AND 
Why the Buick CUV Plugin Will Have a 3.5 L, 6 Cylinder Engine
We recently learned GM will be moving its 2-mode plug-in hybrid drivetrain into a yet-unseen, yet-unnamed Buick compact crossover.
It has been noted that though the standard version of this car will come with a DI 4 cylinder engine capable of more than 30 MPG highway, the plugin version will not.
It will have a direct injection 3.5 L, 6 cylinder engine.
This is the same as the non-plugin 2-mode VUE was to have, though the car was never released. It was engineered for performance, doing 0 to 60 in 7 seconds, developing 270 HP and capable of towing 3500 pounds. The configuration would have achieved about 28 MPG city| 31 MPG highway.
With the addition of the 8 kwh rechargeable lithium-ion pack, GM claims the plugin vehicle can travel up to 10 miles pure EV at “low speeds”, and will deliver double the average fuel economy on the standard EPA cycles. This could amount to about 60 MPG.
Of course, it is logical to think if GM used a more efficient 4 cylinder gas engine and lowered the performance specs, even greater fuel efficiency could be achieved. I asked GM spokesperson Brian Corbett why this was not considered.
Here is his response:
Our hybrid strategy has been pretty consistent over the last few years.
Our GM Hybrid system — the mild hybrid, belt-alternator starter technology — is our affordable hybrid technology paired with smaller displacement engines. Our 2-mode hybrid system is our more capable, premium hybrid technology. It’s goal is to provide significantly higher fuel economy while maintaining the capability of the non-hybrid vehicle’s cargo carrying, towing, etc.
That strategy applies to the plug-in as well; maintaining the capability of a 5-passenger crossover while providing significant improvements in fuel economy. It provides E85 capability, which means it likely will be the first flex-fuel hybrid.
I responded to Brian that I thought anyone looking for plug-in would be looking for fuel economy, that they would like the crossover style but wouldn’t care as much about a powerful motor. I suspected that those individuals would rather get 20% more fuel efficiency in exchange for 20% less acceleration and power.
He replied:
That is probably true for plug-in “enthusiasts” or “early adopters.” But I think the feeling is we’ve got try and get the mainstream public interested in plug-in technology in order to make a meaningful different when it comes to reducing emissions and diversifying from petroleum.
So it seems whether or not most people interested in significantly improving their fuel economy are willing downsize to a 4-cylinder is debatable, especially when it comes to though who desire a crossover.
What do you think?
191 Responses to “Why the Buick CUV Plugin Will Have a 3.5 L, 6 Cylinder Engine”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This 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, 2009I 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, 2009The 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, 2009Link 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, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
August 9th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
Be well,
Tagamet
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:11 am
I agree with Lyle. I want the 4 cyl and the two mode for max efficiency.
GM is right that the general public wants towing capacity and power.
The question is, do these two viewpoints overlap?
Do the people who want towing capacity and power also really want to spend extra for more miles per gallon too?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:11 am
I think the V6 will definitely appeal to a different set of buyers, there is a huge set of buyers that need to tow the boat or the horse trailer and don’t want to burn a ton of fuel doing it. But the I4 would be the better vehicle overall. Build both.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:16 am
I believe a two mode four cylinder would be very desirable to consumers. Sorry, but disagree with GM on this one.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:26 am
I think this is smart. GM should never let their customers think their trucks and SUV’s are under powered. They realize that their larger vehicles will eventually evolve into plug in fuel cell electric vehicles (PFCEV’s) with ample power and unlimited range.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Why wouldn’t they offer both engines and get all the business?!?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:46 am
The 2-Mode transmission is expensive and optimized for higher power drivetrains.. it may not be well matched (waste of money and capability) to a lower power l4 cylinder engine… thats what the BAS+ system is for.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:54 am
CYLINDER-DEACTIVATION is not available with a 4-cylinder engine, which takes away an efficiency advantage of that hybrid design.
ELECTRIC MOTOR SIZE is physically limited, since the entire hybrid system is designed to fit into a traditional transmission housing.
SYSTEM COST is not cost-competitive, due to the added complexity for delivery of towing-capacity beyond Class-II (3,500 pounds).
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:56 am
I am not sure if it would work, but I like the idea of Buick building the 2-mode for the boat towing set, and then building a Voltec/I4 for the soccer moms, with at least 6 useable kWh which would probably give a 24 mile AER without the slow speed limitation, albeit the vehicle with the smaller pack would still not be as peppy as the Volt.
And how slow is slow for the 2-mode’s electric only driving? 35 mph is fair, 45 mph would be pretty nice. Hopefully version 2 would boost that range as the battery gets more efficient. Admittedly, if they build the Voltec Orlando, this would be less important, but spreading Voltec tech across many vehicle types is critical to reducing the cost of the Volt. Bring on Voltec Rangers, Camaros and Impalas! Obviously, it is no easy task to engineer that many different types of vehicles to use Voltec, but GM has built a tiger, they can either ride it or get eaten by it.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Thank you Lyle for being the voice of reason. If only GM would listen. GM has failed to realize the reason the Prius has been a success: MPG is King.
It is ridiculous to think that any consumer will be willing to pay several thousand dollars for a 2 MPG increase (aka mild hybrids). Which is why GM has been left scratching it’s head wondering why they aren’t selling hybrids. Naturally they decide that the reason is that their hybrids look like their regular offerings and not some mutant child’s toy (Prius). How about giving us some real improvement in MPGs?
Now that they have the 2-mode technology and can show significant improvement in MPG numbers, they aren’t going to do it??? Insane. I sure hope the NEW GM can derail this destructive lack-of-thinking.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:02 am
BAS+ is just a mild hybrid, which comes significantly short of competing with FULL hybrids.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:05 am
Honestly, if you really are interested in maximizing efficiency, you wouldn’t buy a Crossover in the first place.
You’d buy a Volt or similar vehicle.
If you want to tow something and still get “good” mileage, then the Crossover looks more like what you’d need.
If you just want to move lots of people in comfort, then a PHEV minivan is a better choice than a crossover. Which is what I want.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:17 am
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the Toyota Lexus hybrid get a single MPG better then a non hybrid Lexus? I’m just saying that this may not be limited to GM.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Rooster,
It might be because GM has been severely criticized for having too many models. Just a guess.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:32 am
jason,
I totally agree with your first two sentences. The last part would imply a prescience heretofore only seen in a few other mfg’s. I’d love to see that kind of long range planning (regardless of where it leads).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:40 am
ziv,
To use your saying, I think that GM has birthed a tiger and needs to raise it well. Gens II, III etc will see how well it’s raised – including it’s breeding to other size vehicles.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:46 am
There is no point for GM to manufacture these vehicles, must less bring them to market as the technology they will utilize is already antiquated & obsolete.
The Serial Plug-In Hybrid is the way to go right now, and these vehicles have terrible mileage.
Why even bother?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:48 am
This is all about market positioning. Buick is being positioned as GM’s Lexus fighter. The Lexus RX hybrid comes with a V-6 as standard equipment and gets 30 mpg hwy and 28 city. It’s all about audience folks. This model is obviously trying to appeal to the Lexus crowd as opposed to the green crowd.
http://www.lexus.com/models/RXh/detailed_specifications.html
Early adopters tend to pay a premium for new technology so this also helps move the two mode technology down stream into future cheaper vehicles. Of course that assumes this vehicle will sell in decent volumes.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:56 am
The days of the huge SUVs are over. It’s not clear at this point but by the time this super-crossover hits the street it will be very clear.
Prediction: The high-hp V6 model will be a very slow selling model. People are just not going to go this way after the next gas price shock (coming soon to a theater near you).
Personally, I think GM should just drop their old hybrid plans and strategies and start from scratch. From a much different perspective of what the world energy environment is going to look like. I know it’s going to be hard to let go and there is always the sunk-cost guilt I think we are already past that. Are we just grabbing on to the last hopes of the past?
GM needs to jump to the future, no matter how scary. This is the time when the company culture is being re-defined. Once you get on a track it’s harder to change. So, the executives and board member need to ask, 1) Are we going to own the future or hold on to the past and 2) Are people going to relax and buy vehicles that are going to cost them over $100 a week to fill up again? Maybe more?
Let’s just look at Europe. Their cars are much more practical (the masses). We are talking about fuel costs that were just a bit high because of taxes. There was no fears of it running out or low. Things have changed. Stop listening to the energy ignorant economists and head-in-the-sand energy CEOs that have to show a good face to keep their stocks prices from collapsing.
Perhaps there are not a lot of believers yet on the GM board. Not to worry, there will be more next year, and more the year after that. Regarding SUVs, Super trucks (personal ego machines) and the Hummer class… Drop it like it’s hot.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:01 am
I agree with your 1st & 3rd points, John, which might also apply to the Highlander Hybrid (a powerful V-6 hybrid with ample towing capability for many boat owners), and it’s also a 5-passenger CUV that Buick no doubt considers competitive even though it’s not a plug-in. I drove the Highlander Hybrid when it was 1st introduced —it’s a superb design that got rave road test reports, and it’s one I would certainly consider buying if it got the much higher mpg of a well-designed plug-in version.
