In our last post we had a live chat with Jon Lauckner GM’s VP of global program management, who along with Bob Lutz is co-creator of the Chevy Volt.
He took some significant questions from readers here and some other sites. Key information is as follows:
Price
GM has never officially told us what the Volt will cost, although about $40,000 is most frequently cited in the press. Lauckner once before indicated we would get an official price about 6 months prior to launch, or May 2010. In this most recent discussion he now refined that to “3 to 6 months prior to start of production.”
Battery Thermal Management
Lauckner confirms the lithium-ion battery will be kept at “20 to 25 degrees C.” In the cold, grid power will be used to warm the battery when the car is plugged in. If that’s not the case the ICE would go on at start to generate heat.
Future Generators
For now the Volt will use a gasoline/E85 engine as a generator, though Lauckner confirmed for the future GM is considering HCCI engines which they have been developing. These are ultra-efficient combustion engines that use extreme pressure rather than spark to completely combust gasoline within the chamber. Other types of generators are not being pursued currently, and he says he “doesn’t see” using a compressed natural gas generator at least in the US.
Acceleration
He confirmed the Volt will do 0 to 60 in 8.5 to 9 seconds depending in the weight of the payload, and that it is even “capable of squawking the tires.” He reiterates is will feel like a 250 HP V6. This exceeds the 0 to 60 time of the Prius (10.5 seconds) or Insight (11.5 seconds), and the 0 to 30 time difference will be far more dramatic.
All Wheel Drive Volt
Lauckner says while developing this variant would be possible, it is “no planned at this time”
Pure EV
Lauckner denies GM has a plan for a pure electric city car.
Charging
He says in order to utilize 220V charging, user will have to have “hard wired 220 connection from a works box to the wall unit,” that will be avaiable at launch.
Battery Warranty
Lauckner confirmed it is GM’s intention to fully warranty the battery pack for 10 years/150,000 miles.
Launch
Lauckner says Volts will not be sold prior to November 2010, though GM employees and “maybe a few others” will be driving pre-production Volts by next summer. Wonder who those few others might be?
ICE Behavior
Several negative speculations were refuted. He says GM plans to make the car seem as familiar and as much like a normal car as possible. He notes when in generator mode, “most customers will be surprised at the refinement of the ICE.” He notes the car will operate at one of several RPM points, and that none of them are “roaring”. He confirmed Volt will get “much more than 30 MPG” in generator mode.
Electrification of the Automobile
“Electrification of the automobile is here and the trend grows stronger every day,” he said. “We remain extremely committed to the Volt and vehicle electrification.”
“We’re the leaders in it today and we expect to be the leaders in the future,” he added.
This entry was posted on Thursday, July 23rd, 2009 at 7:08 am and is filed under GM Q and A. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:10 am)All Wheel Drive Volt
Lauckner says while developing this variant would be possible, it is “no planned at this time”
Bummer. That is one thing I can say about the Subaru that I love. I will take AWD over 4WD any day of the week, in the snow. Any other time, AWD is just a gas guzzler.
——————-
He confirmed Volt will get “much more than 30 MPG” in generator mode.
I would feel better if he said “much more than 50 MPG”
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:20 am)My question is still the same. When will we be told the rollout plan?
(Quote)
+3
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:20 am)It is very scary that Mexico’s oil fields are depleting, Nigeria’s fields aren’t politically stable enough to attract necessary capital and Canada’s oil sands remain expensive to produce.
Electrification will greatly relieve demand, so the faster we tool up, the better.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:20 am)Lauckner denies GM has a plan for a pure electric city car.
Good idea. Zenn can have that niche market.
Did anyone mention a light pickup truck during the chat?
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:29 am)Thanks Lyle for the informative summary.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:29 am)ICE Behavior
” He notes the car will operate at one of several RPM points, and that none of them are “roaring”. He confirmed Volt will get “much more than 30 MPG” in generator mode.
To me this is the best part of what he had to say. I thought they would have been crazy to have an ice that only tracked the accelerator pedal so people didn’t find it strange. Even in RE mode the car will be using the ice more efficiently than a parallel hybrid can. I’m impressed GM
(Quote)
-1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:40 am)If need be, GM can easily convert the Voltec technology for a pure electric. Just a software change that is more likely already programed into it.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:47 am)I was worried about the ICE tracking the accelerator too. I just hope the MPG in RE mode is right up there with the insight and prius.
I would like to know how much acceleration and load will affect the battery range and MPG.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (7:51 am)Given the high cost of replacing a battery pack (either in the Volt or a BEV), it was good to hear that the battery pack would be warranteed for 10year/150,000 miles, and at the end of life, it should still provide 40 miles AER.
Apparently the battery pack can then be used in a stationary application to store power from a solar/wind source or as a “peak shaving” mechanism (store off peak power to use during peak hours).
Since the battery is key to making these cars affordable (no midlife $15k replacement cost), GM seems to be on track.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:04 am)“Expensive to produce oil” will only accelerate the creation/adoption of electric vehicles… so it’s a good thing.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:05 am)Absolutely. I really want to go electric but I also love my Subaru.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:08 am)I am really excited about the Volt, though I fear it will fail for 2 reasons, both of which could be easily
First, GM is not doing any mass education of this vehicle. Execs from Ford, Tesla, and others are slamming the Volt with incomplete information that if you took just what they say makes the Volt seem like the dumbest idea ever. GM needs to speak about the Volt and educate the public that it isn’t limited to 40 miles, and that it doesn’t rely on only the generator’s power output once it has gone 40 miles as that has a big difference in the performance you would see once you have the generator kick in.
Second, I’m sure that GM is going to launch the Volt in California like most car companies do and only move it to other markets if it does well there. I think the Volt would do much better in the mid-west. I know I’m already saving up money and plan to plunk down cash when the Volt is available, but I don’t think it will be in my area for the first model year – or more.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:10 am)Makes me wonder if the dealerships understand what the Volt means. Too many dealerships survived on repairwork. [insert] [rant about horrific personal experience with GM reliability and cost-of-ownership][end insert]. With the Voltec drivetrain, there SHOULD NOT BE anywhere near the level of repairwork to sustain too many dealerships.
In five or six years when you first adopters are lusting after a newer Volt, I’ll buy your 2010 or 2011 version, repower it, and drive it another 150K. And the expensive part will be warrantied for all my 150k.
I think that this is the underlying reason that the dealerships were doomed anyway. The model of spending ever-increasing portions of your income on car transportation is, hopefully, over.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:12 am)Agreed. Seems like every manufacturer is coming out with golf-cart-city-cars. These are not mass-market solutions, just desperate attempts to grab some halo-dust for the brand. Unfortunately these tiny, low speed, low range electric vehicles continue to do damage to the public perception of what an electric car can be: Volt, Tesla, etc.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:16 am)Alternate generators: I’ve thought that a turbine would be ideal, but assumed the cost is the problem. Anyone have any real data? Seems like a great opportunity for GE—a microturbine sold in the millions.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:21 am)I read somewhere that NEVs have a top speed of 25 MPH..
I wonder how far the Volt can travel in AER at 25 mph?
(Quote)
-11
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:22 am)(click to show comment)
+5
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:28 am)Missing from that list of “Key information” was the most important update:
…my getting Lutz’s pink tie
“Jon Lauckner: Hi Statik, still working on getting Bob’s pink tie…”
——
Actually it was a really good chat, he shot direct and gave out lots of good and useful information.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:28 am)Will I be able to do a regenerative brake torqueing burnout? Just kidding, but squawking the tires will be cool. I doubt a Prius will do that.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (8:29 am)Micro turbines are noisy, never happen. But smart to hear they tooting the horn on diesel-pressure-style engines. There is a real revolution in ICE/CE design as the gas and diesel engines become more and more alike.
