiency/how_it_works.php

-Most of the generator power will go directly to the working load but we will assume 15% goes into the battery

-The battery AER discharge cycle is 8KWh as has been consistantly conveyed by GM.

Using the above information and assumptions the expect KWh/gal out of the generator is:
36.6 * .33 * .95 = 11.47KWh/gal

15% goes in/out of the battery (90% each way):
11.47 – (11.47 * .15) + (11.47 *.15 * .9 * .9) = 11.14KWh/gal

So, based on Nick Zeilinksi’s affirmation that the Volt will achieve at least 40 miles AER on one EPA schedule and slightly better on the other:
AER: 40miles/8KWh = 5 miles/KWh energy consumption
AND
ER: 11.14KWh/gal * 5 miles/KWh = 55.7 miles/gal

Based on above assumptions for Atkinson ICE energy efficiency and Volt’s stated energy use, EPA CIty schedule and highway schedule should return 55.7MPG on one and slightly better on the other.

This seems pretty straightforward. Am I missing something? Maybe Dan Petite or a motorhead can speak to the assumed 33% efficiency for the ICE, but otherwise it is pretty clear what we can expect.

So what is the Cd? Do we really care if it is lower or higher than the Prius’ if the Volt achieves 5miles/KWh? If you are really interested, you can look at the highway schedule and use 5miles/KWh to back into a reasonable assumption of what the CdA is.”

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:35 am

#120, Rashid Amul,

What does Prius have to do with elections mattering? That makes no sense.

As for lessons from the Prius, GM learned NOT to copy that dead end configuration and create a stepping stone to future vehicles.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:43 am

GM has said what the power consumption will be for the EPA city and highway schedules
___________________________

I have yet to see anything since before the switch to the larger engine. Non-electric consumption remains a complete mystery.

SMTD

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:45 am

Am I missing something?
_____________________

Remember the EPA revisions last year? Your estimates are missing those same factors the EPA hadn’t included.

(Quote)
RB Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:49 am

#98 LauraM says
Actually, around 98% of reputable scientists have agreed on global warming.
—————————————————————————–

Yes, that’s right, at least when averaged over a decade or so.

Whether or not man-made CO2 is affecting earth warming, or by how much, brings forward much more mixed opinions. One aspect is the graph of long-term earth surface temperature, shown for example in Figure 1 of this link:

http://www.jpands.org/vol12no3/robinson.pdf

The link argues against the CO2 hypothesis. However, whether one argues pro or con, the data in Figure 1 still have to be accounted for.

Favorably for the CO2 hypothesis, in the last hundred years increased CO2 correlates to increased warming. Unfavorably, the amount of CO2 over the longer time span seems to have little or no correlation with global temperature.

(Quote)
sudhaman Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:52 am

it is inevitable. we are going to use electric and hydrogen and reduce dependence on oil. who cares the asians will be paying high cost for oil but we will use electric vehicle.
the sales of volt will simply be skyrocketing

(Quote)
RB Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:57 am

#121 koz on estimating mpg
————————————-

Thank you for again posting calculations. Inevitably they involve some opinion. In my opinion

1) Your ICE effeciency at 33% is too high. Around 25% would be more of a middle-range estimate.

2) Somewhat offsetting, your reduction of 15% for energy into the battery should not be taken. What goes into the battery comes out of the battery, so on the average (which is what you are calculating) the net gain/loss is zero.

I’m not sure how the numbers come on on balance.
Again thanks for doing this for us.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:50 am

#122 Jason says,

#120, Rashid Amul,

What does Prius have to do with elections mattering? That makes no sense.

As for lessons from the Prius, GM learned NOT to copy that dead end configuration and create a stepping stone to future vehicles.

———
Huh? Elections? Sorry, I missed that one. Where did I say that?

Lessons? I wasn’t refering to GM learning anything. I was referring to the populous learning something. That it is okay to buy an electric. That are more aware of these cars because of cars like the Prius. I don’t like the Prius mind you, but it has raised awareness.

(Quote)
dc Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:51 am

I’ll buy the first affordable electric car that doesnt look like the Prius.

So far, the Prius, Insight and Volt look 95% identical…

Pass.

(Quote)
statik Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:59 am

#91 koz
I almost missed. You can be my new internet best friend. (=
================
#98 LauraM said:

“By the way, even if you believe that there is a serious scientific dispute about global warming, then that means that there is a certain percentage chance that it is. Given the consequences if it is true, isn’t even a 20% chance that global warming is real, enough to justify a significant attempt to prevent it? If you had a 20% chance of developing cancer in the next five years, wouldn’t you be wiling to pay a lot of money to reduce that risk? Shouldn’t we do the same when the entire planet is at risk?”
—-
I don’t want to get into a ‘global warming’ discussion, but excellent post…but my thoughts exactly. If there is only 1 bullet in the chamber, I’d rather not pull the trigger at all…regardless of what the odds are. And what is the worst that can happen by reducing pollutions, less kids with asthma? Reduce lung/heart disease? I’m OK with that.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:05 am

DonC

“As for the math needed to give a first approximation of the EV range for the Volt, you act like there is some big mystery. There isn’t. As you should for every EV using a Li-ion battery pack, take the battery back size in kWh. Multiply by .7. Divide by 250.”
=======================================================
Thanks.
So, all other factors that affected the range prediction for the iMiev, that you discussed before are really not important.

Got it!

(Quote)
Guido Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:24 am

eightzero Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Lutz says global warming is a crock. I have real concerns about buying technology from someone that doesn’t understand facts and science.
——–
Yeah, right – like Toyota really cares about AGW … that’s why they have made such a strong commitment to full-sized trucks and SUV’s. Put the bong down, eightball.