However, your 2nd point is a bit misleading —the Buick CUV plug-in will have TWO oil-cooled electric motors, each capable of a 74HP output or a total of 148HP, enough to propel the vehicle as an EV alone under most speed/load conditions if the control electronics were designed to do so.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Herm says: “The 2-Mode transmission is expensive and optimized for higher power drivetrains.. ”
____________________
True dat.
Ford’s ecoboost vs. GM 2 mode hybrid:
GM’s 2 mode hybrid system is kind of a “space shuttle” of a hybrid setup. Lots of parts, very complicated. The big advantage vs. Ford’s hybrid design(apparantly) is it’s ability to accomodate bigger power and loads (i.e. towing capacity).
The problem here is the complexity and expense, when Ford is taking “conventional” technology (ecoboost, 6 speed tranny’s) and may soon be beating GM’s 2 mode in high power applications (i.e. full sized pickups) in mpg and power for less cost. GM’s advantage will be the ability to add battery for Plug in capacity.
In the short term (i.e next 5 years or so) I see the advantage going to Ford. I think their full sized pickups will average in the low to mid 20’s without the complication of the 2 mode. Long term (or if fuel prices go high $5/g+) advantage may go to GM if if battery prices fall rapidly and the plug in upgrade only costs a few thousand.
Of course Ford may figure out a way to “beef up” their hybrid drive train in the interim.
This will be a verty interesting section of the market place to watch develop.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:08 am
The high-power 6 decision and Mr. Corbett’s explanation of it follows the same misguided, second guessing mentality that got the “old” GM into so much trouble over the years. They hooked consumers on enormous vehicles with far more power than anyone needs, back when fuel was cheap and they could easily dupe the public with Exxon-style disinformation campaigns.
The fastest sports cars and muscle cars of the ’60s and ’70s didn’t have the power some ordinary sedans and small SUVs have now. To cater to the boat hauler and the like as being mainstream is, to borrow a phrase from a recent VP candidate, “looking backwards again.”
The mild hybrid was supposed to be cheap, but GM discontinued at least some versions of it, as I understand, because it was too expensive to achieve so little, if any, gain over a simple four banger.
“Flex-fuel” is another bogus “up equals down” marketing scheme to substitute irresponsible land use and increased carbon burning instead of taking real action toward sustainability and reduced fossil fuel consumption. It would be more reassuring if GM dropped such folly, as well as their fuel cell fantasy that appears prominently in its marketing.
Were it not for the Volt, which GM seems to be doing almost perfectly–good for them there!, the rest of GM apparently is still stuck in reverse. As taxpayer-stockholders, we should demand better.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:11 am
I think there are people who care about more than one thing. Lots of people care about mpg right now, not just the envirnomentalists. But they also want other things. That’s why, IMHO, the Ford FUsion hybrid is doing well. It’s not the mpg king, but it’s the most “fun to drive” of all the hybrids. And people care about more than one thing when they buy the car.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:17 am
LauraM,
I agree that people think of more than a single characteristic than any single one, and *I* believe that they think of them in different orders! For some, price is paramount, for some fuel economy, or utility, or towing, etc.
It must be REALLY tough to field models that will fit needs AND priorities.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:20 am
Hey Tag, I want to remind everyone upfront that the Buick plug-in CUV has TWO oil-cooled electric motors capable of 74HP each, or a total of 148HP. It has long been my view that 148HP is enough to propel it as an EV-only vehicle under almost all normal speed/load conditions ….if the battery were upsized to say 24-32 KWh & its control parameters were selected to do so. In other words, its “architecture” alone (i.e., a PHEV with a powerful V-6 using a 2-mode transmission) should not prevent GM from offering a version with a much larger battery and an AER on the order of the Volt’s 40 miles ….while at the same time providing the hauling & towing capacity of an SUV. This is in fact what I’ve been strongly lobbying GM people from Bob Lutz on down, to consider doing for over 18 months (as Lyle and a few others here know). It should sell like crazy!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:26 am
I think their “hybrid strategy” is ridiculous. All hybrids should be plug-in ready. Just because the plug is there doesn’t mean a person is going to plug it in at night anyway. I’d like to know who the manufacturer of the plug for all these plug-in’s will be. Could it be a shortage of these plugs and cables is delaying these vehicles?
NPNS!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Price?
I still don’t understand the PERCEIVED MARKET SIZE for a vehicle like this. Anyone got any current / real statistics?
If I had the money for large water toys that need towing every now and then, I’d keep my “Classic SUV” with the gas engine and use it for that purpose. If you have the money….perhaps it’s all about the image you convey.
I agree with those that state “MPG is King”. I believe amnesia has set in for a lot of people. 13 months ago, the heartland of this country saw $4.20+ gasoline prices. The coasts were much higher. How quickly we forget.
Most people primarily need to get back and forth to work as efficiently as possible.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Nasaman says:
“….if the battery were upsized to say 24-32 KWh & its control parameters were selected to do so. In other words, its “architecture” alone (i.e., a PHEV with a powerful V-6 using a 2-mode transmission) should not prevent GM from offering a version with a much larger battery ….”
____________________________
Geemanee. Just how much do you think 32KWh of battery is going to cost?
Surely there is some point where you just can’t keep adding cost and weight.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Hey Texas. If YOU live in Texas you should know the big SUV and pickup are not dead. Restrained but far from dead. Maybe if gas goes to six dollars a gal, it will start to really make the hunter, fishermen, campers etc begin to think.
GM needs to service that customer just like servicing you with an electric vehicle.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:46 am
asd
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:49 am
I would say that nuclearboy is right, and asking about the overlap is going in the right direction.
Right now, performance-first hybrids will only be bought by those with disposable income that like to show off the hybrid sticker more than their fuel economy. This demographic isn’t the type to drive conservatively or look at their gas receipts.
GM is correct that capturing this market is important for a widespread transition to hybrids/EVs, but it does next to nothing right now. There are benefits, but not for us or the average car buyer:
+ Minor word-of-mouth advertising amongst others with money
+ Not likely to promote hybrids as ‘underpowered disappointments’
+ These buyers usually change vehicles every few years, increasing the drivers that will experience this car, and/or making it affordable for a middle-income economy-minded buyer
+ It’s a crossover, which helps to wean people off SUVs
With drawbacks:
+ Demographic isn’t likely to notice or promote fuel savings
+ If sold next to the standard version, the sticker will advertise worse fuel economy (great, a NEW way to confuse buyers)
+ Vehicle sales will be low, possibly furthering the notion that hybrids are overpriced or unpopular (ala Malibu FH)
+ It’s a crossover, which GM tends to overprice (Traverse, Equinox, Enclave, SRX, Acadia..) and this model will have a hard time standing out, especially with under 30 HMPG
This car is a good idea to launch after hybrids have gained significant market share, but not before. Let’s just get those Volt wheels on the road.
NPNS! =D~~~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Nas I agree. But I think they need to ad a plug and 10 miles all electric to the full size SUVs and PUs
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Numerous members of my family have owned Buick over the years. All with reports of fine quality and smooth operation. My father traded his Crown Vic for a Century and loved it. I did his oil changes and added Dura Lube. Who knows how long that white Century will be around? One aunt bought a new Buick each three years for a total of 6 or more. She loved the boat for her weekend trips to nowhere. Which usually ended at a seafood restaurant.
I wish NGMCO well with their 3.5L offering.
=D~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:54 am
GM is wasting valuable feedback time by not currently selling a hybrid with the same plug technology they expect to use on the Volt. If they already sold a plug-in hybrid the Volt wouldn’t be seen as completely new technology, which tends to scare a lot of customers away.
NPNS!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Here’s a question (or several):
If the target demographic doesn’t really care about or notice fuel costs, and the fuel savings / reduction in trips to the pump isn’t staggering, how will this change the image of plug-ins? Will these people find plugging it in annoying, or hardly beneficial? Might they even stop plugging it in at night?
This car will be very tough to sell even if the salesman can manage to explain it, which will surely be the most difficult part of the pitch. It would be helpful if the plug gave it better fuel savings than the Prius. Luckily, I think a higher stance and better looks carry more weight than any of that mumbo-jumbo. Plus, it comes with a hybrid sticker!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:08 am
I don’t see how MPG can ever be the number one thing.
Look at it this way if you go to buy a car and the one with the best MPG only has one seat. Would you buy it? Not likley.
If a veh can not do what you need it to do it realy dosen’t matter what the MPG is. If you have 5 in your family and a car only seats 4 it dosen’t matter what the mpg is. If a veh wont tow your boat or what ever it dosen’t matter what the MPG is .
My point is first people look for vehicle that will do what they need (want) it to do. Only after that will they look at MPG. But personaly I think MPG comes after safety.