(Quote)
+9
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:01 am)Just an update for you all… Up here in central Alberta Canada… I don’t expect to see a Volt in my driveway until at lease 2012 – 13.. So till the Volt arrives…. I picked up my 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid two days ago… $34,000 (Canadian) with decent options, a truely exciting and configurable dash/display.. I noticed that the body details are different from the standard Fusions… nicer headlights, tail lights and exhaust tip …etc. I have only driven about 380 KMS (mostly city with various speed limits ) so far but, with the 28 C weather… I am giving the car a true milage test as in the climate control (and yes the is one for the passenger too) is set at 16 C. …. Headlights on… stereo… all the options that can be used with regular driving. I am driving this week with a reasonably heavy foot (while allowing for the break in period and not abusing the car). So far I am averaging 48 MPG (Canadian)… and this is with the car not broken in and using all the options.. I have had stretches where I have actually driven close to 2 KMS at a stretch strictly in EV mode ( at around 65 KPM). So far… I am very impressed with this car..
The Volt is going to have to better priced and have better milage when in generator mode. The Fusion Hybrid is a bigger car, lower priced and ( I expect ) better milage… (for someone who drives 150 – 250 KMS every day) So far… I give it 5 Stars..
(Quote)
-2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:01 am)It may be limited by the software to 40 miles.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:02 am)I’m guessing you missed the bit about the Volt being sold in Europe as well.
GM is doing a global rollout.
And if showing up on David Letterman with a prototype in tow to correct public misconceptions about the car isn’t sufficient, I’m just not sure what they’ll have to do to please you, but there’s a danger in over-hyping the car 16 months before it’s available.
(Quote)
+6
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:05 am)“But the latest profit comes because of a $3.4 billion gain due to debt reduction. In March Ford swapped stock and cash to reduce its loan and bond debt by $7.7 billion.
Without special items, Ford would have lost $424 million, or 21 cents per share.”
On the other hand, GM is now debt-free.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:11 am)I think the “mass education” will takes place as they get closer to launch. Meanwhile sites like this are costing GM nothing and the grass-roots word is spreading. They won’t need mass knowledge until they can mass-produce which will take a few years.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:14 am)Efficiency is also an issue with turbines. HCCI is the best way to get extreme mileage in the range extending mode, if you dont mind the extra cost and heavier weight, similar savings as a diesel.. advantage is that you dont need fancy diesel emission treatments. GM has experience with HCCI.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/08/26/abg-tech-analysis-and-driving-impression-gms-hcci-engine/
I think this will take many years, there will not be a lot of urgency to spend the money to implement it. A cheaper solution would be a standard ICE running with ethanol E85 but at high compression.. but that has fuel availability problems.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:15 am)@BillR
“Apparently the battery pack can then be used in a stationary application to store power from a solar/wind source or as a “peak shaving” mechanism (store off peak power to use during peak hours).”
But who get’s the battery at this point? You? The “Muncipalitites”?
Personally I would like one at the trailer park for your mentioned purpose.
That would be cool.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:18 am)As Grat said, paper profit is meaningless, cash is king…cash tells the story in the auto business.
Inside those numbers is ’special items,’ specifically a 3.4 billion dollar gain on a ‘debt reduction’…which basically was Ford spending equity to pay off a debt on Ford’s balance sheet that they couldn’t get re-financed (thats the real bad news). Technically, they ‘bought’ a profit, lol.
In reality, Ford itself lost around 400 million on car operations, and 1.1 billion in cash from continuing operations. However, because they can’t service/re-fi their debt, Ford/Ford Credit is hemorrhaging multiples of that number to pay their obligations which are rapidly coming due (I believe they have some more issuences, and notes coming due early in the new year for a few billion…too lazy to look up the actual number)
Here is Ford Credit’s balance sheet this quarter ended versus Dec 31st, 2008
Cash and equivalents 11,881 vs 15,473
Marketable Securities 7,760 vs 8,606
http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2Qfinancials09FordCredit.pdf
The debt is coming down as well, as they are forced to pay things off with actual cash rather than re-financing, but their debt is in the hundreds of billions…cash not so much.
In the past 6 months, Ford has lost 5.6 (plus, plus) billion in cash, with 21 billion left in the kitty (and that 21 billion includes the 10 billion dollar credit facility they maxed out before it got pulled from them).
Page 1 of the PDF for cash refernce total, and loss of 5.6 billion for first 6 months of the year:
http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2Qfinancial_release09.pdf
Normally, you could probably peg out the ‘end of days’ for Ford to come around next spring. However the DoE’s ‘loan’ of 5.9 (plus round 2) allow for more cash shuffling, and more ‘credit fancy dancing’ reports like this one, that blurr the true state of Ford and let them not own how bad the problem is, or the reality of their eventual bankruptcy. (same as GM did).
With the DoE money, Ford probably can probably stretch it out 18 months or so now to the end of 2010, but in no way did Ford come anywhere close to the reality you represented for last quarter, that being 2.8 billion profit.
GM had those exact same accounting anomolies on their way to oblivion themselves, here are some GM Volt threads about GM’s quarterly successes:
GM Posts Quarterly Profit
March 14th, 2007
“… it is encouraging to see that GM appears to be making a turnaround. If they play their cards right with the Volt (and it appears they are), it could catapult GM to a top tier international position”
http://gm-volt.com/2007/03/14/gm-posts-quarterly-profit-q4-2006/
GM Posts Nearly a Billion Dollar Quarter
July 31st, 2007
“GM has something to celebrate today, as everyone may know by now, they were able to post a profit of nearly 1 billion dollars for the second quarter of this year, 891 million to be exact.”
http://gm-volt.com/2007/07/31/gm-posts-nearly-a-billion-dollar-quarter/
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:18 am)You need to look at the burn efficiency and conversion. Turbine’s are less efficient that standard ICE. In the middle of the two is rotary with the more difficult SMOG specs.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:20 am)My Subaru Brat was one of the best car’s I’ve ever owned. I loved that little thing and it was still driving like new at 160K miles. I really liked popping it into 4WD when needed. I hope I enjoy the Volt as much. From everything I’ve been reading, I think I will.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:20 am)I can get my Prius to squeal – a little, when the roads are wet.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:24 am)That’s the future of this site. When Volt’s start rolling off the line, we’ll be the one’s pushing the electric mode as far as we can. I can see my driving habits changing from hyper driving on gasoline to hyper driving with in electric mode. Since the Volt is being designed for the average driver and 40 miles of range, I wonder just how far it can be pushed with hyper driving? Of course, as mentioned, hyper driving an electric car is going to be different than a gas powered car.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:25 am)“I just hope the MPG in RE mode is right up there with the insight and prius.”
I continue to believe that GM has a pleasant surprise for us, here. I’m hoping it will leave the nerd-shoes back in the pack.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:27 am)The irony of it is a bit striking isn’t it?
We want to go electric but love our AWD.
(My Subaru has 220000 km and counting, bought new.)
Here in the great white north AWD is a big deal for winter.
/Of course it’s 31c all this week here in Calgary and almost NOBODY has central air in their homes.
I’m almost looking forward to winter right now!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:30 am)FYI: Tesla test drive is a range anxiety nightmare. But hey, if you can afford one… who cares.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124629044888368573.html?mod=yahoo_free
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:31 am)And let me add my thanks for a good concise summary, Lyle! Unfortunately, I’m tied up on all-day conference calls nearly every day, including yesterday, so missed the event itself. However, if I’d had the chance I would have asked Lauckner to elaborate on the Volt’s “transmission unlike any other (paraphrasing Lutz from a blog months ago)”.