(Quote)
Guido Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:28 am

statik Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 7:59 am
#91 koz
I almost missed. You can be my new internet best friend. (=
================
#98 LauraM said:

“By the way, even if you believe that there is a serious scientific dispute about global warming, then that means that there is a certain percentage chance that it is. Given the consequences if it is true, isn’t even a 20% chance that global warming is real, enough to justify a significant attempt to prevent it? If you had a 20% chance of developing cancer in the next five years, wouldn’t you be wiling to pay a lot of money to reduce that risk? Shouldn’t we do the same when the entire planet is at risk?”
—-
I don’t want to get into a ‘global warming’ discussion, but excellent post…but my thoughts exactly. If there is only 1 bullet in the chamber, I’d rather not pull the trigger at all…regardless of what the odds are. And what is the worst that can happen by reducing pollutions, less kids with asthma? Reduce lung/heart disease? I’m OK with that.
———–
The difference in opinion lies with “prudent, reasonable efforts” versus “over-the-top, wealth redistribution schemes” like cap-n-trade. I think most of us are for progress …. just not reckless change that may end up collapsing our entire way of life so the tin-foil hat crowd can sleep at night.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:36 am

#121 koz Says:

This will be the third time I’ve posted this analyses of expected fuel efficiency for range extended mode. John1701a and other doubting Thomases, please feel free to criticize.
…………………………………….

It is a waste of time to do these calculations, we just dont have enough data to be even close to a real result.

I dont think the Volt will get the same highway mileage as a new Prius, but this really is not important all all since 78% of the public will not even go pass the all-electric range.. this is a profound concept, think about it..

People talk about diesel and other high efficiency range extenders and it just does not worth it for the same reason. Insignificant oil savings..

The Prius “transmission” is a direct connection from the gas engine to the wheels at highway speeds, almost zero losses.. the Volt will have to deal with generator, inverter and motor losses under the same condition.. plus it is a bit heavier and that increases tire drag.. but only nitpickers care about any of this.

(Quote)
pbennett45 Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:44 am

Not sure I buy the contrast of the east and west coasts vs. the “broad american marketplace”… Pretty sure the states of California, Washington and Oregon added to the section of the east coast spanning from the DC metro area to the Boston metro area is somewhere pretty damn close to 50% of the population (if not more). And definitely FAR more than 50% of the buying power of the country due to the very high concentrations of upper incomes on the two coasts. I apprecfiate Mr. Lutz’s support for the Volt and getting it as far as it is – but attitiudes like that are why GM is in bankruptcy court right now. It’s some sort of delusion that the “majority of america” lives in cow pastures in wisconsin, doesn’t believe what 90% of scientists agree on (climate change) and wants to drive big SUVs and muscle cars. Again – thanx for the support Mr. Lutz, but you’d think driving your company to bankruptcy would be enough to make you realize where the broad american marketplace actually lies.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:45 am

#133 Guido Says:
The difference in opinion lies with “prudent, reasonable efforts” versus “over-the-top, wealth redistribution schemes” like cap-n-trade. I think most of us are for progress …. just not reckless change that may end up collapsing our entire way of life so the tin-foil hat crowd can sleep at night.
……………………………………….

What keeps me up at night is the possibility of an asteroid strike, and we know for a fact that it has happened before and will happen again.. unlike man-made global warming which is just a theory at best..

The solar system has millions-billions of asteroids and comets, and we can do something about it..

Nah, it does not really keep me up at night.

(Quote)
k-dawg Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 8:50 am

I would like to see the data on the distribution of privately owned vehicles that are used regularly.

There are a lot of cars in NYC, but most are cabs, etc. A lot of city-dwellers won’t even own a car. A farmer in Wisconsin may have 4 vehicles (work trucks, etc).

It would be interesting to see where all the private vehicles are in the US.

(Quote)
Schmeltz Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:02 am

Late to getting this thread but here’s my thoughts none the less.

I’m a bottom line kind of guy so here’s the bottom line with Bob Lutz as I see it. Whether you agree or disagree with what he says is for the most part irrelevant. Because what he is doing (on the forefront of the thrust of the EV revolution) is parallel to what we are doing and where we are going. The Volt is what we have in common with Bob Lutz, and together we all want it to succeed. Who really cares if it’s for different reasons? I wish him well.

(Quote)
RB Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:16 am

#134 Herm responds to koz
#121 koz Says:
This will be the third time I’ve posted this analyses of expected fuel efficiency for range extended mode. John1701a and other doubting Thomases, please feel free to criticize.
…………………………………….
Herm resonds — It is a waste of time to do these calculations, we just dont have enough data to be even close to a real result.
==================================================

Herm, you are mistaken. There is uncertainty, but it is within a narrow range. The calculation of koz may be within 2% or off 20%, but they are much better than wild guesses. The power of the equations is that the problem is subdivided into parts, so if one disagrees, it has to be (and can be) focused on a particular step or value.

(Quote)
Juan Francisco Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:27 am

Forget global warming. It is global pollution that is killing thousands of us. Nobody doubts most pollution is man-made. Argue global warming to deflect us from the real problems.

(Quote)
Just an Intern Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:31 am

Just wanted to point out the Prius transmission (why use quotes, Herm, it is a transmission) provides a “direct” connection, i.e. mechanical, to the wheels all the time. It is actually at highway speeds when its function as an EVT or power-split device becomes inefficient due to the high electrical losses (Prius gets good highway due to Atkinson and Aero). Of course, this disadvantage can be minimized by 1. not using the electric path much at hwy spds, and 2. good engineering of ratios to put the engine at a good speed at hwy spds. Herm, it just sounds like your saying the trans “locks-up” in a fixed gear like a manual, which is not true.

Series and 1 Mode power-split hybrids all have a disadvantage at highway speeds, and both require good system level design to make them acceptable.