If I was to guess I would say that when most people look for a car it is 1) Can it do what I need it to do. 2) Price 3) Style 4) Safety 5) MPG
The last 4 can be in any order but #1 never changes.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:08 am
In response to Bryan’s opinion… i think that If it was a tahoe or a silverado, then his position of not sacrificing utility and towing capacity for even further mileage benefits is true, because truck buyers want a truck, SUV buyers want an SUV. Crossover buyers aren’t usually as hardcore about towing and sub 7.5 second runs to 60 in a large vehicle.
So to not even OFFER a 4 cyl…
How much better would the mileage be?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:09 am
I would buy one of these. I like having the power and economy as well.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:13 am
IMO, it’s the “blended mode” mpg in normal daily driving cycles that matters (not the AER).
On plug in hybrids.
Somewhere north of 40 mpg and south of 100 mpg you cross the threshold where mpg just doesn’t matter anymore. The annual cost of gasoline purchased becomes so insignificant that it’s not even a factor.
While there’s some green “bragging rights” to be had for AER, I don’t think it’s worth adding the cost and expense of the extra batteries to attain more AER when you’ve already got a solid (i.e 60 to 80) mpg going for you already.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:15 am
Absolutely. That’s why GM actually needed all those different models/brands when they had 50% of the US auto market. Not now that they only have 15%.
But’s also why when they have different nameplates, they need to distinguish them more. Appeal to different people and markets. Not just rebadge the same old car for a different brand. The brands used to have distinct markets. And so the nameplates would be worth the differential. They would be different cars, not just different nameplates. They need to go back to that. At least, IMHO.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:24 am
LauraM,
On this we totally agree. Well stated (IMHO)(wink).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:29 am
LOL, how can my comment be in moderation when THAT was the COMMENT. As statik used to say “heh heh”.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:32 am
I agree with GM – a vehicle that can tow a reasonable RV trailer and still get PHEV style gas mileage while travelling solo would be a strong draw for me…
But hopefully the 4 cyl could be made available down the road – there are certainly many people who just want a small crossover for the space.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Like Nasaman, I was very interested in the Vue 2 mode hybrid and now my interest is directed toward the Buick 2 mode CUV.
As Nasaman points out, the electric motors in the 2 mode tranny provides an additional 148 HP. If the L4 engine (181 HP) is coupled to the 2 mode hybrid transmission (148 HP), that would be a total of 329 HP which should be than enough for most highway driving.
If only the V6 is offered, I will probably buy one – but I sure would prefer an L4 2 mode hybrid CUV!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Kudos to Buick on their latest TV ad for the Lacrosse. Very well done. And the website is pretty nice too. The interior shot of the dash looks like a mega-upscale version of the VOLT interior shots we’ve seen on this site. Nice car.
I hope the ad campaign for VOLT is as strong as this one.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:41 am
The 6 cylinder is the best choice because that is the feature that will get more people into buying the vehicle. The 4 banger would have lower sales. Sure, it would have better fuel economy, but since fewer of them would be on the road, the total national fuel savings could actually be less than if a larger number of less efficient 6 cylinders are sold.
Also, everyone here by now understands how gas savings start to seriously level off around 30 mpg. If the 6 cylinder CUV gets 60 mpg, and the 4 cylinder CUV gets 75 mpg (my guess), the actual difference is gasoline use is actually quite small. Bottom line; the priority should be to get the largest number of people possible into high efficiency cars/CUVs. That is what’s best for US auto makers AND what’s best for the environmental (and energy security).
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:45 am
First, I think the engine is the 3.6L high feature engine as used in the Traverse, Enclave, and Acadia, not a 3.5L (older OHV engine). It is tuned slightly different from the other engines.
The ICE in the Saturn Vue (which this Buick probably is designed from) was rated about 260 hp, maybe 240 ft-lb of torque.
The electric motors are about 75 hp (55 kW), probably 140 ft-lb of torque (note, these values are about half of the 111 kW, 278 ft-lb for the Volt traction motor, and thus powered by a 1/2 sized battery).
So the combined power with one electric motor (I believe they operate in different speed ranges, so only one is used at a time) is 335 hp and 380 ft-lb of torque! This is the power output of GM’s 5.3L V8 that is in most trucks!
Yet without the plug-in benefit, it gets comparable mileage to the 4 cyl BAS hybrid.
So you are getting V8 performance with 4 cyl economy without the plug-in benefit. With the plug-in benefit, you can likely get 40 – 70 mpg, depending on your daily driving distance.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Well, it’s good to see that my question was addressed from a previous post, thanks Lyle!
I still don’t buy that explanation though, because of the fact that the non plug-in version of this vehicle will have lower HP 4-cylinder engines. It would seem that, for the same performance, you would need at most, the same sized ICE along with an electric motor.
Then again, some people have mentioned that a smaller engine doesn’t always mean more efficient (undersized for example). I still don’t buy that entirely either though given the smaller engines in the same vehicle that doesn’t have the added hp of an electric motor.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Good question. All of their 2 mode hybrids have been 3.5L V6’s, so apparently they feel more comfortable with that engineering, but something is glaringly off when they are happily selling a DI 4 cylinder engine standard in the 2010 model, they don’t feel like it’s going to be sacrificing towing capacity or power, and in 2011 in the exact same body style they add 170+HP worth of electric motors and all of the sudden that’s not enough power. They don’t think their customers aren’t happy with anything slower than a 7 second 0-60?!
Like Lyle said, who even cares about a 7 second 0-60 in their SUV? How many plug in hybrid Buick SUV owners are you going to see peeling out at stop lights trying to impress chicks?
How much power would the DI 4 cylinder get you when mated to the electric drive? Probably more than enough to tow almost anything.
The only explanation that makes any sense at all is that since you’ll be driving in all electric mode most of the time anyway, you won’t notice much mpg degradation anyway, they might as well throw in a powerplant for those twice a year trips to the lake so you can beat that Prius off the line carrying your boat.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:53 am
I think everyone looks at mpg now. I’ve lurked on the Camaro forums, and I’ve seen people there talk about mpg. If they talk about it, I’m pretty sure CUV owners are interested too.
Even though you won’t save any money in the long run buying a hybrid–I think lots of people just don’t want to worry about paying extra per mile. And they prefer certainty (car payment) over uncertainty (gasoline prices). Especially since nearly everyone is expecting inflation–which will raise gasoline prices, but not car payments for a car you already bought.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
We not only have a short memory, we’re impatient. I think we’re the only people who pace in front of the microwave.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Toyota Corolla, with a 1.8L engine, gets 26/35 mpg.
Toyota Prius, with a 1.8L engine, gets 51/48 mpg.
Volt gets rumored 50 + mpg at ICE mode.
I notice that from ICE =>Generator => Electrical driving system (either Para all or serial Hybrid), gets better mpg.
I want a Cruze with a ½ KWH battery, small ICE, electrical driving system and get 50 or 60+ mpg. That should cost less than $20k and seats 5.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
When developing a strategy for any product it is key to begin with the marketing fundamentals. Who is the consumer? How do they understand a product? What needs and interests do those perceptions create? Etc. In a recent Science article, “The MPG Illusion” marketing professors Richard Larrick and Jack Soll found that the average individual perceives MPG as a linear relationship. For each mile the millage number moves up there is a corresponding gas savings. So a jump from 15 to 20 mpg is perceived as the same as a jump from 35 to 40 mpg. But the reality is, as many technical folks reading this already know, fuel savings is not linear. A fuel savings increase from 14 mpg to 15mpg is roughly equivalent (in terms of the actually amount of fuel saved) as a jump from 33 mpg to 40 mpg. But the public doesn’t perceive fuel savings as a non-linear relationship (If millage is described in gallons/mile or l/km then people tend to understand the non-linear nature o fuel savings better but the public is not use to nor is it presented with millage numbers in this way) . For this reason GM will always be fighting the publics perception by choosing a strategy that focuses on actual fuel savings while keeping capacity of the vehicle the same. GM’s two-mode hybrid system is very advanced and made great strides for the capacities of their full size pickups and SUVs but the public perceives it as inferior to the Prius or the general strategy that Toyota has been undertaking. From an engineering perspective GM’s parallel hybrid strategy has been a smart one but from a marketing perspective the public will continue to see it as weak and inferior to Toyota’s high millage strategy. But depending on how the EPA lets them display millage for the plug-in the overall numbers may be inflated to such a degree that it won’t matter. Will see.
Your thoughts?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I think the reason may be :
1) Its tough to put compound split on a 4 cylinder engine where in cylinder shut off it will act as a 2 cylinder engine.
2) They already developed and tested for 3.5 L ( on that time they developed , 3 ltr engine was not in production )
3) I don’t know why they are not trying a 2.5 , 5 cylinder engine , which will be good for a 2 cylinder shut off at cruising.