…..it’s my belief, as others here will recall, that “making driving the Volt as normal-feeling as possible (paraphrasing comments by Andrew Farah)” almost demands that it will (when a driver pulls over into the oncoming lane on a 2-lane road to pass, for example) literally LEAP FORWARD to reduce the passing time —as virtually ALL cars with automatic transmissions have done for over 50 years. I also believe this “passing gear” effect could be achieved by either electronically switching the traction motor windings or momentarily increasing the motor’s drive current(s), or both. [Of course, pedal position & vehicle speed sensing could control this "passing gear" effect ....as well as allow the Volt to reach 60 mph from a standstill in say 6 secs rather than 8.5-9 secs!] I really hope GM actually has this mysterious “transmission” up their sleeves as a surprise exclusive to the Volt for car mags and would-be purchasers to rave about!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:39 am)Somewhere around May next year if I were to guess.
Does that sound about right guys?
That’s 6 months prior to production start.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:41 am)Call me crazy, but the last thing Voltec needs is a heavier, more expensive engine unless they push into full sized trucksa and SUVs. Efficiency, cost, and weight are of equivalent importance IMO. This comment was a dissapointment and I hope he held back for strategic decisions. The next generation EREV sedans and small trucks will not be using diesel, HCCI, or Otto ICE. It may be still with Atkinson but I would bet the successful companies will move to a new low weight, low cost, and reasonably efficient power plant.
(Quote)
-19
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:45 am)(click to show comment)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:46 am)Sure, adding weight and cost makes hella sense.
(Quote)
+5
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:47 am)I think that limiting the AER to 40 miles is pretty unlikely. It is most likely that the ICE will start up when the battery is at a certain discharge level. There is no reason to arbitrarily start the ICE at 40 miles.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:47 am)Funny… my AWD subaru (non-turbo) refuses to squeak the tires…
Way too much traction.
I think I just decided I want a Volt-back… please consider this a request…
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:48 am)Statik:
Is there any way or senario you could foresee Ford not having to run through bankruptcy in the future? I ask this because they seem to have a planned rollout of some potentially strong vehicles in the coming 12-18 months, (looking at Fiesta, new Focus, un-named EV, new Taurus, etc.). Additionally, they have scored some market share at the expense of GM’s and Chrysler’s bankruptcies, consistently scoring high with J.D.Power & Consumer Reports, and the good favor of taxpayers for not taking a bailout–yet. In short, they are basically doing everything as well as possible. What else could they do to stave off bankruptcy?
(Quote)
-20
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:48 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:49 am)That sounds great!
Congratulations on your new toy!
I’m still planning on holding out for my Volt (AWD???) but the Fusion is high on the alternatives list.
(Quote)
-14
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:52 am)(click to show comment)
-11
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:53 am)(click to show comment)
+3
Jul 23rd, 2009 (9:55 am)I was very pleased to read Lauckner’s comment in yesterday’s chat, “We’ve already announced the Opel/Vauxhall Ampera, which is coming to Europe in 2011″!
I’ll be seriously considering a trip to Europe in 2011 to pick up an Ampera, tour the “Old Country” for a few weeks, then have my new car shipped back to the US. I LOVE the gorgeous, highly-distinctive Ampera styling —in fact, I feel the Volt will have very tough competition on its hands in Europe!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:00 am)I’ll take a MUCH less expensive Volt thank you very much!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:03 am)Heh heh, Adrian my friend you ARE consistant!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:08 am)What do you have in mind?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:10 am)As noted in #1 – My major concern around his comments was:
He confirmed Volt will get “much more than 30 MPG” in generator mode
What’s up with that!! – 30 is a LONG way from 50! I half expected a comment around “greater than 40″, as I was guessing it would get 43-45, as some folks have done the math, and gotten numbers in that range…
But, “much more than 30″, come on! – That sounds like “high 30ish” numbers to me – 37-38? I’m mainly interested in highway numbers, and 50ish for a Prius was my bar – I’m willing to give some, to support the Volt and EREV/BEV concepts – and I had resigned myself to the mind-40ities – but in the 30ities?!! Seems like that design goal got SORELY missed..
Each update, the goals get “downsized”, we’re basically up to $40K, (with $7.5 back from Obama), the concept style is gone (OK, I realize the 22 wheels had to go), and now we get high 30’s for highway EREV mileage. Only thing that’s really remains from the original goals are the 40 AER, and 10/150K on the battery
Perhaps I just grumpy today, but high 30’s really struck me… As per #15, the Fusion is going back on to my alternative list.. And I’m getting more serious about an A123 conversion on a 3rd generation prius..
Time will tell at late 2010, and I’ll hold out with my 1994 Camry (which gets 31 highway with its 4 cylinder) until then…
That’s just the first time I’ve seen at 30’s number for highway EREV mileage, and that one really pains me…
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:14 am)Absolutely.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:17 am)This is one of the few real questions left, isn’t it? I tried to ask about the transmission obliquely because when I’ve asked it directly it never gets answered. What I asked was how many wh/mile the Volt used during the US06 drive cycle. Since we have the wh/mile figures for the City and Highway drive cycles, and since we know that the transmission uses a single gear, if you have the wh/mile for US06 you can work backwards, estimate the drive train losses, and reach some conclusions as to whether the transmission is truly spiffy.
Note that the wh/mile for City and Highway are identical, which is a little unusual. Also note that this is one of the few things that Bob Lutz has ever clammed up about.
(Quote)
+5
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:17 am)SOMEBODY bought a $20000 plasma a few years back so that I could buy my 42″ screen for $1200.
Maybe it’s my turn to be an early adopter.
As Red Green says, “We’re all in this together”.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:20 am)I agree Gsned57 about the ICE “not roaring”. Granted, we will need to see/hear a final production vehicle to confirm for ourselves, but I was glad Laukner said it anyway. The PR flack would have been devastating to the project as a whole.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:20 am)“Lauckner says Volts will not be sold prior to November 2010, though GM employees and “maybe a few others” will be driving pre-production Volts by next summer. Wonder who those few others might be?”
—————————————
“Wonder who those few others might be?” —- Lyle said with a sheepish grin as he finished hard wiring the 220 line in his garage.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:22 am)The question if you check was asking…
—————————————————
Comment From Steven Schrier ]
Could you clarify a recent report from Detroit Autoline which said the Volt’s gas engine comes on loudly at very high rpm and the Volt may only get 30 MPG when the gas engine is powering the car after the initial 40 mile all electric range is used?
3:07 Jon Lauckner: I think most customers will be surprised at the refinement of the ICE. It will operate at several RPM points (not roaring) and the charge sustaining fuel economy (gas engine on) will be much more than 30 mpg.
—————————————————
He answered the question like it was asked.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:25 am)I can think of a few small farms that would love to get ahold of a few of them!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:25 am)its possible they will allow the owner to use the full 8kwh of capacity.. it could be done by just measuring (easily done) how much wh has been used so far…and calculating what the current pack capacity is as it ages.
If the Tesla can get 400 miles of range driving at 17mph with a 53kwh pack then the Volt should be able to do about 86 miles. Assuming a lot of things of course.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:26 am)Don’t look into the “much more than 30 MPG” quote too closely. The phrase could mean anything between 40 and 100 MPG.
Remember, though, how much of your daily driving is going to go past 40 miles anyways? Or are you going to say that the Volt’s range goal is going to be “downsized” to 20 miles?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:27 am)GM’s own promotional material disagrees. It clearly states that a direct mechanical link is more efficient than converting from motion to electricity then immediately converting the electricity back to motion.
53.9 MPG is my average as of 3,988 summer miles… which recently included 50 miles of kayak transport on the roof on my 2010 Prius.
How Volt will compete with a “much more than 30 MPG” in generator-mode estimate poses a huge challenge for supporters, especially now knowing that the lithium-ion battery-pack will be kept at “68 to 77 F degrees”. That means the engine will run more often than many cared to admit for those of us in the north with lower than expected efficiency.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:29 am)I’m with Biodieseljeep on this one.
The newer advanced combustion engine technology is an excellent was to make a genset even more efficent.