There is also a lot of discussion as to which is more fuel efficient when the Volt engine is operating (CS). Hands-down, the Prius will *probably* win. That’s what the Prius was designed to do: operate with the engine running, and it’s lighter. That said, we’re comparing apples and oranges by comparing two different philosophies. The Volt philosophy is: Gasoline is evil and it must be avoided as much as possible, even if that means inefficient gas use later. Inefficiencies won’t matter if you’re using much less over all, and in that 30-40 mile range, Volt has infinite mpg. Prius philosophy is: Smart but necessary gasoline usage.

I don’t know which philosphy will win out. Probably some compromise. GHG and limited fossil fuels need to be considered. My guess is that if GHG becomes more important, we’ll see more Prius-like designs b/c of good well-to-wheel efficiency. Or, if fuelling sources become more important, we’ll see more Volt designs b/c of the diverse electric sources. Hopefully long-term we take care of both GHG and fuel sources.

(Quote)
Gregski Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:33 am

My father in law is about 57 years old and set in his way like a MOFO. Lutz is 77. You expect change from him, don’t hold your breath.

He says the Volt not only represents GM’s commitment to change but call it “the first generation of an electric vehicle from GM”

um… did you forget the EV1 Bob? How convenient.

“If you look at most of the mainstream media, you get the impression that 95 percent of Americans today want a vehicle like the Chevrolet Volt or a [hybrid such as the] Toyota Prius,” says Lutz. “And that, by God, the reason General Motors is in trouble, is that we have not offered a vehicle like that…”

CORRECT

“… But when you look at the reality, at today’s fuel prices, most Americans still want a conventional car.”

I paid over $3.00 a gallon when I filled up this morning Bob, THREE BUCKS and it’s still going up this summer.

Listening to this guy talk about the future of electric cars [while his company is filling for bankruptcy] is like listening to a hippie talk about a haircut!

(Quote)
Just an Intern Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:37 am

Daily Driving Distance Distrubtions:

http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/downloads/AXP_FHWA_driving_stats.pdf

Just in case anyone wants to see how many people drive how far. I think all of the data in this document came from 2001 NHTS.

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:38 am

@ Herm 134

Diesel contains at least 17% or more energy by volume than US regular gasoline (which is currently 10% ethanol). Why do you call at least a 15% improvement in efficiency insignificant?
Source: US DOE

Also, diesel is currently much less expensive than gasoline.
Sources: US EIA, AAA

The threads on this site are often amazingly fact free.

“People talk about diesel and other high efficiency range extenders and it just does not worth it for the same reason. Insignificant oil savings..”

(Quote)
Guido Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:45 am

Juan Francisco Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Forget global warming. It is global pollution that is killing thousands of us. Nobody doubts most pollution is man-made. Argue global warming to deflect us from the real problems.
————
Nah – you’re the one trying to distract. The question is whether carbon dioxide is a “pollutant” on the same level as carbon monoxide, NOX, Freon, and mercury ( for example ). Last I checked, ALL plantlife on earth disagree with your trying to lump CO2 in with the others. Long-term historical data show CO2 levels LAG warming periods – or do prefer we not use facts in this discussion ?

(Quote)
Gregski Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:59 am

# 88. Dick G.

Eye Eye sir!

(Quote)
Lwesson Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:14 am

LauraM#98 Gee, when I studied Earth Science back at the old University of TX I settled back and enjoyed the MOST humbling FACT that massive ice ages swept up nearly like clock work covering areas with miles of ice and then retreated with, ta da!, GLOBAL WARMING. Get this, many times there were NO people and other times ONLY Stone Age types that would be frozen thawed out and turned into GIECO cavemen and lawyers.

Case study by, get this again, by actual real live scientists vs dead ones, indicated that we Earthlings are due for a rather large ice event. Core samples indicated that before ice age conditions that there were spikes in temp going way up before plummeting. You should hope that we DO NOT have a real ice age. The warming of the planet is simply EARTH mechanics at work and not really us really “important” humans.

Frankly, here in hotter than Hell Tejas, I dream of skiing in the Hill Country and having a White Christmas every year like I did when I lived in Colorado. My land and house here in the former Republic will skyrocket in value as hoards of Yankees will be whistling Dixie looking for someplace to NOT die and be covered with miles of ice. I will be glad to remind them about the War of Northern Aggression as I take their money.

Oh! Canada. Forgot. They will be here too. They will have to drop their ridiculous Centigrade temp. and all the rest, relax and have a real pint. LOL! eh!

I rather suspect that the big issue of all the carbon tax scam is to control the economies of the world and bring the ever naughty Western Civilization under the bridle and loving whip of a new world order.

I am most interested in less pollution. While being a product of the Oil Industry, I am committed to giving the public a choice on what fuels their transportation. The VOLT is a leap in the right direction as are the TESLA, FISKER and others.

What many on this site seem to skip is that the Oil Industry has a real vested trillion $$$ interest in continuing the status quo. The related industries that make oil work are also deeply concerned about, well, keeping their means of making $ and keeping their jobs.

Wall Street also makes trillions on using oil in speculative trading and The Middle East is a big sand box and ONLY due to the energy beneath it’s sands is it a world player. Great! Crazy people with lots of money!

These interests will not quietly go into the night.

There! Now I have sinned on numerous levels and the Climate Cult dressed in Snuggies among others will come calling.

The boys, Zeus and Apollo are waiting.————-Higgins

(Quote)
Larry McFall Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:19 am

We need the VOLT! now. It is in-deed the time for GM to keep the pressure on the development of the VOLT. 10,000 vehicles the first year is the prediction for 2011 production at $40,000 a copy. I guess that is not to bad but GM has produced first year junk at a higher rate than that.

If GM would get some production models out to the dealers, they might get some pre-orders of the Volt to help secure the commitment. I was really hoping that the first year cost would be more like, $30,000 with the possiblilty of a good warranty on system and parts that will probably be improved by feedback of the results of the first year models.