5 cylinders + electric motors should be able to give a v8+ powr when required. but any way it will take big more time to develop ( i am not sure GM has a I5 – 2.5 lrt engine which has some j standard – i forgot that number – where that interface is the interface 2 mode hybrid controller interacts with engine for engine shutoff etc )
4) Too complex transmission ( 4 clutches etc) so not worth to fix on a low end car because they cant get return and big wear and tear.
mostly they will come in an with 2.5 ltr I5 direct injected , 2 mode transmission if gas prices shoots up again which is a balance between using 4 and 6 cylinder engines
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Yes, there are 2 motors in the 2-mode system, but they still need to fit in the space afforded to the transmission assembly.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Because of hybrid architecture, you can’t just add the power ratings of the electric motors and ICE. The total power output is based on the degree of assist provided by the motors, and most certainly will not equal 329hp.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Jim in Pa,
I know that your “bottom line” is a tough sell to some, but it is gaining more and more acceptance (including mine). The larger the vehicle the more it benefits from significant electrification.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Addendum
I just want to note that I feel this might not be such a problem now that GM has the Voltec suite of technologies to also undertake a high millage strategy as well. Mostly I just thought for the reasons stated in the previous post that GM’s first foray into strong hybrids was out of touch with the public’s perceptions. Since they now will have a high millage leader a multiple prong strategy may serve them well. I
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
I think the 3.5 with the battery will sell very well. At the present time there is little else to choose from if you want to haul things, go off road, and still use less gas during your normal routine. This vehicle should be a gas sipper not a guzzler during day to day driving.
BUT for me, no interest in either model.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
(click to show comment)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
To get past the enthusiasts and early adopters, the number that counts is “dollars saved over the life of the vehicle”. I don’t think this kind of buyer is obsessed with power, either.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Everything is BIG in Texas !
That includes our Trucks, SUV and manhood.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Actually, GM did have a product plan culminating in a fuel cell variant of the Volt, so their prescience was documented at least two years ago. I wish I still had the link to that product plan – perhaps someone else here can provide the link.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
(click to show comment)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Yeah and ALL their hybrids have been complete failures in the marketplace to date. Or do you have “select amnesia”.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Jason,
Was it the “skateboard” on which almost any body could be mounted? I know that was designed for a fuel cell. I wish that a battery would fit in it, because I think acceptance of fuel cells is a very long way down the road.
JMO.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
(click to show comment)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
(click to show comment)
August 9th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
That’s a lot more power than the 120HP or so that my 2.5L Ford Ranger generates, which is plenty competent for towing every load that I’ve ever wanted to move. I even have the differential with the lowest amount of reduction.
Don’t get me wrong, you know the trailer is there, and there are situations where keeping moving with a trailer involves making the engine scream. But, ~335 peak horsepower seems a little excessive when 120 peak horsepower meets my needs.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
I want a Voltec vehicle with….
1. 660cc 4 Cylinder (KEI Car class) engine.
2. Possibly slightly smaller electric motor
2. Same size battery pack as the Volt.
I don’t really need a car that can go 100+ mph.
An 80 mph top end would suite me fine.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
I sense deep animosity (probably just jealousy in disguise) toward superior foreign Hybrid technology from posters here. Once (if) GM brings a decent hybrid product to the market we can talk. Until then you all are just pretenders and not contenders. BRING IT or STFU.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
PDNFTT
Oh well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Some of us just want the independence that comes with being off of the oil roller-coaster.
You’re right in financial terms, of course, but money isn’t everything.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I just wish they made a hatcback or wagon version of the Ford Fusion.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
The hybrid sticker looks silly on an otherwise low MPG-car.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
I don’t want to take anything away from the Fusion Hybrid, but it is debatable as to whether it does well because it is more fun to drive than a car like the Camry hybrid. I think the Fusion Hybrid does well because:
1) It is the only real option for a 4 door hybrid from a domestic automaker. The Malibu and GM’s other half-efforts (4spd auto??? Really?) don’t count with anyone who can think and read.
2) That for some reason it managed to get EPA ratings so much higher than what it seems to achieve real-world (see the Motortrend comparison where the Camry ratings of 33/34 were confirmed while the Fusion did about the same as the Camry despite it having 41/36 ratings). But based on these ratings Ford advertises, “The 2010 model Fusion and Milan and their hybrid versions are the most fuel-efficient mid-size sedans in America.”
3) That Ford posts the combined HP on their website while Toyota doesn’t. So while it looks like the Fusion is much more powerful even though they are about equivalent (Camry is apparently faster 0-60).
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Problem is Lexus drivers would never consider driving a GM, no matter what the specs or price are.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
I would agree, except that NEED and WANT must often get confused. Otherwise there would be a lot more Fits, civics and corollas on the road.
From a non-domestic buyer’s perspective, aside from “can it do what I need it to do”, your list is pretty much backwards. Safety and MPG are most important. Price and style are fighting for last place. But you forgot some of the more important ones:
Reliability
Quality
Retained Value
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
That makes sense — but I don’t know if it will work.
The only place I’ve seen the Lexus hybrids are as ferry vehicles at a high-end hotel/resort. The Lexus 450h nice, but they’re not worth the money — the leather is and burled plastic is nice, but it’s not really worth going to a $40k+ vehicle for that, especially since the mileage is nothing special. And, yes, I do look that little “h”, and I hear the PWM controller from hybrids when I’m on my bike.
On the other hand, I’ve seen the Prius on every U.S. highway I’ve traveled.
Tiny niche, big niche.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Luke,
Maybe the 230 that’s floating around is actually “dollars saved over the life of the vehicle”. Naw, just teasing. Trying to pass time until the Tuesday press conference.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
“Our hybrid strategy has been pretty consistent over the last few years.”
Yes it has been consistent—consistently poor. GM would be wise to listen to the “enthusiasts” every now and then. Maybe they could sell a few hybrids for a change.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Good thing you aren’t running GM, they would have been bankrupt a lot sooner with decisions like yours.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
No 4 banger cap’n, we need more powa.
Make it so number one.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
For Buick CUV plug-in, I agree. Size should be just fine.
For smaller vehicles (where 4-cylinders is typical), the smaller transmission housing could prove to be too much of a limitation.
As for the Highlander observations, note that the newer generation is larger inside, more powerful, and is more efficient.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Not so sure. If you have more than 2 kids, I can see why you’d choose a PHEV crossover instead of a Volt. Minivans seem to be dying out, however who knows what the future holds.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Luke, there are many loads your truck will not tow safely, probably any boat over 23ft length.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I like your thoughts and agree with them. Many get lost in the HIGHWAY miles debate. As a general rule, most vehicles get great gas mileage on the open road. It is not difficult to get over 30 mpg on the open road in practically any midsize sedan with many getting close to 40 watching how you drive. You need to understand that to understand my next point.
Practically every car, unless it is some type of hybrid, gets terrible gas mileage
1)Going up hills at slow speeds (or any steep grade for that matter)
2)Accellerating at any type of brisk pace
3)To simply get the car moving
4)Towing
Once you have gotten past these (I am sure you might think of some others) most cars get very reasonable gas mileage. These hybrids that can allow you to use the battery to help with these instances where you normally don’t get good gas mileage can now allow the car to get very good mileage all the time. This is why too many people get caught up in highway mileage. That is not where most people lose out on MPG. Bringing up the city mileage of any auto drastically improves your overall mileage because you always have to “get the car rolling”.
Hawk
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Hi Tag,
Trolls aside…
Toyota has a high mileage car in their lineup in addition to their mild hybrids. I don’t have sales stats on the Toyota milds, but I imagine any significant sales could be attributed to their being Prius cousins.
As company policy, offering milds makes sense because they are such a small modification to a standard power train (aka easy). But it is folly to only provide mild hybrid technology without having a real MPG solution. The Volt can’t get here fast enough.
But I stand by my previous statement. They have the tech to build a high MPG conventional hybrid and they aren’t doing it. Crossover or not, they need to have more cars in the 40+ MPG range.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Your right about quality and reliability but retained value means nothing to me, I keep my cars untill they are junk.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
A proper response would enumerate the principles you refer to, and point out what you think he overlooked.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
The Highlander is expensive and doesn’t get great mileage. Try cross-shopping it with a 2010 Subaru Outback with the CVT — the outback gets better mileage, costs less, is lighter, and is almost exactly the same size. The Outback can tow twice as much as I need.
Toyota does dominate the hybrid-space, but that’s because of the Prius — not because of the Highlander, or the Camry, or the Lexus 450h.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I’m aware of that — I’m not suggesting that my little Ranger will tow everything, I’m saying that it tows everything I’ve ever wanted to tow. I’m just not likely to have a reason to tow a 23′ boat.
I do tow a 4′x8′ utility trailer loaded with sheet goods from the home center. Or loaded with a motorcycle. Or loaded with gardening supplies. And there’s no reason that I’d want to tow all of that at once.
Your needs may be quite different than mine — but my towing needs are very modest. I’m a homeowner with a DIY habit, so I just don’t need hundreds of horsepower or a full-sized truck/SUV/minivan.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
They need a better explanation of why they won’t offer BOTH engines. When gas goes to $6+ in a couple years these things will sell like crazy especially the lower powered ones.
GM has always been scared of selling small engined cars. They seem to think that if we make a nice car it has to have a big engine. Luckily they are starting to get away from that a little bit. Wish I could afford a VOLT but I would be happy with the 2010 Buick Lacrosse with the 2.4 engine.