As for weight and cost, well we don’t know that yet, do we?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:30 am)we know it does 66 miles with the US06 cycle, while using 8kwh of battery capacity.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:31 am)That WOULD work out rather well with the end of the mini lease wouldn’t it?
GO Lyle!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:34 am)To gfamanid:
First, no one at all said theICE milage IN the 30’s …
I still think we will see over 40Mpg w/ the ICE..
Much More Important, almost all average VOLT drivers will be seeing WWLL over 125-175MPG (or more) in $$ equivelents, when you factor the ICE in with the EV charges @ about 80 cents/each 40mile charge.
It seems really stupid to completely IGNORE that the car has EV batteries & then just compare the volt ICE-only milage to a Prius or Fusion, & complain…
Even if the Volt had a 25Mpg ICE, Most drivers would still get 100Mpg $$ equivelents…
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:34 am)a cheap mass produced 4 cylinder engine.. dont forget EREV is transitional until batteries get lighter and come down in cost a bit.
Eventually you may see EREV in long distance trucks..
(Quote)
-1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:35 am)Adrian: “the new huge find in North Dakota”
Bakken is not going to save you. The oil is uneconomically difficult to extract. Anyway, I thought you libber-tarian Paultards insisted that oil was “renewable” and the earth was continually generating it faster than we consume it?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:39 am)make it an option.. some people worry about long distance highway mileage.
Maybe they could reduce the size down to 1 liter and thus save a bit of weight?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:39 am)Here’s something for those sugesting a Turbine genset…
Revealed: Velozzi SOLO, a crossover plug-in hybrid with multi-fuel micro turbine technology
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/07/22/revealed-velozzi-solo-a-crossover-plug-in-hybrid-with-multi-fu/
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:40 am)Seems like if you’re OK with 33 mile EPA AER at 150,000 miles, then just keep going till the wheels fall off as the saying goes!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:43 am)I have always been foggy on how the mpg will be calculated for the Volt. Does anyone know the formula the EPA intends to use? I don’t get anywhere near 100 mpg when I calculate the mileage. How will this be done?
sidenote to Lyle: Maybe this would be a good future thread topic?
(Quote)
+3
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:43 am)Yep.
The same kind of failure as the Prius starting 10 years or so ago.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:43 am)Congratulations.. that is about the same cost as a Volt after the tax credit. For the miles you drive a classic hybrid makes more sense than a Volt.. a Volt specializes in under-40-miles-a-day driving.
Why did you choose the Fusion over the Prius?.. size?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:45 am)slow down a bit on the higway until you get your 50mpg.. it may not be much, just a couple of MPH
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:45 am)Lyle
Thank you for bringing us Jon Lauckner’s question and answer session. We had a good number of our own ask some very good questions. While Jon had to skip around and answer like a politician it was interesting just the same. We did get to confirm a few things and he left us with some things to think about. Thanks to you and all who participated. Look forward to more later.
And here’s hoping one of those others riding around in a pre-production Volt will be you and myself. I know you deserve it and I would love to do it. I have the time, money and desire to do it.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:48 am)Absolutely!
EREV is almost a no-brainer for heavy trucks!
The Volt needs to hit the roads first but I can see heavy trucks coming in not too far behind that.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:49 am)I think around May 2010 sounds about right. Lyle may know a little more, but be unable to say.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:54 am)Government properties rarely actually “fail”. They more typically get brutally ravaged by their more financially savvy and opportunistic, partners contractors and customers and tenants. After which government normally sells the assets for what seems to be a ridiculously low price (not called an actual loss though) and promises all around not to be in a situation like this ever again, and or a thorough investigation and blue ribbon commission.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:55 am)We have beaten this one to death!
Of course we’re up for another round though!
CJS and I have spoken on this one at length..
He thinks the battery should be disconnected to test the genset, I think the battery should simply be run to depletion and then the tests run.
As for the combined… well THAT one is tough.
There are those who could go months without exceeding AER.
I personally expect that a few days a week I will exceed the AER which is why I like the Volt in the first place. It can be an everyday car without compromise.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:57 am)That WSJ review is good, here is the money shot:
“But an electric car that steals your sleep, compelling you every sunrise to rip out its plug and run away for no reason, is proof that automotive passion is still strong.”
(Quote)
+8
Jul 23rd, 2009 (10:59 am)Adrian,
While I don’t agree completely with all you said, I do agree the U.S. has enough available known oil reserves already to serve our needs for many, many decades. That does not count areas a little further off our coasts that could be explored. The problem is two-fold, to put it simply. 1) When the oil companies look at producing oil in these known fields they have the problem of purchasing very expensive leases from the U.S. government along with the high cost of actually bringing the crude to market versus the much lower cost of importing oil from foreign sources. Which do you think the oil companies and the other entities who purchase on the world market would do? 2) Most of the known reserves on land and offshore are technically off-limits by presidential order and by congressional action. As crude oil prices rise only the second of these two will be a detriment to bring to market our reserves. It is a known fact that the U.S. has more available crude oil available to us today than all the reserves in the Mid-East, Iran and other areas in close geographically. I work for an oil company and I have been in discussions on the availability of crude oil and the problems associated with drilling and marketing it.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:00 am)Technically GM can adjust the MPG by simply adjusting how much power to draw from the batt pack for additional “Power Assist”.
So lets say GM knows how the test is run. They know when it’s least efficient for the genset. All they would have to do is set the computer to deliver more electrical power from the batt pack to assis in power delivery to the motor. If they allow this for the duration of the test then I bet they can deliver even more than 60MPGe.
Now one has to ask in the very common scenario that if I drove to Disneyland, after the freeway 40AER after 200miles of driving, what is my MPG?
Need more Kahlua now…..
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:02 am)The unknown factor in the fuel use question is how much more efficent an engine running at idealized speeds is compared to an engine with has to cover a wider range.
I’m REALLY curious to find that out!
This is NOT to put down the new prius, even though it doesn’t appeal to me there is no disputing that they have done a good job with it.
Since the question specifically ASKED if the mileage was better than 30 mpg, the question was answered correctly.
Taking things out of context isn’t good for anyone.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:07 am)Here’s what I don’t get. How does Toy/Honda/Ford get away with their batt pack on a 10/100 warranty? Granted they are smaller but why does GM have to work so hard on their batt pack to meet this?
I have conceded to the “Just leave the batt pack attached” config.
Just leave it in there because it is “By design”.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:12 am)I hope they have a number of things “up their sleeves” to wow all of us. They are going to have to do something that helps take the sting off the $40,000+ price and the lack of availability for several years. Here’s hoping.
(Quote)
-1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:12 am)You seem to have a number of “issues” which are beyond the purview of automotive engineers.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:16 am)Yep,
This is the classic it gets more complicated the more you look at it scenario!
Since I’m not Amul and don’t drive all the way across the country for my commute, day to day I’ll burn little to no gas at all.
For ’special’ trips like Disney I KNOW I’ll burn some gas to get there, (It’s roughly 27 hours driving from my house…) but since I don’t do that every day I don’t have a problem with burning gas to make that trip. (I’m betting on a ~50 mpg average in extended mode… OK and I fly when I go to LA…)
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:20 am)Why do you say this? Seems impossible. US06 is a very aggressive cycle. That would be one phenomenal transmission! Maybe you’re confusing this with something else?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:20 am)John,
You may very well be correct about the Volt successfully competing with a vehicle like your 2010 Prius on a miles per gallon basis when the ICE is running. But overall mileage per gallon with the Volt should (and I say this hopefully) far exceed the Prius when you factor in the miles driven in EV mode on a daily commute of less than 40 miles round trip. It does not take many days of commuting with no gasoline to far outstrip what any year model of the Prius can match. There is just no real comparison between a Volt and a Prius. Not taking anything away from the Prius because I think it is a great car (almost bought one myself). But all things considered, the Volt is a much better purchase – based on what we all know about it at this point in time. When it is released and we know the real truth, this may change some, but I suspect the Volt will still be superior. IMO…
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:26 am)huh?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:26 am)I still wonder if GM is pricing in the cost of a replacement battery in the cost of the Volt. If so, I can see no reason why the Volt would not be profitable to GM from day one or in the very near future (maybe after selling a hundred thousand or so to help recover development cost). Has anyone at GM said one way or the other about this? I know we have had some discussion about a replacement battery cost being included in the cost of the Volt in previous discussions.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:26 am)It’s great that you’re getting over 50 mpg. FWIW the GM web site more or less says the Volt will get 50 mpg in Extended Range mode. That’s probably a pretty good benchmark.