Will, I am on GM’s team for the production of the VOLT so let us go forward and upward!!

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:22 am

Bob is right on the money. The first 10000 Volts will go in a flash. Hopefully this will lead to lower retail prices and I’ll get one in the second round. (I’ll still buy Gen 1 assuming I can get one!)

Bob has said time and again he doesn’t believe global warming is people driven, not that it doesn’t exist.

So he’s an old motorhead and he likes Camaro’s and jets… he is totally consistant with this. The only inconsistancy I see here is that he is grudgingly coming around to electric drive. The man is 77 years old, he’s entitiled to be a bit set in his ways.

#121 Koz, Well thought out. I expect we’ll have more solid numbers soon to work this out.

I will NOT buy a BEV… No Extender, No Sale

(Quote)
Dan Frederiksen Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:34 am

global warming is a crock…
how is it even possible to be this stupid at this point in time as a leader in a big car company????
sure he’s 77 and a small step away from taking his place in hell but that’s no excuse. that just means he had a lot of time to improve himself but didn’t.

I’m a christian and therefore a pacifist but I could see some irony if he was hit by a Ford F150 or a Chevy Suburban. Hell hath no fury like God fresh out of patience with these republican shitheads.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:42 am

# 134 Herm, you are absolutely right, they picked a lightweight existing small engine to keep costs down. (Yes #48 Rick a 1.4l is a small engine …) since most driving will be done with the engine off anyway keeping the weight and cost down is the right way to go.

#147 Lwesson, By decree of your Canadian overlords your Water will boil at 100c and freeze at 0c and you will like it! BTW our Pint is based on the British gallon so it’s bigger! (I’m willing to bet the metric beer thing was a joke… they are funny in the mountains you know!)

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:51 am

There is more truth in what Bob Lutz says than most of us are ready to admit. I personally don’t need a Volt type vehicle. I do see the need for one for the future and for GM to be a successful auto company. I agee with Bob Lutz about global warming. It is a crock. But having said that, I want to do everything I can to help keep our air and water clean as possible to give my children and grandchildren a better future. That is why I want to see cleaner automobiles hit the market place. But it is not just the automobile that does the polluting. Al Gore needs to fly commercial. That would help a lot. How about it “Polluting Al”?

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:53 am

#150 Dan Frederiksen, “christian’s” like you are the kind that made me re-evaluate religion as a whole. You come across as a self important jackass.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:00 am

Bob Lutz? LOL. I thought that he had retired already. So how is what he says relevant, except as a window on the “executive” mindset which has brought GM to where it is today? Bankruptcy court.

This interview sounds like it might have been done 6 months or a year ago. Did they have it in the drawer and pull it out to fill some dead space in the paper?

Next case.

(Quote)
maharguitar Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:05 am

Image and public perception is everything in the car business. If people only did the bottom line cost benefit analysis we would all be driving Yarises, Fits, and Cobalts. Farmers, Ranchers and Contractors would be driving F150s.

Companies like Mercedes, BMW, Cadillac, Lexus, would not exist. These kinds of cars make no sense financially. Except, there is more to a car than getting you from point A to point B. People will pay a lot of money to “make a statement” about who they are and how they want other to perceive them.

The stats on the Prius and the Hybrid Civic are very close to each other yet more people bought the Prius. I think that is because the Prius looks like a hybrid and the Civic looks like a standard econo car. You don’t get any brownie points for driving the Civic.

In that sense Lutz is correct. If you do the math, the Prius doesn’t make sense. Neither will the Volt. The purely emotional aspect of owning a “green” car is enough to carry the Prius from novelty to mainstream.

So, if your goal is to move yourself down the road as cheaply as possible, get a Yaris. If you want to lower our dependence on foreign oil or save the earth from global warming, get a car that uses the least amount of fuel regardless of the price.

The main reason people will buy the Volt is that, for a few years at least, it will be a babe magnet.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:10 am

#153 MuddyRoverBob:

I dunno, I kind of liked it.

I certainly can’t claim to be a Christian, but our mother did drag us to Sunday School for years before she finally gave up. I remeber all sorts of cool Bible stories about the Lord smiting people, sending floods, fires, swarms of locusts, and all sorts of imaginative ways to punish those who made Him angry. Didn’t he turn Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt?

Maybe He could turn “Maximum Bob” into a pillar of salt. Might help him to keep his mouth shut.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:37 am

#141 Just an Intern Says:

It is actually at highway speeds when its function as an EVT or power-split device becomes inefficient due to the high electrical losses (Prius gets good highway due to Atkinson and Aero).

……………………………………………

I put quotes around transmission because it does not switch gears, no clutches, no belts or torque converters.. pretty ingenious device. I thought little electrical power was used by the two motors at highway speeds, yes they are spinning but the engine is providing all the torque to the wheels, do you have any links with this information?

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:38 am

#156 Noel Park, I suppose I should have just turned the other cheek, eh? I just can’t think of any place other than a church where I have been treated as badly so I tend to react strongly to this sort of self important crap.

I still think Bob was right on the money about the overall market though. Most people would rather have a Camaro or Hummer or (insert favorite cool car or truck here) than a gas miser car. Having said that I do want a Volt for commutting duties. I might still get an old Porsche 911 as a weekend toy though. (One ends up spending more time polishing this kind of car rather than driving them anyway!)

I will not put my wife into a BEV, too much risk of running out of ‘go’, the Volt solves this delemma.

(Quote)
Koz Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:45 am

John1701’s #123

“I have yet to see anything since before the switch to the larger engine. Non-electric consumption remains a complete mystery.