The time is quickly coming where if you don’t get 30+ mpg you probably won’t be able to afford to drive.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
My household owns one of those foreign hybrid vehicles. It’s a great little car. I hope the Volt makes it obsolete — but, until then, the it seems that our little car will take care of our needs just fine.
I’m not sure where the animosity comes from. I think there’s a “go team” element to it, along with a stereotype of the drivers that I can’t confirm based on my own experience.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
(Actually, my Ranger is overkill for my needs — a small station wagon with good roofracks that could tow my 4′x8′ utility trailer could take care of everything. Unfortunately, the only cars that meet that description lack any sort of alternative-fuel capability.)
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
… probably won’t be able to afford to drive.
When the price of gasoline peaked I defiantly stopped driving as much. And even though the price of regular is below $3 I continue to drive less often. BIG OIL shot themselves in the foot big time.
=D~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
To each their own.
This is the amost perfect vehicle for my empty nester to be lifestyle. I wish it got 15 miles all electric with a top speed of 40 MPH before the engine cuts in. This would let my wife drive 95% of the time with out using the gas – give her the vehicle style she likes and give me the towing I need.
Then we buy a Volt or converj for my commute
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
“You won’t solve the problem by making better cars,” Ries said. “You’ll solve the problem by making different cars that stand for something.”
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/GM-has-to-focus-on-its-cars-apf-75063891.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=
Converj interior… http://garfwod.250free.com/Converj_interior_view.jpg
=D~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Just interested… do you have kids? A boat? A travel trailer?
Even a gen 3 Volt isn’t going to tow. So what’s the answer there in the near term?
Some of you seem to live in downtown Gotham and never get out.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Ford Flex is the vehicle that competes against the Buick CUV, I think.
MPGs in the teens/ low 20s but it manhandles 4500 # (and this is their eco-boost)
Buick is upper 20s / low 30s, has an AER, but will only hup 3500 #.
Yes, it will be interesting.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
There is no one factor in any purchase, though efficiency is probably a big concern with many. The more expensive fuel becomes, the larger the concern for efficiency will be.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
GM needs to work harder on getting more LIGHTWEIGHT materials into their bigger SUVs and trucks. More of that “high strength steel”, aluminum, magnesium, etc. Maybe even a good bit of that carbon fiber stuff if it’s getting cheaper. These lightweight materials are just as strong I hear.
Maybe in 5-10 years we’ll have the best of both worlds. All the torque, power, pulling capability and acceleration of today’s SUVs, trucks and cars but using Voltec ER-EV technology.
I hope to see SUVs and trucks in 2015 with ER-EV powertrains with 60+ miles of all electric range. After 60 miles, a super efficient IC engine kicks in running on algae based “bio-gasoline”. Maybe by then, they’ll call it “algoline” or something.
In 2020, I’d like to see SUVs and trucks with 80+ all electric miles and then maybe a hydrogen or methanol FUEL CELL will kick in to keep you going 400+ miles. In the early years, I think it might be MORE practical to have hydrogen fuel cells vehicles on the biggest vehicles like 18 wheelers. Wal-Mart is trying to “go green” a lot these days. They might be the first company to have them. You don’t need to worry too much about the safety of hydrogen tanks on big trucks. I can also visualize LOTS of UPS, US Postal Service and Fedex delivery trucks with a good sized battery and a fuel cell “range extender” in 2020+. Electrified vehicles are excellent for the stop and go driving that those delivery trucks do.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Don’t forget the other advantage of electric propulsion.
Putting global warming aside (please? if only)…
If the CUV starts from 0 to 20 or 30 mph in electric drive only, that cuts out a lot of smog causing NOx and particulate emissions.
This is much more important to me than CO2.
If only we could just relegate all air cooled VWs to the clunker pile or the museums…
Does anyone know if all the new CUVs starts from 0 mph are electric?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
You have a great point here unless someone wants an EV. Nasaman is really advocating for an EV more than a Prius like plug-in hybrid.
Yes you can’t justify the extra 100+ mpg on a dollars and cents basis, but most people don’t really buy cars like that. Having said that, I think a CUV that seats five and has good acceleration will sell very well. Probably better than the same vehicle in a more expensive EREV form.
Hard to know how many EV nuts there are and if they would want a five seat CUV with towing capability. Nasaman is one but I’m not sure how many others like him there are out there.
Personally I think either are great. Whatever sells the most gets my vote.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Every car company in the world makes high power vehicles, especially Europe and Japan… Ford, Chrysler, too.
Why the GM hate?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
When Consumer Reports says the Fusion beats the Camry because it’s sportier and more fun to drive you have to accept this as reality. Consumer Reports usually ignores things like performance.
Personally I look at the Camry and it looks tired. The new Accord at least looks sporty. Seems like Toyota spent too much time chasing market share and not enough time sticking to its knitting (that’s Toyota’s conclusion as well BTW). Sound familiar?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
GM will be the first, apparently, out with a plug in… this Buick CUV.
So why the criticism against them and not all the rest?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
LauraM says I’ve lurked on the Camaro forums
Sounds like a confession, Laura!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Toyota owns the mileage hybrid space. That may end as early as Tuesday. If the Volt does get a 230 mpg number then the Prius, at 50 mpg, simply loses that title big time.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Since 2000 SUV have been slowly disappearing and CUVs have been appearing. Hence the troika of Enclave, Acadia, Equinox from GM.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
This is a great point. As mpg goes up you need bigger and bigger increases to make a difference.
Also keep in mind that if the Volt is at 230 mpg then everything below this is really meaningless because all these vehicles will essentially be fighting for a distant second place. The big winner is number one. (What mp3 player is second after the iPod?).
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
And why offer a 4 cylinder when it might give some an excuse to turn their backs to the Volt?
Good points.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Yes, I for one want power and towing capacity that I don’t feel a 4 cyl can provide. GM is right. If you want fuel economy buy a Volt. If you buy an SUV supposedly you are buying one for its versatility. I gave up driving a pickup and then an SUV and now drive a Honda Civic hybrid as premium gas hit $5/gal. and let me tell you it does NOT meet my needs. I need more space for hauling home project materials and I’d really like 4WD and more horsepower so I’m not the “granny” climbing to 8000 feet as I go snowboarding in Tahoe. Someone wrote 148hp is enough. For an SUV, no way! My experience in all types of vehicles says 200hp is minimum for what I consider “normal” acceleration, hill climbing and towing capacity. The Civic does not cut it!
SO, when GM offers an SUV with 200hp but with a plug-in electric only range of 40 miles, I’m buying. The Volt is tempting but quite frankly I’d have to buy a trailer for the home improvement projects.
Hey Lyle! What is the towing spec for the Volt?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Did I hear Mr. Robinson enter the room? Hydrogen…
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
Please, Lyle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Return us to the days of consecutive posts. I just do not have the time to keep re-browsing comments to find out what I may have missed.
Now, everytime I either return to post or even refresh, I need to rescan ALL comments, to be sure I am not going to post something already covered.
I think the days of these subtopic style, posts should be done.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Note: My first attempt at using BOLD, but I forgot how to turn it off in mid-post.
But now I have it!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Superior foreign Hybrid technology? What exactly would that be? Ford has the same, independently developed, technology as Toyota. Honda seems to have something less. GM with the Volt seems to have a lot more.
There is some negativity on the part of some towards foreign manufacturers. On the other hand, there is some frustration on the part of Prius defenders to see the reign of the Prius as the “Queen of Green” ending. This frustration manifests itself in statements like “until then you all are just pretenders not contenders”.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
You couldn’t be talking about the Escalade hybrid, could you?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Tag,
Do you actually retype the “Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS ” inserting the control characters to BOLD, or do you just copy and paste.
/just wondering….
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
First of all, with an electric motor we should be talking about torque. How much torque does the electric motor and is it sufficient for Most towing needs.
I don’t believe HP has anything to do with towing. It’s Torque and the Transmission Multiplier. The SUV buyer has been sold a bill of goods for years about some Delusional need for more HP. These monster engines are just Money Directly into Exxon’s Pocket, giving the Consumer No Real Benefit.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
I have to agree with you JEC. If someone wishes to respond to a particular post, it’s easy to list the # and proceed with it.
Lyle is doing a Herculean job here with gm volt dot com. I do similar work on a website which is geared toward the world of music. It’s not always easy to keep the posts coming.
_____________________________
As far as buying a new hybrid Buick as a towing vehicle. If I bought a 25″ boat and needed a vehicle to tow it. I would buy a good used $5000 truck. If I wanted 6 cylinder power in an electric daily driver truck. I would buy a new EREV Orlando (or similar).
Will anyone really buy a new $38k Buick to tow a boat around with?
=D~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
JEC,
I used to retype it every time, Just 2 or 3 days ago I went to cut and paste. I have a text doc on my computer that I cut every morning and paste all day. “And now you know the rest of the story”.
SEE? Now all itallics.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Will there still be a market for big SUVs and trucks? Huge V8s to tow boats and trailers? No doubt.
What I’m suggesting is a bit radical. I’m suggesting that GM satisfy that market with EXISTING models and production lines and eventually give that over to Ford, Chrysler and eventually a specialty auto maker like Land Rover or something.
I just don’t think they should waste their time or marketing focus on designing new, half-assed vehicles that confuse the next gen consumer.
The next gen consumer should get to know GM all over again. When you think environmentally conscience, green, high-technology, responsible, efficient, practical, excellent design, form follows function, family, safety, live-within-your-means, everyday, etc. you should think of GM.
I fear if GM does not do this now, another new company will. This is the electrification era. It’s just a but unclear at this point. Tesla knows it. Fisker knows it. Aptera knows it. BYD knows it. Nissan knows it. Better Place knows it. All the battery companies know it. Many CEOs and leaders know it. Does GM leadership know it? I don’t know either, especially after I hear about half-assed hybrids (HAH).
I’ll go even further and suggest GM cross the bridge and get into electrification infrastructure. Previously, transportation and electricity generation were two different worlds. I think GM can see that these are now coming together. Electrification means unification. The opportunities for GM are untold. Imagine a partnership with GM and GE. Endless possibilities.
The complete cycle, one stop shopping, we have it all, turn key, leave it to us. This is what I think when I imagine the new GM.
How about this. Change the name of the company to General Transportation. Or General Motion. General Dynamics (darn, already taken). You get the point. Transportation is about to get a whole lot bigger. If you can design a great EV you can also design a great EV infrastructure. You can then design great sustainable energy systems to power said transportation.
If auto makers continue to think in the narrow box of transportation when it’s about to open completely up, I think they are making a big mistake. Let’s look at how Google, Apple, and now Microsoft (had to or risk being taken over) are expanding. From search software and a PC company to complete Information and communication companies. This is happening right before our eyes! It’s not as radical as it sounds. They are owning media, entertainment, information and anything else that they can fit in. Why can’t GM own everything that fits into the new electrification model? Just some thoughts.
Transportation is getting from point A to point B. Transportation is about freedom. Transportation is about moving mass instead of just information, electrons and light. If you think about it this way, transportation covers a much larger potential market. It’s a new life for GM. Now that’s exciting!
If I were the CEO and director of the board at GM I would hold a meeting of top executives and the first words would be:
We are now a transportation company. All existing products (yes, even the Volt) are now cut. We must justify any activities from this point on. We are not going half-assed. We are not going to just use assets and technology because we have it. We are going to re-invent ourselves. We are going to define our mission to where we can’t wait to get into work tomorrow.
Don’t worry, the Volt will be justified. It’s the shiny example of what GM can do when they re-invent themselves. The Volt department should be the key starting point. Can you feel the pride and excitement? Can you feel it not only from within the company but coming from the outside? Yes. It’s there. It’s a hard-to-define thing called hope.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
From the article: With the addition of the 8 kWh rechargeable lithium-ion pack, GM claims the plugin vehicle can travel up to 10 miles pure EV at “low speeds”, and will deliver double the average fuel economy on the standard EPA cycles. This could amount to about 60 MPG.
——————————
This figure is a lot worse than I thought. I was figuring 150 MPG on electric assist (not 60), and 30 MPG after that.
With this new data, using a typical driving pattern, assuming you only charge overnight:
Vehicle ……………… Gallons per year
Volt …………………… 37
Prius …………………. 228
CUV PHEV-10 ………. 322
CUV HEV ……………. 380
20 MPG car ………… 570
==============================================
Brian Corbett (GM) says: I think the feeling is we’ve got try and get the mainstream public interested in plug-in technology in order to make a meaningful difference when it comes to reducing emissions and diversifying from petroleum.
——————–
For the mainstream public, one of the biggest issues is convenience.
Plugging in every night takes about 30 seconds, and another 30 seconds to unplug every morning, so this ends up being around 7 minutes per week.
Going to the gas station takes longer. After you drive there, wait in line, pump, and pay, it usually takes me 10-15 minutes.
With the Volt, you only go to the gas station once every 2-3 months. With a regular gas engine car, you basically have to gas up every week. Since 7 minutes a week to plug/unplug is significantly less than 10-15 minutes to gas up, the Volt is more convenient than a regular car
But this CUV PHEV doesn’t save that much gas over the regular hybrid version, so you have to go to the gas station about once a week, and plug/unplug every day. So the CUV PHEV is significantly less convenient than a regular car
Car ……………….. Fueling Time
Volt ……………….. 7 minutes per week
Regular Car …….. 10-15 minutes per week
CUV PHEV ………. 17-22 minutes per week
For the masses, this added inconvenience will not only decrease sales for PHEVs, but will also give many people the impression that all plug-ins are more hassle, so this could damage Volt sales as well.
Therefore, I urge GM to cancel this CUV PHEV project, and just sell the 30 MPG CUV 2-mode hybrid instead.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Don C @ 5:47pm,
I really agree Don. There are so many people who would want to switch over to the V-6 with the twin-e-motors to get those boats and ultralite campers hauled, while dropping the need to stick with a V-8.
I know of someone who is a private investigator who buys a new (black) Suburban (loaded) every three years or so. I’d bet ten bucks that he’d love to have that Buick (in black), so that if he needed to, he could “go electric quiet stealth mode” to position himself at stakeouts.
Another customer I have would immediately dump her large (Ford) truck (with a large V-8), so that she could haul her boat and “make a smaller carbon footprint”, because she wants a smaller V-6 engine as her “daily driver”, yet, when she wants to put in (the water) her boat, she would have all that electric power immediately present to pull it back up the boat ramp.
Noooooo Problemo.
One (of many) of the tremendous advantages of those twin e-motors, is that in towing all things, those motors can cut excessive ICE displacement, so that no longer do you have to have all that internal combustion cubic inches just wasting gas after its need to be there to just overcome inertia to get the extra load of what you are towing, going up to speed. Once you are up to third gear, for a great number of situations, you do not need a very large V-8 so much anymore, just a solid little V-6, backed by, as nasaman said, 148 more instant electric horses. Giddy – up!
I really think GM has got a second really great HIT coming with the Plug-In Buick.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
I can feel it my brother! I can feel it!
The classic risk/reward equation. When GM introduced a 2010 retro muscle car called the Camaro many snorted that it was ‘old school’ and ‘a waste of another $300 million dollars in development’. But, in your heart, you knew it was going to be a very hot seller. Even at under 30 mpg, it was going to be a hot seller.
Maybe this is where NGMCO needs to look for direction?
Did you see the eruption of emotion flowing through the EREV Orlando thread? How many thumbs up need to be viewed to grow the balls to proceed? Please God, tell me that NGMCO wants to proceed.
Good post texas
=D~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
If we’re voting, I vote to keep the email alert for replies. It’s the ONLY way I can reply to all who comment.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
I agree. Not as interesting or as much “fun” to follow.
The ‘voting’ thing was interesting at first, but now enough to want to stay with this format. Besides, we all know who sucks on their comments. I’ll probably get a “-15″ for this one!!! HA !!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Dave K,
I agree that Lyle is doing a Herculean job, but I don’t see any more effort needed on his part re the format. I’m not sure, so correct me if I’m wrong. I don’t want Lyle to have anymore work that he does already. The way it is now, I can read every post that I wanted to comment on and reply to the replies, If people can’t do that, things will likely get quieter – especially with Statik not here chiming in. It’s kinda like our home without the daughters here – the same, but lonelier.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
In 5 years, new battery technology should allow for a mainstream EREV CUV.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Texas what you are wanting is to control the market ie. tell everyone what they can buy.
I believe you should allow each to make the decision as to what they want to do or buy. That’s known as freedom.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
2 cars, 2 insurances, 2 parking spots. The EREV Orlando will cost more. I don’t see why this would make sense for many people, other than if the boat is 25′ which would be way too heavy for the 3500lb capacity of this Buick. I think GM has backed into the right solution here. For people that want the versatility and towing capability, this is a huge gas saver. It’s comp is not the 30mpg ICE only version that can’t tow but rather the 21mpg 6-cylinder version. The problem is they will probably have to charge more than $38K. I’m guessing $42K minimum. I think there is a fair number of people with commuter cars for gas mileage and SUV’s like this for family and weekends. These people would much rather drive something like this full time if it got effectively 40-70mpg for their commute.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
I think this plug-in two-mode as proposed by GM hits the sweet spot of the high efficiency SUV/CUV market best. It seems to me that for the majority of those that likes the specs that a 4-cylinder version would provide, they would like an EREV Orlando better. It would have to compete against the Escape 4-cylinder, Escape Hybrid, new Chevy Equinox, Toyota Hylander Hybrid, etc. A non-towing/hauling plug-in CUV/SUV doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
He could also set it up so that previously read messages are collapsed (but easily accessed) , and only the new ones are fully expanded.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
DonC
Well put. I doubt though that Prius will sit on it’s collective hands while being deposed – and that good for everyone!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Dave K,
That interior shot of the Converj is neat. Thanks.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Oh…Note to GM:
High efficiency minded buyers should not be considered an anomoly or some kind of wort on the buying public’s persona. The market is huge and extremely diverse and plenty of people want sensible choices. Many of them have moved to your competition. You say you want to lead into the future and provide the widest array and best offering of high efficiency vehicles. If this is the case, then you need to embrace this subset of the market and build on it. You need to offer “real” products that offer real advantages. This is a very forward thinking and shrewd group as a whole. You play off of the current events and mindset to grow this market just as you have grown other markets in the past. Be careful though. Don’t try to take too much advantage or you will be burned (e.g. Malibu Hybrid and 1st gen 2-mode). Trying to sell $500 BAS hybrid system for $3500 is BS and clearly the market showed you this.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
All the rest don’t have Voltec technology. I’m a long time GM customer, and care about their future. That’s why I’m critical about their decisions and actions. If you don’t think putting a plug on every hybrid is a good idea, feel free to explain why.