I don’t think you need to lose any sleep the Volt competing with the Prius. Many Prius owners will suffer “Volt Envy”.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:29 am)GM makes a very small pickup truck that’s sold in Asia. I heard it costed more to ship the truck to the US for display at an exec meeting than to buy the truck… It probably has an exceedingly tiny possibly diesel engine, but it can haul stuff and probably gets great mileage.
GM should bring it over.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:31 am)I doesn’t matter how many decades of oil are left in the ground in the US when you can only pump it out so quickly, most of the fields in the US are old fields and they don’t produce nearly as many barrels per day that would be necessary for use to consume only domestic oil.
This is the thing many people fail to understand, we can have 1000 years of oil left and it doesn’t matter if we are limited by the amount of oil we can extract over a given time period.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:31 am)grat,
I saw that Letterman show where Bob Lutz tried to correct what Letterman had said on an earlier show about the Volt. Letterman never really gave Bob time to really get to the meat of each attempt before he was launching into a joke or breaking into what Bob was saying. Bob Lutz probably only completed one or two compete sentences longer than five words before Letterman was interrupting. It was not a very good place to get correct information out about the Volt.
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:34 am)The fact that it’ll be a money loser for GM doesn’t mean it’ll be a failure.
In regards to the price point: It uses NO gas. This is the first mass-market vehicle capable of that. I’m sure the early batches of vehicles will be sold out to people who recognize that possibility.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:35 am)John, I have a 2005 prius I recently took a 350 mile each way trip. 1 kid and a few bags in the back, My 70 lb dog in the hatchback area and my wife and I up front. On top of the car I had the dog crate (3 inches thick folded down) and a large duffle bag wratchet strapped as compact as possible. I drive about 75 MPH on the highway and had the cruise on most of the time. I averaged 27 MPG on the way up and 23 MPG on the way back. I realize that aerodynamics play the biggest role in the prius getting good highway MPG and my speed in addition to the stuff on top of the car is my reason for the poor mpg.
As for my normal driving with my prius (which I am very happy with by the way) I commute 7 miles all highway (75mph) too and from work. In the winter my milage is about 33 mpg and in the summer I get just over 40. What pisses me off most about my prius is that when I drive the little amount it takes me before I get on and off the highway, the engine is almost always running because it needs to heat up the catalytic converter before it’ll do any AER. So at the point where it’s warmed up I’m now on the highway and don’t get any AER.
I think the prius is a very well thought out car and does pretty well but I’m expecting the Volt to get higher MPG in RE mode.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:36 am)You may be correct. With GM’s announced production volume schedule all the Volts they produce will be purchased as soon as they are available in a showroom. Assuming it is a successful vehicle by doing what GM said it would do. After several years as production volume increases marketing and word of mouth will help sustain sales. There is no marketing better than having someone you know and trust show you his Volt and expand on its virtues to the point that you can’t wait to get down to the closest dealership to purchase one yourself. When that happens nothing but bad follow through on GM’s part can stop the Volt and its siblings from taking over in the automotive world. IMO…..
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:37 am)“But who get’s the battery at this point? You? The “Muncipalitites”?”
At this point, since you are purchasing the entire Auto, I imagine you own the battery and can choose what use you put it too.
However, some power companies will be willing to purchase the batteries with ~10 kWh of capacity to help reduce the cost of replacement of battery or auto…
(Quote)
+5
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:40 am)Let me ask you, Adrian, did you say the same thing about the Prius when it was announced and in its initial production? Or is it just that you hate GM and what the Volt stands for? What cause are you “fighting” for with your negative comments. If you have a case to make for a competitive product come on out and say it in the clear. Stop these negative out-burst or just shut the heck up. Now that is certainly “IN MY OPINION”. Take it for what it is worth.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:44 am)bro…
Carriage Return and Lne Feed or better, the enter key after a sntence would be nice.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:48 am)I think you are correct in what you said about the dealerships. At this point many of them are clueless. Some of the dealership’s owners and top managers may know enough to only see the Volt as a new vehicle to sell while the salesmen, on the average, don’t even know that it is coming. Certainly most dealerships make a lot of money on service as they do selling new cars. I have no idea which is their best profit center. Probably depends on the dealership.
We don’t know yet what kind of service GM is going to require to maintain warranty status. It may be similar to a normal vehicle or more expensive. We just don’t know. We think we know it should be less, but I am not so sure of that – yet. Time will reveal the true figures. I can’t see GM doing something that would severely impact their dealers as more electric vehicles are produced versus normal ICE vehicles.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:48 am)I think that’s the way it will go too… basically viral marketing!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:48 am)Ford has done a superb job marketing the Fusion, distinguishing it from the other hybrids like the Camry based on its ability to run at much higher speeds before switching out of EV mode. Kudos to the marketing guys (not saying it’s not a great car, but great cars don’t sell themselves).
The Volt will beat the Fusion hybrid on the mpg front but really, the Fusion isn’t competitive with the Prius in this regard. While many cars can serve as substitutes for one another, the Fusion is a larger car and competes most directly with the Camry or the Malibu, not the smaller Prius or the smaller Volt.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:52 am)More than 40 mpg would be great. ‘Much more than 50mpg’ is asking for too much.
But honestly, even if it only got 30 mpg, you would still rarely use gasoline if you plug it in every night and don’t go on long trips. For that rare long trip, 30 mpg is fine.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:52 am)Herm,
Speaking of the HCCI engine, is there any knowledge of when GM is going to have that engine ready for production and placement in the Volt. Certainly seems they would move as fast as possible if it could help increase efficiency of the Volt while in ICE range extending mode.
(Quote)
+7
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:55 am)Is the “GM FAIL” comment because of Fords profit or because you think this may lead to GM’s failure or because you just hope for failure? Make yourself clearer next time. Otherwise, you deserve the negative numbers your comment will acquire. IMO…
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:55 am)Whoa…
On the rest of it though, the average ‘gas’ mileage is going to skew from lows in the 50 mpg range to highs over 200 mpg depending on driving habits/weather/location.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:58 am)Remember, the key to the Volt is the 40 miles of pure electric. This will handle the vast majority of usage. If you regularly travel much more than 40 miles each day, then you may be better off with a Prius.
But on average, the Volt will get MUCH better mileage than the Prius as long as you plug it in since most people drive less than 40 miles a day and thus will rarely burn gas.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (11:59 am)Dealerships live on the service side.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:01 pm)Statik,
Based on your figures or comment, it would seem Ford is putting themselves into a position where they may be unable to continue paying off debts unless they expect sales to increase drastically to help bring in the necessary cash. If sales do not increase and they continue paying off debt like this and they get to a point where they have to ask for government help or controlled bankruptcy (like GM/Chrysler) having made a “profit” would not help their argument for help. Am I wrong in thinking along these lines? Maybe Ford sees a way through this mess without resorting to federal aid or bankruptcy. Surely they are not counting on a sales rebound of that magnitude?
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:04 pm)That’s an interesting point.
GM might surprise us with a lower than expected price announced next May. (I put on my TAG hat there!)