SMTD”

Did you read my comments or think put any thought into the scenario. The power consumption of the car is independent of which ICE (or other range extender) is used. I’ve been trying to explain this to you for a long time. This is what is meant buy the ICE is “decoupled” from the motive power. The ICE doesn’t directly drive the car. The car uses the same power regardless of the power source. Does this make better sense to you now?

#135
“Remember the EPA revisions last year? Your estimates are missing those same factors the EPA hadn’t included.”

The EPA schedule is the EPA schedule. It has not changed. Now, you are correct in that they how apply some correction factors. The new sticker MPG #’s reflect this, but the that does not affect what the results will be on the EPA schedule. It will affect what the sticker says. If you want to adjust down for this, then you could apply the percentage change in Prius rated mileage from 2007 to 2008. This adjustment will be very close to what the actual affect on the Volt’s mileage will be.

(Quote)
Guido Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:00 pm

Dan Frederiksen Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:34 am
global warming is a crock…
how is it even possible to be this stupid at this point in time as a leader in a big car company????
sure he’s 77 and a small step away from taking his place in hell but that’s no excuse. that just means he had a lot of time to improve himself but didn’t.

I’m a christian and therefore a pacifist but I could see some irony if he was hit by a Ford F150 or a Chevy Suburban. Hell hath no fury like God fresh out of patience with these republican shitheads.
———–
What makes YOU so sure that global warming is a given, and it is caused by man ? Did the Lord tell you this himself ? If the case for this assumption is so crystal clear, why won’t AlBore debate anyone on the topic ? Why did he see it necessary to present so many erroneous facts and misrepresentations in his movie on the topic ? Why wouldn’t AlBore take any questions during his congressional testimony ? Why have the last two years been so much COOLER at a time of increasing CO2 emmisions ? Note that I am not at all against reducing all man-made pollutants in a prudent, reasonable manner – but YOUR ( BHO ) mesiah wants to dismantle our economy in the process with poorly-thought crap-n-trade legislation. I’m pretty sure that MY Mesiah would be disapointed if we didn’t use a little more critical thought before jumping off such a sheer cliff.

(Quote)
Shawn Marshall Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:00 pm

Global Warming – man made, to be specific – is not a crock – it is a religion of the pseudo-scientific and a large amalgam of academic charlatans looking for grant money. Somehow GE and AL Gore have been fantastically successful in duping this nation of uncritical thinkers, folks so ready to impale us all on the sword of green wave hysteria. If you believe in man made global warming, must you not support nuclear power with all your heart and soul? If not, should you look in the mirror and ask yourself just exactly what it is that motivates you.
Kudos to Lutz – he is not a fool.
Your take Lyle, on Lutz’ frankness about the Volt only highlights your own green agenda. The Volt must be successful economically and strategically and not be based upon the chimera of global warming. This illusion will dissipate of its own vagueness, has already in fact; is this what you greenies want for the Volt?

(Quote)
Koz Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:33 pm

RB #127

I appreciate your input.

1. You might be right but 25% seems low considering the Prius’ ICE is rated at 37% max efficiency. Considering the Volt’s ICE will be kept at or near max efficiency, I think 33% should be close. It will be interesting to find out what it turns out to be.

2. Unfortunately this won’t help out. I didn’t reduce by 15% but rather what the in/out battery loss will be for that 15% (1- .9 * .9) since this is loss that plug generated energy doesn’t see.

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:35 pm

@ Shawn Marshall 161

Methinks you are missing a more important truth, which is real world consumer preference, backed up by hard sales numbers. Here’s a picture of a recently discontinued Chevy model. Look at what the license plate says. Who’s eating who?

http://image.truckinweb.com/f/8436535/0805tr_01_z+2006_chevy_kodiak_4500+front_view.jpg

(Quote)
Koz Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

Statik #130

You read that entire rant? That’s scary.

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:44 pm

Here’s another discontinued GM model, an action which will not change GM’s overall CAFE mileage not one iota, but does get rid of some efficient diesel offerings for real working trucks.

http://mdt.volvospeed.com/images/topkick_gmc_kodiak_C4500.jpg

GM knows how to do the two step, but do they always have to be backwards? Meanwhile, where’s the new, fuel efficient product line that’s 35 years overdue?

(Quote)
Koz Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:52 pm

Herm #134

It is only a waste of time if the assumptions cannot be reasonably made or are made unreasonably. What was done unreasonably?

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 1:50 pm

Electric drive is chocolate. Clean diesel engine/generator is peanut butter. Turbo is high speed frosting. Put ‘em together and you have a haul a$$ off the line, instant acceleration response, go like stink off roadin’ big load-haulin’ gem of a luxury smooth and quiet redneckmobile Dakar crossover. It just accidentally happens to be really efficient, too. If the Opel Ampera gen II doesn’t have performance/diesel options, Europeans are going to know that they are being rooked.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:04 pm

EVO # 167

If diesel is a more expensive powerplant and Europe’s commutes are much shorter, what is the point of the greater expense when Amperas will have a 64 Kilometer AE range?

(Quote)
Jim Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:19 pm

Lutz says consumers won’t recover the premium they pay for a hybrid system in fuel savings.

How short sighted do you have to be to think that fuel prices are going to stay at this price indefinitely? Gas will be $10/gallon in my lifetime. Without Voltec technology travel will be limited to bicycles and electric scooters.

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:30 pm

Jeffhre

Plain old consumer preference. About half of all vehicles currently sold in Eurpore use diesel, even though the engine is more expensive (though the fuel, by energy content per volume, is much cheaper) and commutes are shorter. A model with an ICE offered without a diesel option is half a model in Europe. Maybe if you can show Europeans that electric drive torque is like strong diesel torque, that’ll keep them happy?

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:51 pm

#170 Evo
I hear and understand what you are saying about the diesel cars in europe. My wife swore we should buy one after renting a few when travelling in Europe. There is really only the Jetta TDI here in NA that is anything close to reasonably priced. MB and BMW have diesels as well but priced out of most budgets.