NPNS!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
I agree Tag. This is Lyle’s gig and he can do as he wishes. Texas and I simply commented on the before and after usability. And you are right, statik adds fuel for debate.
Koz, my goal is to sell my motorcycle which will result a two vehicle household. An 06′ Accord and an EREV truck.
A hybrid, 3.5L ,10 mile electric range, Buick isn’t in the cards. My wife is a hard core Honda buyer and will not change. Very loyal to Honda.
The forthcoming green viral 23 (plug in) 8•11 answer will be interesting.
=D~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
A word from Toyota…
Last year, Toyota announced that it planned to sell one million gas-electric hybrids per year sometime during the early 2010s. To accomplish this, Toyota will launch as many as 10 new hybrid models by the early 2010s, in various global markets. The new third-generation Toyota Prius and all new Lexus HS250h, both debuting in Detroit, are the first two examples of that effort.
Also, last year, Toyota announced that it would roll-out a large number of plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHVs) to global lease-fleet customers in 2010. That schedule has been moved up.
“Last summer’s four-dollar-a-gallon gasoline was no anomaly. It was a brief glimpse of our future,” said Miller. “We must address the inevitability of peak oil by developing vehicles powered by alternatives to liquid-oil fuel, as well as new concepts, like the iQ, that are lighter in weight and smaller in size. This kind of vehicle, electrified or not, is where our industry must focus its creativity.”
=D~
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
OK here’s the DEAL-O
This is in no way a snub a Lyle. I understand he is doing a terrific job hosting this site. This is the ONLY site I visit regularly, and I appreciate all Lyle does to keep this interesting.
So, here is how we can make our posts follow the OLD format. So, the rules are you NEVER select [Reply], instead just select the SUBMIT COMMENT at the bottom of the page. This way all posts will be linear with time and we no longer need to search for current posts.
LET NO ONES IDEAS EVADE YOUR EYES, PLAGIARIZE!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
I wouldn’t call it “hate,” especially since the “old” GM has shifted on. However, among car mfrs GM earned the distinction as the most environmentally hostile, with the dirtiest vehicles/worst fleet MPG avg for a large diverse line company (not including specialty makers like Porsche). Along with Ford and Chrysler, GM led the charge toward marketing obscene gas guzzlers like the Suburban and bringing us things like the Hummer as bonus insults to injury. They could have seen the same future that Honda and Toyota saw, but GM instead went for short term high profit margins. That didn’t turn out so well for them, but we’re still stuck with a lot of environmental damage as well as the financial bailout.
This is not about other makers who make overpowered stuff. It’s about GM. Are they ready to lead, or do they want to follow or get out of the way (to borrow another phrase)?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
P.S. For those who need or really want a hauler, the new FS pickup w/ the mode 2 hybrid appears to get an honest 20MPG in all around driving, according to Automobile mag (IIRC). Not bad! And so much for needing a diesel in that class.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
I think he’s thinking that GM never learned their lesson from bankruptcy by thinking people always want more power to tow/haul crap all the time.
Maybe a second round of bankruptcy will teach em right?
Are they forgetting already what put them into bankruptcy????
Putting the 6 cyl into a hybrid for “power” defeats the entire concept of the hybrid. I predict these will sell like floating rocks, way to drop the ball on this one GM.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Lol. I guess it is…
I’m interested in their experience with GM’s waitlist process and dealer mark-ups. It’s not the same as with the Volt–there will be fewer dealers, and they’re probably limiting the rollout to certain markets. But, on the other hand, they’re not limiting Camaro production to 10,000 the first year. So I probably won’t be able to wait the whole thing out.
But based on what I’ve read, I really hope that GM handles it better with the Volt than they did with the Camaro. Maybe retain title to the dealer cars so that dealers can’t sell them for a mark-up? And take orders sequentially by order instead of by the individual dealer’s allocation?
By the way, I think it’s great that GM is producing a car in such high demand. I just hope it lasts.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Great idea. You mean like this right.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
No. I don’t want to tell people what to buy. I want to predict the market. Many feel we will just go back to our old ways when the economy comes back. I feel when the economy comes back we will see just how deep our energy problems are (peak or near peak oil). Then we will get a real taste of reality.
I understand you can’t just make a car and force people to buy it. That’s why I feel GM’s past efforts at hybrids has failed. History has so many examples to learn from.
I have a feeling that a change is underway. From people wanting and buying more “stuff” to people becoming more aware of the limited resources the world has. Sure it might take some time but if we want to make this all work we are going to have to be good examples and good leaders. Most importantly, we need to have great alternative products that people can buy. Would you like to buy a practical EV today? Good luck!
Thus, I think it’s best to anticipate our environment and to develop great products that will best serve future customers. Electrification, environmentally aware, efficient, practical and affordable are points I think will be more valued than 500 bhp super SUVs and trucks. I guess it’s a personal opinion. I try to base my prediction on what I see going on with earth’s resources. Try to wade though all the BS and lobby-happy rhetoric.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Sansa ..
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
nice, thanks for posting …
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
In reviewing this topic I noticed some comments seem to miss the important point that GM’s small FWD 2-Mode system contains 2 separately-driven electric motors, each capable of 74HP. These oil-cooled motors are packaged along with planetary gear sets in an overall size not greatly larger than a standard automatic transmission. Remember that electric motors can be made very compact (even when air cooled) by contrast to gasoline engines of equivalent hp ratings.
It is therefore completely credible that the plug-in Buick’s drive train architecture should allow it to operate at almost any normal load/speed in pure EV mode. (Of course, the control electronic’s parameters would need to be optimized for highway speeds and/or towing operations in EV mode). My reference to this in my initial post above (at 10:20 am) along with upsizing the 8KWh battery to 24-32KWh is of course proposing a future version of the vehicle —after battery costs have declined significantly. (And remember that Lyle’s Mini-E already comes with a 35KWh battery, so a 32KWh battery isn’t really so far-fetched).
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
promises not kept, or ? Wasn’t there a entire line of priuses coming?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
I agree with the many posters who indicated GM should offer the 2 mode with a powerful 4 banger. Thus the base would have X horsepower (the 4) then the Hybrid would have X plus horsepower, from the 2 mode electric boost motors, and then the 3.5 L 6 with the highest HP and BAS+. This would mirror the Camry arrangement. Honda tried the highest horsepower hybrid approach and it bombed at the marketplace with the Accord.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Why does it have to be an “either/or” situation?
Put the V-6 engine in the Buick, so people can haul the larger boats and campers.
Make a version (Chevy or GMC) that has a 4 cyl ICE for those of us that still need the space of an SUV or CUV for our weekend remodel projects, and maybe have to haul around a small trailer with a max load of 1000 lbs now and then.
Or am I missing something?
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Absolutely agree with the Buick decision. Buick is famous for innovation, going first with technology, and QUIET is the Buick mantra. This brand also offers the kind of pricing a hybrid requires. Chevy was always a question mark for me.
Still, I’ll take whichever works best. Wish the Buick would arrive first.
(Quote)
August 9th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
LOL
Take Care
Arch
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 12:15 am
Congrats to Tesla on becoming the first profitable electric car maker! It can be done.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/07/technology/tesla_profitability/?postversion=2009080716
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 12:59 am
True, if you don’t mind double clutching through 16 gears to pick up a box of kleenex at the quickie mart.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 1:03 am
Agree absolutely. Hopefully the New GM doesn’t develop the habit of not investing in and improving it’s growing list of products so that a bunch of unclaimed orphans are left to wither and die.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 6:25 am
That was an Accord. I don’t think the typical Accord buyer has horsepower high on their priority list. Yet, the Lexus hybrid sells resonably well even though it isn’t optimized for fuel economy. The proposed Buick is a CUV with the capability of towing 3500lbs. The horsepower is important if you want to tow more than a few miles and especially if there are hills. The plug-in energy won’t last long when towing. There will be better people mover options than an I4 version of this. This should be the realm of Voltec, IMO.
It is essential that the expensive new hybrid technologies are applied optimally. Some markets and vehicles are a much harder sell until the premium comes down.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 6:39 am
jeffhre,
IF GM does that we should call PETA (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 6:45 am
Is the purpose of the 2 mode hybrid (and PHEV version) to be the “work horse”? Is the EREV scalable to have the same performance?