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:10 pm)I send the same congratulations. There is no one vehicle that can satisfy every consumer. Yours is a very good choice as are most of Ford’s vehicles today. Same for GM, generally speaking. keep us informed of your experience. We will all be hoping for a good report. Well, most of us, of course.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:12 pm)What Don said, lol. You got anything on that Herm?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:13 pm)Sorry you are right, Volts range on the battery is 66 miles on the city cycle, 61 miles on the hwy cycle.
“According to Jon Lauckner, vice president for global program management at GM, the Volt can complete six of the 11-mile-long city cycles or the same number of 10.3-mile highway cycles on one battery charge.”
from:
http://gm-volt.com/2009/04/24/the-chevy-volts-electric-range-is-40-miles-in-both-highway-and-city-driving/
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:16 pm)Yes but no, but yes but no ^^
You cannot advertise the volt with a “you get a 180MPG” with ifs and elses everywhere. Keep it simple and concise:
- Electric mode, full charge: 40 miles without gas (no MPG numbers)
- Extended range mode: 50+ MPG
Since Prius seems to have reached the 50mpg… Volt MUST reach that cap as well on ICE mode exclusively.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:17 pm)Nice catch!
I hadn’t done the maths on that.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:18 pm)CaptJack said:
But who get’s the battery at this point? You? The “Muncipalitites”?
Personally I would like one at the trailer park for your mentioned purpose.
That would be cool.
———–
Definitely you as owner of the car would retain the pack. I’m sure 10 years from now there will be some system to dispose of a replacement pack, or to sell it (if it still has value).
I’d be interested myself to use it as a backup/storage system for my next solar system. Today backup energy is a ugly/expensive proposition. Stacking/maintaining/replacing lead acid batteries is not my idea of ideal by any stretch of the imagination. Old Volt packs would likely be very inexpensive and still generally have 10+ kWh usable per pack, which is huge (relatively speaking).
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:22 pm)I think it should be tested EXACTLY like the Prius and every other car is tested.. dont disconect or mess around with anything.
True it will get infinite mileage in both tests but so what?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:29 pm)I thinks its pretty annoying when people term the Volt a “Luxury” Car. In reality, its 10 years costs are in line with the most popular cars in the United States. It will be a very expensive compact… but at the same time, less expensive than all midsize, fullsize, trucks, SUVs, Cross-Overs, etc on the market.
(Also, a “luxury” compact might be the A3 with purchase prices above 30,000 and ~25 mpg in the long run it will cost several 10,000s more than a Volt)
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tYp3o120V7j17FVbJlmoSHA&output=html
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:30 pm)EDIT TO BUMP
(two replies to the same question sometimes lead to the second comment being 50 comments down the page)
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:31 pm)Re: N Riley and second pack question:
—–
Yes, Lutz himself has said that the full cost of a second pack is factored into the cost/price of a new Volt.
Here is the quote I am referencing:
“Longevity is the unanswered question,” Lutz allowed, but he added that simulations have left him optimistic that a lithium-ion battery’s life expectancy will be competitive with nickel-metal hydride, the current standard in hybrids. As a backup, he said, “We’re being conservative on battery life. For our cost calculations we’re assuming each car will need a replacement during the warranty period.” The Volt will have a 10-year powertrain warranty.
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2008/09/gm-exec-volt-ba.html
Sidenote/fair disclaimer: That was from September 2, 2008, but it was repeated a couple times early this year (Jan/Feb)…so I assume that is still the plan. I certainly didn’t hear anyone say, ‘good news, we are only pricing in 1 pack into the cost now, and the MSRP is coming down by $7,000,’ lol.
It is no wonder priority number 1 at GM is clearly pack longevity/pack maintenance…if they can get even half the packs ‘over the hump,’ I think that would be a great success.
I assume any Volt sold whose battery lasts the 10/150 would be very profitable, and any Volt that doesn’t loses money. Where the split for overall profitability on the project is, I don’t know (probably GM doesn’t have a clue either at this point). But profitability itself has to be based on the success vs failure rate on the pack getting through the warranty period (assuming of course they can sell a respectable amount of copies going forward at 40K-ish a pop)
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:33 pm)Statik – you are always amazing.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:33 pm)There is just no real comparison between a Volt and a Prius.
________________
Why did you do it then?
For that matter, why is GM?
I could understand comparing the plug-in Prius, but everyone seems to be ignoring that reality.
(Quote)
+4
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:39 pm)So ….
Isn’t it a good idea to run the Mid-East dry (and on a quick path to political irrelevance) now and develop American (and South American, don’t forget that new find off Brazil) oil later?
/removing tongue from cheek
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:41 pm)Actually, that’s where it all started. At the beginning, they were going to use the existing 3 cyl, 1.0 L, turbo engine manufactured and sold in Europe. Then at some point the decision was made to upsize to the non-turbo 1.4. I assume that was because they could make on the same line as the Cruze engines at the Hamtramck (spelling?) plant. So there was a potential weight saving, but it was traded off for manufacturing commonality and, hopefully, cost.
Of course everybody knows that weight doesn’t matter any more anyway. Except maybe you and me, that is.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:42 pm)Congrats on the excellent choice, Ray! I was in a similar position 2 years ago, and I made the wrong choice. I tried to get my local Ford dealer to come off his price for the Ford Escape Hybrid, they not only didn’t come off their price, they didn’t act like they wanted to sell me the outfit at all! So I went off in a high moral dudgeon, stopped in to the local Toyota dealer and bought the RAV4 after checking out the Honda CR-V.
Now I am thinking about the FEH’s 33 mpg vs. the 20 or so I get with my RAV4. It dawned on me about a month after I got the RAV that the reason Ford wouldn’t bargain was that they only build 2,000 a month because Aisin refuses to sell them any more CVTs. Ford doesn’t have to bargain, they are selling all they build. And the FFH gets much better mileage than the FEH… I rented a regular Fusion last year and had a great time driving it over the Cooke City Pass into Montana.
Again, congrats on the purchase!
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:42 pm)I think they’re hoping for a major run-up in the stock price if they ever announce actual profitability, which could happen. (And I do mean major.) Then they can do another equity offering and use the proceeds to pay off a substantial portion of their debt. (At least the amount closest to needing refinancing.)
I think it might work. The markets can be irrational. But then again, I’m not nearly as familiar with the numbers as Statik. For all I know that wouldn’t be nearly enough.
Regardless, the longer they wait, the more market share they gain. And even if people are upset when they actually go through the bankruptcy–if they really like the cars, they might give Ford another chance afterwards.
And who knows? They might get actual private DIP financing for the bankruptcy if they wait long enough.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:42 pm)Huh?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:46 pm)What does that have to do with the 2010 model, which underwent several revisions to address those very complaints?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:52 pm)I would think that in the event of a warranty replacement, GM would retain the first battery.
If, 150K miles out, you wanted a new battery from GM, it seems likely that there would be a credit available for your old battery (not too different from the allowance you get for your old Lead-Acid starter battery today, but hopefully more. Any allowance would have to take info account the possible usefulness an owner might derive from the battery itself). GM could then pick examples for diagnostic post-mortems, contract at OEM levels for recycling, or make mass-deals with power companies, or whatever.
It is also possible that (also like lead-acid batteries) there will be many suppliers for these batteries in 10 years, and many more options (such as Gen III-type batteries in Gen I size “T” cells, with firmware update for more AER: As I said once here, “old Volts don’t die, they just go farther”).
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:53 pm)Nope.
I wish I could say something more, but I can’t. They are looking at four times EBITDA (once you get the 5.9 billion from the DoE on the books). On top of that you have plunging revenues, on bad margins (First 6 months of the year revenue dropped 25 billion to 50 billion total).
On top of that, they have all kinds of triggers that require cash, like 11 billion credit due to their VEBA, 10 billion line of credit maturing in 2011, the 6 billion the government just gave them, a couple billion in notes maturing early in 2010….and they have 21 billion left in the bank now (with a minimum level needed probalby around 8 billion), and no credit left.