BUT, in a car where the engine should rarely run why would you want to drag around the heavier more expensive diesel engine? The lightweight all aluminum gas 1.4l seems to be a good choice in this case. Most of the time it should simply be there as the backup plan.

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:54 pm

@ Jim:

You mean superbikes? Electric scooters and bicycles are so last century. I mean, everyone who’s anybody already has one of those.

http://www.ttxgp.com/

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:57 pm

Yes there is strong preference. I’m sure that would warrant some kind of cost benefit analysis to try since the Voltecs represent GM halo vehicles.

When I first heard of the Volt concept I thought that diesel or even nat gas options would be good, but for most people this would make such a slight operating difference that I don’t know if it would justify the development costs.

The amount of gas used and the ICE engine operating hours would seem to fall off a cliff compared to most gas burning cars using the 40 mile range to it’s best advantage.

Look at a 100 mile commuter like Rashid Amul. Although he says the Volt would be perfect for his wife’s shorter commute, if he could actually charge a Volt at work, then he literally cuts out 80 miles of gasoline driving every workday .

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

#171 MuddyRoverBob

That’s a great question for the Europeans on this site.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

#171
MuddyRoverRob

Thanks, you said it much better than I could have.

(Quote)
EVO Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 3:19 pm

jeffhre & MuddyRoverBob

Thank you for your patient explanations. I’m still worried about what Europeans think, though, and remain unconvinced that some opportunites aren’t there for future vehicle generations.

I’m simply pointing out what European consumers will inevitably ask, when they compare the Ampera to the excellent performing, highly efficient diesels they already have.

I’m offering up a solution – show them that electric drive torque is like diesel torque, only stronger off the line and smooth as silk, and they’ll get on board. A high speed slow motion film of an electric vehicle side by side off the line with a diesel in first gear as the diesel manually takes up the accelerator, puts in in the clutch, shifts, lifts off the clutch and then puts in the accelerator again ought to do it. If the diesel doesn’t add much for efficiency or performance, then let them know that a turbo diesel generator for electric drive is like putting frosting on frosting (some will still want it).

In some configurations, though, it’s obvious that diesel + turbo + electric drive offers very high performance with its efficiency.

Doubt it? Keep watching the 12 hours of Sebring.

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 3:52 pm

GM needs to work harder on getting high quality, high reliability cars and trucks that LOOK COOL to folks in HIGH SCHOOL.

That age 16-25 demographic is important. I bet a lot of people tend to make judgments about particular car manufacturers based on their FIRST cars. A lot of times, high school kids buy used cars. Cheaper cars … often 4 cylinder cars that MUST get good gas mileage. High school people don’t have a lot of money to blow on gasoline you know … so they end up getting the 4 cylinder cars. Some parents won’t let their 16 year olds get the big 8 cylinder muscle cars with 250+ horsepower either … even if they could afford it.

So … bottom line, that first car IS important. If a 16 year old guy gets a 4 cylinder car and it runs good, has decent performance and it rarely needs expensive repairs … that’s likely to make him want to buy again from that same manufacturer once he gets out of college or gets a good job promotion. Only this time, it’ll probably be a car with a bit more luxury and have better performance … but he still wants that reliable, high quality car and the peace of mind like he had with that FIRST one.

I think Toyota and Honda have been focused on that “first car” market for the past 20 years and they’ve made some good impressions on people. GM needs to make sure they are in that “first car” segment of the auto market. Award winning cars that get the good reviews on the internet, Consumer Reports, car magazines, etc.

Even though GM might not make huge profits on the smaller 4 cylinder cars that the high school folks drive, it’s important for the cars to be really good. Why? So those young drivers will have a positive feeling about GM cars and KEEP COMING BACK once it’s time to get rid of the old car and upgrade to a new car (or newer used car).

GM needs to make sure ALL their cars and trucks have a consistent quality, reliability and that “cool factor” for the exteriors and interiors. In my opinion, this is what GM needs to do to become the premier car company in the world. Not just in sales but also in REPUTATION for well built, high quality cars. I’d rather see GM have that excellent reputation for the quality of their cars than huge sales.

The average Joe on the street needs to think that if he gets a GM car he’s probably going to be happy with the purchase, no matter if it’s a $16,000 economy model or the highest end Cadillac or Corvette, etc. He’ll know that GM engineers worked just as hard on designing a car for a 16 year old high school junior as he did for a bigwig at some corporation.

(Quote)
DaveP Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:05 pm

I can certainly understand Lutz’s feeling bittersweet about the loss of gas powered performance cars, but what I don’t understand is why he isn’t more excited about the prospect of electric performance cars. The prius is a (performance) dog. The Volt is not really very performancy either. Even the Tesla is but just a tiny fraction of where electric performance will ultimately take us all (think 600-700hp, 2000ft-lb torque).. At the rate things are going it might not happen in his lifetime. But maybe instead he’s lost the hot-rodder modder spirit.
Other long time “car-guys” sense this. Csaba Csere was thinking along those lines months ago:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/columns/c_d_staff/csaba_csere_the_steering_column/fearless_prediction_plug_in_hybrids_will_be_the_hot_rods_of_the_21st_century_column
Personally, being a fan of AWD performance (think WRX) I favor the idea to add a second motor to the rear wheels of a Volt.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:25 pm

#176 EVO
There is absolutely no doubt in the performance ability of a modern diesel.

I see your point too, there is a generation of “Euro’s” who have grown up driving diesel because it’s less expensive. Gas cars are almost a curiosity and mostly perceved to be for the ‘rich’ and are certainly not ‘green’. Maybe that is a bit of an exaggeration but it is close enough. There certainly were many more diesels than gas cars when I was there.