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 7:22 am
But, Tag, it is not a different model. It would be the same model with different engine options.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 7:27 am
NZDavid,
You’re right. My bad.
Be well,
Tagamet
PS New topic is “up”
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 7:39 am
LOL. Now that’s style
/Made me smile.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 7:42 am
NZDavid,
Thanks, smiles are precious. Enjoy every single one.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 7:47 am
NOT the same at all. Statik doesn’t txt regularly hinting for money.
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
/Now who did I cut and paste that from?
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 7:52 am
NZDavid,
Actually, I txt statik for money ALL the time. No luck yet though (lol). Hey, I’m the optimist, remember?
Be well,
Tagamet
PS Copy away! I hope GM has a copy posted in their offices!
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Thanks for sharing… I can’t wait to get a electric car myself…
We’re just waiting for a few more to get on the market and it will be time to replace our Honda… I’m hoping that the volt will be a good choice or the prius… the rebates are definitely a great step in putting more people in these cars.
If just saw this today as well (government rebate on cars – http://www.hybridmile.com/news/government-rebate-hybrid/) I hope that these get extended into 2010 and really they should be available till every single gas car is off the road.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Also depends on the price of gas. A plugin CUV that gets 60mpg becomes a lot more attractive when gas is $5/gallon. I agree somewhat on the convenience, but i plug in several things several times a day w/out even thinking about it. And when gas hit $5 gallon last time, look how many pple got on their bikes, or carpooled, or did whatever, even though it wasn’t the most convenient. People adapt.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Not me, but some ppl need power, plain & simple, just to do the things they do. Its not just a simple matter of transportation. These are work vehicles. (even transportation in some environments is a lot of work). At this time, battery technology isn’t there. The Buick is an attempt at a middle ground solution. I think its a step in the right direction. Leave all the options there and let the ppl decide. I dont think we should directly decide for them.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 9:33 am
my list
1 Function
2 Style (this includes the geek factor of an EV and all the bells & whisltes)
3 Cost (this includes cost of ownership)
4 Performance
5 Quality/reputation/fit-finish/whatever
6 Availability
Edit: i’m didnt list safety because i guess i’m just not that concerned about it. I assume all cars pass the crash tests, and i wear a seat belt, and i guess i just dont really care about it. I also didnt list resale value because i keep my cars for 10+ years.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Amen!!!
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 10:48 am
I agree with Lyle. I think that Mr. Corbett misreads the market. Not too surprising for a company which laughed at the Prius not so long ago.
Anyway, I’m not a buyer for this vehicle in any case, so it’s just academic to me. I guess I’m just a “plug-in enthusiast” or “early adopter”, and not part of the “mainstream” Is it just me, or does that sound just a bit condescending? Poor old “NGM”, they still don’t seem to get it.
I predict that this vehicle will enjoy the same massive market penetration as their highly successful “dual-mode” light trucks and “mild hybrids”..
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Mass market reality vs. sub-markets:
I am a mass market person. I have a 300hp, 58 ft^2, AWD car that gets 27 mpg highway. I want a 300hp 58^2, AWD car that gets much more than 27mpg highway, and more importantly, more than about 20 in town (22 mixed). A plug-in with a solid engine and performance is what I want/need. I’m not going to buy a compact/coffin box. This car is built well (Volvo V70). I’m VERY interested in the Volt, but more interested in this Buick as it is far more useful for the kids, groceries, and trips.
If you want people to buy more “efficient” cars, first define the strategic goals – is it energy independance from “bad” countries, clean environment, most distance between fillups, highest mpg, and what about safety? And don’t forget about the human elements – comfort, performance, features, convenience, air conditioning.
If your #1 goal is the environment, ride a bike, walk or take a bus/train everywhere and don’t own a car. I work in D.C. and several coworkers walk, bus, train, moped, Vespa etc. to work, including top management.
Anyhow, GM must consider the mass market.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 11:47 am
August 10th, 2009 at 11:50 am
We’re talking about a CUV that gets 60 MPG only for the first 10 miles, and then 30 MPG after that. With a typical driving pattern, assuming you only plug in at night, that corresponds to an average of only 35 MPG. Since the non-plug-in 2-mode hybrid would 30 MPG, and the plug-in option probably costs $3000-$4000 extra, a non-plug-in 2-mode hybrid CUV is probably a better deal.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 11:55 am
If the Volt is to give 40 electric miles per “fill”… I’d take even only 15 to 20 miles electric in a 4WD capable vehicle (I love my Tahoe where I can reliably make it into Deer Camp on the snowy hilly 2 track trail and haul lots of gear), or a Crossover for the wife that seats 7 (I have 4 kids, so min. of 6 seats, and I NEED that 7th seat for that “neutral zone” empty seat for peace-keeping (parents know what I mean), or when grandma tags along) and can tow something SAFELY like our Scout Troop’s trailer or the 21 foot boat). I have been commuting only 22 miles round trip at low speeds (no highway) daily for work. 20 would replace the vast bulk of my petroleum required Monday through Friday. Just because I require larger vehicles (sorry, the kids aren’t for sale) doesn’t mean I wouldn’t love to have some fuel savings in a larger vehicle.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 11:56 am
August 10th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
August 10th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Not from me. If an excellent car can be made obsolete by a more-excellent car, that’s called “progress”.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
You’re talking diversification here. If GM gets involved with electricity distribution, they will no longer be in bed with the oil guys.
The true upside is revenue. Sell the use and sell the method. (the razor *and* the blades *and* the soap.) I’d be willing to bet that the oil guys make more money on a car over it’s lifetime than the car producer. (gas, oil, tires, plastics.)
A smaller all-electric GM may be a good thing.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
I guess it’s all gonna depend upon what Ford delivers with the PHEV Escape in 2012. If the PHEV Escape smokes the PHEV Buick in terms of fuel efficiency and price, then I’d say the Buick CUV will reach a much smaller share of the market with it’s hauling capacity.
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Speaking of statik, where is he?
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Arch
what’s happening with geothermal?
RB
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
He posted that he’s decided to follow the site but not post. A crusade of requests to get him back have SO FAR been unsuccessful.
Our loss.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
(Quote)
August 10th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
isnt it gas free for the first 10 miles, then X mpg after that, When you factor the 2 together, they arrive at 60mpg??
not sure how long the trip is though. Is it the 51 miles again?
(Quote)
August 11th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
The PHEV needs to turn on the ICE for acceleration and highway driving. Only the EREV has all-electric range. So PHEVs are rated as some high MPG for the first 10 miles or so, and then a lower MPG after that.
The EPA test trip is the electric assist range (10 miles in the case of most PHEVs, and 40 miles for the Volt) plus an extra 11 miles. Doesn’t make much sense to me, but that’s what it is.
(Quote)
August 13th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
You know, I don’t know why people wouldn’t go with a car that got the best fuel economy as long as they could get their families into it. How often do people tow a boat or travel trailer? Pickup trucks can be rented. I live in Texas and people are always saying well I need a truck sometimes. Really? How often? Most of us live in cities and suburbs. If you need to move something big just have it delivered or rent a vehicle that can do it. Why buy something that’s just wasting fuel and power for 99.5 percent of the miles you’ll ever drive it? It makes little sense to me.
(Quote)
August 17th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
I would like to add a counterpoint here.
3500 lbs towing.
I need that, lots of other people do too.
I currently have a V8 powered Land Rover Discovery performing that duty.
This CUV could replace that.
(Quote)
August 18th, 2009 at 2:54 am
Ok this is ok if u drive 2 work and back but if u do that u should have a volt or something
If u pull with it the mpg will drop and if u think the 8 kwh will help yaa for like a mile or 2
And im thinking that the 270 hp comes from both the motors and its only 10 miles at low speeds
So with a trailer or boat so that means their go’s 100+ hp and u get 170 most the time I have 2 go 60+ miles
1 way And I think a kwh costs like 10 cents so it costs like 90+ cents 2 charge it and u get 10 miles for 90 cents So that’s 30 bucks a month or so if your electric is 100 bucks and u have 3 plug-in cars that’s twice the energy consumption we r gist trading 1 problem with another not unless I got this wrong I could. I think that this will not replace my 4×4 that I use 2 go snowboarding but im a dumb jeep person tho and I don’t drive it in the summer I have a 86 Daytona for that it gets about 28city/36 hw and it wont help the farmer or others that are stuck with trucks that get 10 mpg like my f 250 I uses for dry wall and fuel tanks for welding or wood so I’m not 1 of those that don’t uses their truck it is possible that it could replace my jeep if it was a 4×4/ and the non plug-in version but its not! I think it will sell but I Think a van that held 7 passengers or some thing like that and got the some or better mpg would sell better and a truck that got 20+mpg that could truly pull like my 5th wheel but if u need some more room thin what the volt has and need 2 pull lil stuff it will do fine I would not get the plug-in 1 tho I will spend the money on new doors and windows etc and actually save some green
(Quote)
August 20th, 2009 at 5:33 am
Great. I would add the save of souls not poluting enviroment and not using arab and russian oil.
(Quote)