Ford itself can do nothing to not go bankrupt, it is too late (imo), the only thing they could possibly hope to do is push the ball a little further down the field…they need to raise more equity and do some debt exchanges, and I don’t know who is going to do a debt for equity swap in this economy or with what went on with GM/Chrysler?
I figure if Ford wanted to be a ongoing concern with a ’shot’ of avoiding C11, they would not only have to be profitable for the next 18 months, but cash flow positive in that time, AND they would also have to BANK another 10-12 billion.
I just don’t see it…and why not go through the GSB? What is the downside, it is a once in a corporate lifetime opportunity? Other than having your pride stepped on…but that is a issue for the ‘Fords’ to deal with.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (12:56 pm)Thank’s MuddyRover
I hadn’t seen the direct question and his answer – I feel a little better, about where the 30 number came from.. My “gut sense” is that if the real number is 43 (or 45), then I would have expected his response of “heck, 30, we’re above 40!” – Rather than the the “much more than 30″ – But again, he may have just been parroting back the question..
And per Gary below, I really, really don’t think it’s going to be a number 50<MPG<100, the physics and weight of the car preclude that.. I would be delighted with 50, but I’m resigned to mid 40s and I can live with that. Again, I realize this is ICE mileage after the 40 AER. It’s just for those 300 mile trips, I would like some reasonable mileage above my 15 year old Camry.
Regardless, I had just never seen a 30 number used for for mileage on ICE after battery and that really threw me. Again, I’m not asking for 70’s, but matching a Prius (50ish) or Fusion (45ish) seems to not be asking for too much (IMHO). As for slowing down, that’s not likely to happen either – I want my 45 at 70-75 MPH
At the risk of quoting Buffet (Jimmy), “Only time will tell if it was time well spent”, so we really should know, “the number” about this time next year. I’ll hold my “disappointment” or “delight” until then…
(Quote)
+2
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:00 pm)If I had to hazard a guess: Ford knows it is coming, and they are using the advantage (and good vibes) of not being bankrupt now to gain market share, and more importantly (as Schmeltz says) get as much new/better product out to the market now, with GM/Chrysler fighting to get out of their self-inflicted R&D (and production) coma, before they have to do it themselves
I don’t know the numbers for sure, but I’d guess about 85% of Ford’s product lineup is getting turned over/remade from 2007 to 2012.
It makes sense to me to get everything in place now, max everything out, spend on the future like drunken sailors (if drunken sailors did that sort of thing, lol), and then walk from the debt/obligations in C11 and let the government hit the ‘45 day’ reset button for you…with all your fancy new hotness in place on the other side.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:01 pm)I see a silver lining here, however,
Just because a battery pack “fails”, doesn’t necessarily mean it’s worthless. More than likely, several cells have failed.
With the onboard diagnostics, GM should be able to determine which cells have failed, and replace them. So if your pack is bad, you go to the dealer and get a replacement (refurbished) battery pack. Your old pack returns to the local GM repair center where it is refurbished.
This is not unlike starter motors, alternators, and other components that are bought refurbished for a good price, but the old part is returned otherwise you pay a “core” charge. For the battery pack, the core charge is probably $10,000!
So theoretically, it should be much less than the price of an entire new battery pack to warranty and maintain the battery.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:06 pm)My thinking exactly…
But don’t tell anybody, I want to get them cheap!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:06 pm)Don’t forget that turbines can be made to run quite well over an extraordinary range of liquid (even gaseous) fuels. If you think of E85-capable engines as “multi-fuel,” a turbine in a car could make your head spin.
Microturbines are currently being researched for use by the military (at much smaller sizes than what you would put in a car), so I would tend to think that efficiency conversion experience based on aircraft is probably insufficient.
Remember, the object in a turbofan is thrust, in a helicopter it is mechanical torque, and in current-day “topping” power plant generators, both of these things can be used to produce electricity (generator attached to a turbine stage via transmission, and another attached to a fan which is turned from bypass air on the same engine).
If you add thermal regeneration, and possible thermal conversion, the efficiency numbers could start to mount quickly.
Jets tend to be most efficient when run at a single speed, as in a powerplant; which could be the case in some Voltec-derived scenarios: such as over-the-road trucks.
I recall some of the Granatelli (sp?) brothers’ work in automotive turbines, one of their street-legal cars was almost soundless; for a television appearance, they had to place the microphone almost on the intake with the hood up to hear “jet noise.” They are also very smooth. There would be no need to make “rpms follow throttle” as has been discussed for the Volt’s internal combustion generator.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:08 pm)That’s a legitiamate point, in five – ten years maybe you can get a replacement T-battery from NAPA or the like.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:12 pm)Thanks for the link. I enjoyed reading about the test drive. I don’t ever expect to be able to purchase a Tesla of any description in my lifetime.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:12 pm)Sounds like a plan to me. Go for it.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:18 pm)Of course, the real reason jet engines “took off” (that even made me groan) in air travel was the difference in servicing requirements. A reciprocating aircraft engine is measured in tens of thousands of hours before a rebuild (that’s optimistic), an airliner’s engine is measured in 100s of thousands, if not a million or more.
Those of you who hope for reduced service requirements moving forward ought to be really hoping that someone can make a turbine-genset a reality for a reasonable cost.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:22 pm)Thanks for the excellent explanation as usual. I guess I was naievely thinking Ford could squeak through this, but not in light of what all you brought to the surface. That’s too bad, especially since Ford has gotten a lot of good limelight for being the healthiest patient in the Intensive Care.
(Quote)
+3
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:22 pm)Steve,
The most efficient gas turbine that GE currently makes is the LMS100. It is an aeroderivative (modified jet engine) and its thermal efficiency is about 45%. Its nominal rating is 100 MW (134,000 hp).
Being an aeroderivative, it fires at high temperatures and uses advanced cooling techniques like air cooled stationary and rotating blades. It employs many exotic materials in the hot gas path, and uses a highly efficient, multi-stage axial flow compressor. The inlet flow to this machine is about 1.75 million pounds per hour.
With much lower flow, an automotive gas turbine would have much lower volumetric flow, which lowers efficiency. Think smaller thicker turbine blades, relatively speaking, versus more efficient blades with high aspect ratios (long and slender), much like the wing on a glider.
Add the fact that the exotic alloys are expensive and the compressor section on this small scale is difficult with ~20 stages and variable compressor geometry (actuated compressor vanes) would be complex. Thus, constructing a small gas turbine that can compete with an ICE on efficiency is cost prohibitive.
Thus, at small power grids like an island, the utility may have a battery of diesel engines to meet the load. For larger grids, turbines (steam, gas, and combined cycle) become the main power providers.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:22 pm)This is where the education comes in.
This is one of those rare times where the customer (owner) of a car can DECIDE how much gas they will use by understanding how their new car works.
There is no good agreeable way to guess an average combined economy. Yes, they will publish the extended range rating but then critically they must challenge people to see how well they can do on average.
I think this is critical because it will highlight what is different about the Volt!
“Why only 40 miles electric?”
“Easy… why pay for expensive battery range you will hardly ever use? The law of averages will give the Volt exceptional average fuel mileage.”
I’m comfortable that the extended range number will be very close to 50 mpg.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:24 pm)Saying that most of the fields are old fields and they don’t produce nearly as many barrels per day is correct only to some extent. There are many areas where crude has been found but due to cost of drilling for it, but primarily due to government ban, it is not being produced. Plus many, many fields lie offshore that are banned by government. You make it sound as if the U.S. is running out of crude, but that is not the truth. The truth is that we have vast amounts available, but are not allowed to get to it. And there are expected fields a few more degrees offshore unexplored where most experts expect to find crude and natural gas. Usually if you find crude you find natural gas first. It is not as simple as looking at a glass as being half full versus being half empty. Those who don’t want petroleum products on the market always down plays our petroleum reserves as though we only have the old land-based fields available that were explored and developed 100 years ago. That is just not the case.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:25 pm)Hey, I saw in the news that Chrysler is matching the Gvt rebate. So if your trade quals for “Cash 4 Clunkers” you get an additional $4500 for a total of $9000.
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/daily-news/090722-Chrysler-Offers-to-Double-Cash-for-Clunkers-Rebate/
Has anyone ever purchased on these rebate thnigies? I haven’t. Hell, I’ve sent in rebate crap from PC parts I bought from Fry’s and got jack sh|t back.
Also, I heard in the news the the Blue Oval is saying they will post a profitable month. Really?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:29 pm)By the time Volt battery packs are being retired in large numbers I wouldn’t be surprised if stationary power storage had improved so much that utilities wouldn’t want to bother with the used packs. I certainly wouldn’t count on the packs being worth much.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:32 pm)Thanks Bill, that’s a great explaination!
(Quote)
+4
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:33 pm)That idea has been discussed off and on in the oil industry for over 25 years. “Why not purchase foreign oil as long as it is economically feasible until we are forced to explore and develop the remaining reserves available to us at home”. I am very familiar with this concept because I have always championed it myself. Of course, I and everyone else who did so, was championing a cause that changed as soon as OPEC started jacking the prices up and we saw our national treasure being transferred in bulk to the oil producing nations.
Most of us who champion exploring and producing our own reserves do so now as a stop-gap measure for the next 25 to 50 years while we move our economy to more efficient means of transportation (electricity, for one) and improve our present petroleum burning vehicles to gain the last possible mileage from every gallon of fuel. We must do this in an effort to control our cost and protect our national defense and borders. We should have started a program of more nuclear plants 25 years ago and should have moved to higher mileage vehicle requirements at the same time. But, it is not too late to start now. Problem is I don’t really see any movement by anyone in Washington, DC that is going to help solve some of our more pressing power problems. A lot of talk that never answers any questions and a lot of money being sent down the pike to “friends” that only goes towards wasting another billion here and another billion there. It is enough to make you want to puke.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:41 pm)I can see where I can agree with you on that, Muddy. They may live on the service side, but they “vacation” on the selling side.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:45 pm)LauraM and Statik,
I think you both have valid points. Thank you.
And, Statik, I must agree with Shawn Marshall as comment below. You are truly amazing (at times, anyway). Thanks, again for all your input here. I really do enjoy reading yours and Laura’s comments.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:51 pm)Yes there is an article that claims Lauckner said this. But is 120wh/mile believable? If not then maybe he was quoted wrong or he was talking about using 70% of the battery.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:53 pm)It sounds like they may actually let you get a Volt after all,
lol
(Quote)
+5
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:55 pm)N. Riley,
You seem to be in disagreement with recent statements from some of the major oil company CEOs on the question of reserves.
Seriously, get out and take a look at some of the volumes of data available. US oil production peaked in 1970/71. US production is now down to about 1/2 of that peak. The continent now resembles a pin-cushion and all the easy oil is gone. New oil discoveries have fallen off a cliff for 3 decades. All of the oil reserves you claim are more expensive to produce than the market can support. In the best case scenario, the Bakken will take years to develop and will max out at 200,000 barrels/day, barely one-percent of current US oil demand — and Bakken requires horizontal drilling which is not at all cheap. The offshore oil takes a 5 to 10 years to develop, and depletes rapidly. The offshore reserves are so “thin” that it would take thousands of rigs to achieve a significant overall flow rate. That’s expensive, and we don’t even have the rigs. Oil can exist only so far down (it gets too hot so oil vaporizes as you go deeper) so deepwater oil is in thin deposits that rapidly deplete. Oil companies are not building new rigs or replacing rusting infrastructure because they know we’re in the end-game and production volumes are only going to go down.
Read some of the work by Matt Simmons, investment banker for the oil industry, or theoildrum.com, or simply google a bit. There are some ambitious megaproject tracking efforts going on today, teams of earnest researchers looking for solutions for this coming train-wreck, when the cost of energy finishes off what’s left of the global economy.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:56 pm)I’ve since heard that at Volt Gen II or III there will be a 1-liter engine specifically designed to be an EREV generator (and not a modification of another engine, like the 1.4).
Isn’t the Cruze version of the same 1.4 liter expected to deliver close to 50 mpg using HCCI (and no hybrid components)? I thought the point of HCCI was to have diesel-like benefits at gas-engine-like weights (and using gasoline).
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:58 pm)With will be perfect for a small off-grid farm/Volt charging station
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (1:59 pm)You can do that?!!
What about US emissions / crash-worthiness yada-yada-yada that keeps more efficient European cars (including some made by Ford and GM) in Europe?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:03 pm)Size was one thing.. I like the looks of the Ford better and the instrumentation is in front of you…
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:09 pm)A crushing blow to the last of the brave equity holders, major dilution of existing stock, but a step up from the near total wipe-out of a 39 day government clean-rinse.
Lets start a pool; as you can see above, 39 days is my best guess if Ford ever gets it’s chance to “drive” through the Governments too big to fail cycle!!
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:11 pm)Statik do you use those Bull & Bear noisemakers like Cramer uses on Mad Money, when you are blogging?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:12 pm)Aren’t you wearing a pink tie in your picture?
(Quote)
-5
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:12 pm)If GM doesn ‘t build a fuel cell version of the Volt, it is making a huge mistake.
(Quote)
+1
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:13 pm)LOL! no arguement there!
It has always struck me as crazy that the ’service’ deptartments of most dealerships have such terrible customer service.
This happens at all brands dealers, it isn’t GM (or Subaru or whoever) dependant.
THIS is why people HATE car dealers, when you go in there it’s like playing 3 card Monte when you go to the service desk… You KNOW you are getting ripped off and they don’t care that you know.
It’s a crap feeling.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:18 pm)The traditional negative with turbines is that they are very thirsty.
I’ve been out of the airplane business for a while now so it is possible the new stuff is much more efficent though.
An 300hp or so steady state turbine that was fuel efficent could very well be an excellent genset engine for a heavy truck.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:24 pm)Always good to hear from a parrothead!
We are getting our very own Marguritaville right here in Calgary!
I’m thinking the optimized ’sweetspots’ the Volts genset will run at will give the edge needed to make 50+ mpg in extended mode.
(I also have my overly positive TAG hat on today…)
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:28 pm)More details required, but that is a possibility!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:30 pm)Good question!
It sure would be great if the Volt really is that efficent!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:32 pm)I think the idea of a simple flex fuel microturbine would take auto development symbolically into the new milenium.
Just imagine driving a Volt, quiet and smooth for 40 miles, then suddenly the dashboard lights up and a string of organic LEDs begin their ignite countdown. The OLED’s silently turn off one by one, then the a distinct but muffled turbine whine begins.
With new sound baffling and noise cancellation tech combined with new the interest in turbine efficiency research, you may be on to something there. If not it’d still be a lot more fun than a 1.4 liter 4 banger. And bio-diesel would work well too.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:34 pm)Stream of consciousness…
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:36 pm)Zipdrive & N Riley
Ditto!!!!
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:38 pm)Huh?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:40 pm)hu?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:40 pm)If that is the case then it’s fair and good and should be a SWEET bit for the marketing folks.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:41 pm)He’s alive!
Hello Michael, we were wondering where you had gotten to.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:44 pm)….huh?
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:45 pm)LOL, This was at #19 with no comments between when posted. Now it’s well beyond and below irrelevant. @ 23 and counting.
I still would like to see Lyle to use some kind color system or some symbols to show the age of comments. And maybe some kind of search-able notation that could help pull up comments previously not read.
(Quote)
Jul 23rd, 2009 (2:47 pm)Since they hocked the blue oval I think they should be “the corporation formerly known as…
See Statik and LauraM comments above for great details of the news!!!
(Quote)