Somehow the message of only buying 20l of gas once a month (or possibly less) needs to be shared in a very clear manner.

Maybe get Hammond to say it’s good, then Jeremy can make a few ‘green’ jokes and then it needs to do decently well around the track with the “Stig”. (Send the Volt SS version with the sticky tires (tyres)

(Quote)
detfan Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 4:56 pm

The 150 mile range will probably end up not being accurate. . . . more like 400!!

http://thefutureofthings.com/news/1122/nanowire-batteries-to-hold-10-times-more-power.html

(Quote)
eightjack Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 6:08 pm

Koz Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 12:52 pm

Herm #134

It is only a waste of time if the assumptions cannot be reasonably made or are made unreasonably. What was done unreasonably?
________________________________________________________

Each time you make an assumption, there is an unknown potential for your number to be in error. Perhaps a small error, or perhaps a larger one (the likliehood of small vs. large is of course based on info. we dont have: that’s why an assumption must be made in the first place). So if you only need to make a single assumption to reach your conclusion, and you are smart, your chance of being close to correct may be fairly high. But with each additional assumption, that chance dips lower and lower. Since you are making six or seven key assumptions (based on no actual data) the chance of being numerically close to correct at the end of your chain of reasoning is almost nada. Therefore it’s a waste of time.

(Quote)
jbfalaska Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 11:02 pm

And, so? Lutz believes this is an environmental drama. Personally, think Bob Lutz is living the world he was raised in. And so am I. My world was in the military, spent two decades protecting oil for ever wealthier shiekdoms.

Bob, call in marketing. This is far from just a Green issue. This is no different than freedom fries during the War. We have to do this. We’re running out of Oil and our country more than any other is addicted by cars like the Camaro, Corvette, and Great Big SUVs. The Sauds just came out and said with China continuing to grow, along with India, they are expecting $200 per barrel of oil within 2 years with even a modest economic recovery for the globe.

CHEVY VOLT: American-made, American FUELED.

(Quote)
koz Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am

eightjack #181

Thank you for the in depth analysis of probabilities. I would have never have known that. They are not wags pulled out of thin, but rather performance numbers from existing similar components (see references in my original post) and one guess from GM engineer’s statements.

1st Ass.: 33% average efficiency for Atkinson I4 in Voltec configuration
2nd Ass.: 95% efficient generator
3rd Ass.: 15% generator energy through the battery (only guess based GM engineers statements on gwnerator function)
4th Ass.: 90% efficiency for battery charge/discharge of generator through battery energy

So, my question now to you is what do you think are the quantifiable range of errors for my 4 (not 6 or seven) assumptions? Plus only the first 2 are significant unless GM completely changes their control philosophy of keeping generator energy from cycling the battery as much as possible.

(Quote)
eightjack Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 12:41 am

183
koz Says:

eightjack #181

“… They are not wags pulled out of thin…”

What is a wag pulled out of thin?

“So, my question now to you is what do you think are the quantifiable range of errors for my 4 (not 6 or seven) assumptions?”

I don’t think ranges of error for your assumptions ARE quantifiable. That’s kind of the point. You are guessing at efficiencies, then adding it all up and shouting Ta-DAH!
Any of your guesses might be close, or it might not. But it would be pretty amazing if you guessed four in a row correctly.

(Quote)
koz Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 6:55 am

eightjack

“What is a wag pulled out of thin? ”

Getting the feeling this was rhetorical but anywho…wild a$$ guess with no reasonable basis

“I don’t think ranges of error for your assumptions ARE quantifiable.”

Really? The efficiencies of generators that are reasonable for this application aren’t known? The efficiencies of ICE engines aren’t known? The ones available on the market certainly are.

That’s kind of the point. You are guessing at efficiencies, then adding it all up and shouting Ta-DAH!

Actually I wrote “Based on above assumptions for Atkinson ICE energy efficiency and Volt’s stated energy use…”. I didn’t say or wasn’t trying to imply that my analysis provided a definite answer for the Volt’s range extended performance. Rather, I was pretty explicit in encourage others comment on the process and refine my assumptions. You are evading the issue of the reasonableness of the guesses. They were referenced and the numbers were real. GM certainly won’t be using the same exact components but ICE’s and generators are mature technologies. Comments about Cd’s, CdA’s, Volt will be 15% less than Prius, and MPG’s based on past ICE-only car experience were a waste of time. My analysis was an attempt to start a discussion based on reasonable assumptions. Challenging my analysis or my assumptions would have been a valid and mature response but flippantly dismissing my efforts as a waste of time is just rude and arrogant (not to mention ignorant).

(Quote)
J. Muchagrove Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 8:35 am

Lutz is a putz. Another old ostrich-dinosaur with his head buried in the sand.

(Quote)
Eco Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 8:37 am

I live by the creed that God protects the stupid.

If ever there was proof, this is it.

Despite the wants and desires of a spoiled child of the boomer generation, somehow, some way, circumstances guided an unwilling heart to make a decision that will change the lives of hundreds of thousands, and then millions. For the better.

He will eventually be known more for what he never wanted to do, than the sum total of everything he actually wanted to do.

(Quote)
Lwesson Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 9:48 am

MuddyRoverRob———Seems my defense of ONE aspect of Lutz’s thinking on “Global Warming” stirred some conversation.

Per you dictat on Centigrade—> Now why must we subvert the human experience to a system of measure that is alien to that experience? You will be visitors after all.

Far more logical to have temps approaching 100 being logically HOT and those approaching 0 as being COLD, for bio creatures, humans that is. Now if I were a robot and I’m not allowing as to what I might actually be though I am looking for Sarah Conner, robot logic temps for robots would embrace in their metallic, crystalline microprocessor sort of way, Centigrade measure. 100º would be boiling and for a robot kind of hot and 0 simply cool and good for the olde processors. Same goes for more of the metric tirades against the human experience. Funny, the metric dictators have stolen some sizes from the English so as to be not so asinine ridiculous to humans. Sky Net has some understanding. LOL!

Right you are on the Imperial Pint! Praise be! And NO, in Nelson in ‘97 it was some Lilliputian glass and I got two of them!

Cheers!——–Higgins — Here boys, some stout!

(Quote)
BenHead Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 10:53 am

The thing is, from what Lyle has said about his test drives, this car is no slouch. It might not bust out of the gate like the new Camaro (though electric cars certainly CAN, as Tesla shows) but I bet it’ll handle at least as well. Electrifying the automobile by no means automatically kills its performance. If anything they can be more easily made to perform better – that’s expensive now, but won’t always be. Honestly, it makes me glad people other than Lutz are in charge of things, now.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 11:23 am

Lwesson,

I agree with Statik (#130) that I don’t want to get into a global warming discussion. For one thing, although I’m familiar with the basic arguments, I’m not an expert by any stretch, and I’m not qualitifed to argue about it. That means, I’m going with the opnion of the vast majority of the experts. Especially, since none of the counter-arguments that I’ve seen sound very convincing–at least to me. It is possible that they are wrong. However, personally, that’s not a risk I’m willing to take.

However, since you asked–yes, ice ages are regular occurrences. And, yes, things heat up in between ice ages. It’s a question of degree and how fast. And we are heating up extremely quickly in terms of historical global climate change. Also, usually, the carbon increase in the atmosphere happens as a result of the already naturally occuring global warming. (And intensifying the effects.) Here, it’s preceding, and causing the heating.

Also, we are straining at the ends of basically all our global resources. The glaciers around the north pole are getting smaller. We’re reaching peak oil. We’re running low on clean water. We’re eliminating the forests at a frightening rate. We’re overfishing the oceans. (The average size of tuna and sea bass has gone down considerably.) Mercury and other contaminants are showing up in fish. Lead is showing up in the soil in people’s gardens. The coral is dying. Frogs are dying right and left and no one can figure out why. Ditto for bees (and they’re actually a crucial part of our food chain). The American chestnut is endangered–and not because of logging because they’re dying. How can all of this not have an effect on the climate? Or a long term effect on human health?

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 11:52 am

#188 Lwesson
Heh heh.. I’ll leave the Metric issue smoldering but it has never made any damn sense to me that water froze at 32 degree’s…

Skynet is definately a tough nut to crack.. I finally got out to see the new movie on the weekend. It is certainly built for another movie… It was all right though.

A pint is ‘large’ and a glass is ’small’ I’m betting your bartender in Nelson simply didn’t have any pint glasses clean! (a nice town, my kids like a particular chocolate shop there)

(Quote)
Lwesson Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 12:44 pm

LauraM#190 Yes, a sticky wicket! But I do make query if there really, actually, is a bullet in the chamber??? Opps, it’s an single action AUTO! Not goode for Russian Roulette you know. Do we need to turn the Western World economies and the people’s pocket books and liberties inside out in a police state for a, just in case there might be a bullet that we can’t really do ANYTHING about as it is a bigger Earth/Sun, just changing AGAIN, issue?

As the ice cores that have been taken… dramatic temp fluctuations were precursors to rapid global cooling. As per global ends, I seem to recall a cheery someone who gave like dire predictions of running out of everything, a 19th century dreary fellow actually. Bees are now at a holding pattern. Lead was banned in fuel but… Coal fired plants dump radiation, lead… so where is the push for real large energy sources like fusion, fission and yes solar. Like I said, $ and the people who depend on carbon fuels will not quietly pull the trigger or walk away.

I’m all for Das Volt by Gov. Motors and others but I still find the notion that the dramatic dynamic forces of a planet and the Sun, (forgot that the Sun is doing some strange NO sunspot activity ie chilly World), that humanity is anything more than a pin prick. WE are well able to destroy the economic infrastructure with fear and dictatorial Orwellian “management”. yes we can.

MuddyRoverRob—– the whys of Fahrenheit have some logic and that is just a GOOGLE away. Living/surviving in a tiny temperate zone of Centigrade does not, for humans that is. 32º is manageable but 0º F is rightly a challenge. Have frostbite to prove that but that was but the puny human flesh! LOL!

Regards all!———Higgins—humm, the boys are barking madly, I wonder why?

(Quote)
willdryden Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 1:58 pm

DonC Says:

As for the math needed to give a first approximation of the EV range for the Volt, you act like there is some big mystery. There isn’t. As you should for every EV using a Li-ion battery pack, take the battery back size in kWh. Multiply by .7. Divide by 250.

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Where did you get the 250 figure? Both the Rav4-EV and the EV1 got 6 miles per kWh at 30 MPH. The Rav4-EV got 3 miles per kWh at 60MPH where the EV1 got 4 miles per kWh because of better aerodynamics. Most conversions get 1.5 to 2 miles per kWh because of the poor quality of parts available and expense of the better parts in lots of one.

The figure they are basing their calculations on is 5 miles per kWh for the Volt. Although the Volt will have a 16kWh battery, only 8kWh is usable in EV mode. I suspect GM is figuring a 50% freeway/ 50% city street average to get this and hoping the Volt will do as well as the EV1 on the freeway. The way you drive will infuence this so, as with all cars, your range may vary.

(Quote)
Don Says:
June 9th, 2009 at 4:16 pm

Lutz is so out of touch with the common man that he doesn’t get it. That picture tells it all . . . you know how much fuel that fighter jet sucks down? Massive amounts. He doesn’t even think about it. He does not understand what $4/gallon & $5/gallon gas does to the average person.

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

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

Bob Lutz and GM Ambivalent About the Chevy Volt

194 Responses to “Bob Lutz and GM Ambivalent About the Chevy Volt”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts