AND 
Chevy Volt Gets 230 MPG City EPA Rating
GM CEO Fritz Henderson announced today that the Chevrolet Volt extended range electric car has been given an official EPA rating of more than 230 MPG city and a combined city/highway average fuel economy of more than 100 MPG.
The photo above is the first ever of the production Volt charger.
Henderson mentioned that GM has been quietly promoting the numbers 2 and 2 with a happy outlet and today owned up to it.
He said the EPA has developed a new federal fuel economy methodology draft for PHEVs.
Using this technique, the Volt will become the first mass produced vehicle to obtain a triple digit MPG rating. He also noted using this system the Volt is determined to have an efficiency of 25 kwh/100 miles. Considering the cost of electricity this amounts to 3 cents per mile.
“From the data we’ve seen, many Chevy Volt drivers may be able to be in pure electric mode on a daily basis without having to use any gas,” said GM Chief Executive Officer Fritz Henderson. “EPA labels are a yardstick for customers to compare the fuel efficiency of vehicles. So, a vehicle like the Volt that achieves a composite triple-digit fuel economy is a game-changer.”
The methodology assumes in city driving the car will mostly operate on electricity but some degree of gas operation is taken into account. The petroleum equivalence of electricity and a utility factor weighing in the population’s driving behavior are also included in the calculation.
Press Release:
Chevrolet Volt Expects 230 mpg in City Driving
* First mass-produced vehicle to claim more than 100 mpg composite fuel economy
* Tentative EPA methodology results show 25 kilowatt hours/100 miles electrical efficiency in city cycle
* Plugging in daily is key to high-mileage performance
WARREN, Mich. – The Chevrolet Volt extended-range electric vehicle is expected to achieve city fuel economy of at least 230 miles per gallon, based on development testing using a draft EPA federal fuel economy methodology for labeling for plug-in electric vehicles.
The Volt, which is scheduled to start production in late 2010 as a 2011 model, is expected to travel up to 40 miles on electricity from a single battery charge and be able to extend its overall range to more than 300 miles with its flex fuel-powered engine-generator.
“From the data we’ve seen, many Chevy Volt drivers may be able to be in pure electric mode on a daily basis without having to use any gas,” said GM Chief Executive Officer Fritz Henderson. “EPA labels are a yardstick for customers to compare the fuel efficiency of vehicles. So, a vehicle like the Volt that achieves a composite triple-digit fuel economy is a game-changer.”
According to U.S. Department of Transportation data, nearly eight of 10 Americans commute fewer than 40 miles a day http://tinyurl.com/U-S-DOTStudy .
“The key to high-mileage performance is for a Volt driver to plug into the electric grid at least once each day,” Henderson said.
Volt drivers’ actual gas-free mileage will vary depending on how far they travel and other factors, such as how much cargo or how many passengers they carry and how much the air conditioner or other accessories are used. Based on the results of unofficial development testing of pre-production prototypes, the Volt has achieved 40 miles of electric-only, petroleum-free driving in both EPA city and highway test cycles.
Under the new methodology being developed, EPA weights plug-in electric vehicles as traveling more city miles than highway miles on only electricity. The EPA methodology uses kilowatt hours per 100 miles traveled to define the electrical efficiency of plug-ins. Applying EPA’s methodology, GM expects the Volt to consume as little as 25 kilowatt hours per 100 miles in city driving. At the U.S. average cost of electricity (approximately 11 cents per kWh), a typical Volt driver would pay about $2.75 for electricity to travel 100 miles, or less than 3 cents per mile.
The Chevrolet Volt uses grid electricity as its primary source of energy to propel the car. There are two modes of operation: Electric and Extended-Range. In electric mode, the Volt will not use gasoline or produce tailpipe emissions when driving. During this primary mode of operation, the Volt is powered by electrical energy stored in its 16 kWh lithium-ion battery pack.
When the battery reaches a minimum state of charge, the Volt automatically switches to Extended-Range mode. In this secondary mode of operation, an engine-generator produces electricity to power the vehicle. The energy stored in the battery supplements the engine-generator when additional power is needed during heavy accelerations or on steep inclines.
“The 230 city mpg number is a great indication of the capabilities of the Volt’s electric propulsion system and its ability to displace gasoline,” said Frank Weber, global vehicle line executive for the Volt. “Actual testing with production vehicles will occur next year closer to vehicle launch. However, we are very encouraged by this development, and we also think that it is important to continue to share our findings in real time, as we have with other aspects of the Volt’s development.”
August 11th, 2009 at 6:39 am
230 mpg city will get some attention. Go Chevy!
Take that Toyota…
It is great that the Govt may allow the Volt to really show off its potential with these high mileage numbers that include battery only operation. That is how many will use the Volt.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:40 am
Congrats, Lyle! You made the best guess (and I agreed with you)!!!
Since this 230 mpg figure has been endorsed by the experts at Argonne National Lab, it will help everyone grasp how essentially “gas free” the Volt is vs ordinary hybrid and/or ICE vehicles!
August 11th, 2009 at 6:42 am
That’s great! Now for some hardcore advertising.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:42 am
While contrived, it does emphasize how the typical driver, as defined in these tests, rarely uses gasoline.
Toyota would be foolish not to offer an E-REV.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:46 am
Press conf is at 8:oo this morning not 8:30 or 9:30
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 6:48 am
That’s an interesting looking charger- I wonder if what the black circular part is for…
August 11th, 2009 at 6:48 am
PRESS CONF AT 8:00 THIS MORNING?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 6:52 am
I still think it sends the wrong message to assign an MPG rating to the battery powered portion of an electric car.
We discussed this quite a bit a while back, and our best method was to have two numbers. One for the AER and one for the ICE MPG.
But what do I know? I also thought it was a good idea for the USA to convert over to the metric system…………..
August 11th, 2009 at 6:54 am
Definitely cool but for some reason I think a press conference at 2:30 would seem oddly more appropriate.
Just hope I can get my hands on a Volt….
August 11th, 2009 at 6:55 am
I’m sure it’s just a holder for the center device and a place to hang the cord.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:58 am
That’s what made the most sense of the “What is 230?”.
For the 48 miles a day I need to drive, that might be about 8 gallons a month I would estimate (instead of about 80), using AC most of the time. That would be a 90% reduction in CO2!!
I hope the conference will be available for viewing later today. I have three, 8 to 5 demos out-of-town for Genisys.
Volt ROCKS!!!
August 11th, 2009 at 7:05 am
People can relate to MPG ratings, so 230 is a great number. 100+ in combined city/highway is also a milestone number. I can’t wait!
Nitpick: That is a CAD drawing of the charger, not a photo.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:07 am
Very nice! I wouldn’t have calculated it that way but it still has value. My city mileage would be way higher (if I had a place to plug it in). Very exciting to have it confirmed though.
Too bad they didn’t post HWY miles
August 11th, 2009 at 7:07 am
While I do agree that the true rating should be separated into an AER rating and an ICE rating…
I think that most people who are not quite as up to speed on exactly what the Volt is all about will certainly raise an eyebrow when they hear about a car that gets 230 mpg!
I equate the metric system in America to soccer… both pretty good things but they’ll just never catch on in the states
August 11th, 2009 at 7:09 am
HA! We were right!
Well done GM!
Go Chevy Volt!
August 11th, 2009 at 7:15 am
Ok…now tell us the depleted battery MPG.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Yeah, but GM wants to take advantage of a full day’s nes cycle by putting this out at 8 a.m. — very media savvy.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:19 am
I was wrong thinking “23″ was the number of NGMCO plug in vehicles offered in August 2011. Those that guessed mpg were right.
The reason I didn’t feel 230 was an accurate number for the city mpg is that it doesn’t fit the formula we were given. If you change the 40 mile city range (battery) to 60 miles city range (battery). Then the formula works.
60 mile charge = electric cost $1
230 miles (city) / 60 battery life = 3.83 recharges or $3.83 (cost of one gallon of gas).
Did the front air dam make the difference or are LG Chem batteries doing better than expected? Either way, you got to love that number.
yes we can?
=D~
August 11th, 2009 at 7:21 am
If I had a Volt in my driveway it would NOT (I repeat NOT, not NOT) get 230 miles per gallon.
It would get INFINITY miles per gallon because I would never drive it over 40 miles in any one day.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:23 am
Talk about generating some buzz! This announcement will do it — and it’s bound to make for some interesting blogging over the next few days. I really can’t wait to see how Toyota and Honda react to this.
And given our recent thread about marketing the Volt vis-a-vis BEVs, for all those who do not understand the Volt and its ER-EV drive system, this is a number that they understand, and it will blow them away.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:31 am
Seems unlikely they would share the least flattering number until they have to. Let’s hope it is at least 50 MPG HWY.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:31 am
If I still had a Chevrolet dealer, I would care about this announcement with some “how great it is going to be” intensity.
However, as my dealership closed today as far as Chevrolet or Buick (we’re just not Obama-worthy I suppose), the Volt’s mpg has become an abstract topic for me. My GM vehicles have been good, and are good, but I’m not thinking I will “transfer” to a different GM dealership, especially as others in this area have poor reputations. I’d rather stick with the people I know at this dealership, whatever brand they decide to have for sale.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:33 am
The simple number “230″ turns heads like someone revving their engine…will GM go further to explain the number to the uninformed? I’m disappointed since it appears that the EPA did not adopt a format similar to below:
40 AER, 50 city/50 highway MPG
August 11th, 2009 at 7:42 am
Nice one, but please… 230MPG…
lol, the current most efficient car is about 55MPG, and *TADAAA* “we” achieved 230 (*) <- Please refer to the footnote conditions blabla
But again, you tell people what they want to hear, no what facts are. There are 2 numbers who have to be published
1. Battery mode MPG (infinite – ok, electricity cost ok)
2. Battery SOC mode (??? MPG)
These are the two extremes. And the way I do use my car will set my own MPG somewhere in between these offsets. The SOC MPG is the GUARANTEE I won’t get above this limit in normal circumstances.
SOC Mode is the most important number we need. Don’t fool with it. GM, are you proud of your car? Yes or no? If so, there are then no reason to be afraid to keep some transparency. Or is there anything you better not tell?
Dammit, that makes me sick. Sorry for the rant…
/kicks the cat
August 11th, 2009 at 7:42 am
Congratulation GM! Keep up the great work.
Go GM go!!!
August 11th, 2009 at 7:49 am
I always thought 230 was agood time to go to the dentist! (toothhurty) Naw, really awesome news!! Maybe it will get the attention of non-car people. I wonder how many will gripe because it really doesn’t get 230 miles per gallon when they forget to charge it. (I still want one).
Shake and Bake!
August 11th, 2009 at 7:53 am
Hurray!!!!
Next great number is 11/10
August 11th, 2009 at 7:55 am
(click to show comment)
August 11th, 2009 at 7:55 am
Seems a bit like false advertising to me but we’ve all gone over how MPG’s SHOULD be calculated.
I also really wish they would have given the Highway MPG numbers.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:58 am
You forget the second mention where it says:
“First mass-produced vehicle to claim more than 100 mpg composite fuel economy”
It does cover your SOC MPG, as when you go the highway you will use your battery and when you reach your SOC, then you will use gaz, the COMBINE full economy is over 100mpg.
If you only want the pure ICE mpg, go buy a SUV
August 11th, 2009 at 8:05 am
This is a great number (230 and 100 miles/mpg). However, I still maintain that the typical driver is not the 80% of the population at least for the first few years but a home owner with a garage and a daily cycle with overnight recharge would represent the Volt usage best. No doubt the EPA published MPG will fit well with this model.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:05 am
man this is rocking. GM will rock the world by giving a $40000 car that has 100MPG and 230 mpg city. take out toyota and honda out of the market by launching the volt. it was excllent that CEO henderson came out with this numbers.230mpg a triple digit mpg would be really great. Imagine we had a cash for clunkers program of $1bn next year the subsidy should be like 10000 for the volt excluding the tax credit of 7500 for PHEV
August 11th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Lyle – can you find out the formula they use to calculate the MPG on PHEV’s? It will be interesting to compare the competitors PHEV’s to the Volt (now that we have determined a yard-stick).
August 11th, 2009 at 8:11 am
With the information now given, I still think they should state the miles AER with the miles per kWH (not kWH per mile), then state the fuel mileage in charge sustaining mode. Eventually, Plug-In Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles will have to provide similar information. BEV’s will only have to state miles AER and miles per kWH.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:16 am
How does 25 kilowatt hours/100 miles electrical efficiency in city cycle, not mean only 32 miles of range in just city to anyone?
25 kilowatt hours = 100 miles city
8 kilowatts of usable pack in Volt = 32 miles
Goes to show you, people do just look at the MPG, even here.
Sounds like the worst news yet, the EPA confirming a bad electric range, it does not mean much now when GM has said it has gotten 40 miles city or highway now because the EPA clearly did not.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:16 am
(click to show comment)
August 11th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Could it be that instead of artificially holding millage to 40 miles to a charge (which is the impression I got from earlier comments/posts) that when the battery is new that 60 miles on a charge city is possible. So instead of artificially holding a charge range to 40 the battery will perform initially better and will degrade over time to the 40 mile range over the warranty life of the battery. Maybe? That could account for the difference.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:26 am
The hwy cycle averages 48mph, it is estimated the Volt will get low 30s at 65mph average
August 11th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Read the article, and work on your comprehension skills. Thanks.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:36 am
what number will the L e a f get?
August 11th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Mr Smith
You forgot to stand on one foot, hop in a circle, and wave the ostrich feathers. (smile)
With a little divide by zero in the middle of the calculation, you can get most anything you want. That’s all that has happened here.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Only one problem…..MSRP 40k!!!!!! That is a bunch of BS!!!!! Who can afford this car in this economy!!!! There goes the money you just saved on gas!
August 11th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Kyle,
I’ve been floating that idea for a while, but the engineers here think that the software may limit the initial AER to 40.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Lyle noted;
“The petroleum equivalence of electricity and a utility factor weighing in the population’s driving behavior are also included in the calculation.”
August 11th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Lyle – can you find out the formula they use to calculate the MPG on PHEV’s? It will be interesting to compare the competitors PHEV’s to the Volt (now that we have determined a yard-stick).
August 11th, 2009 at 8:45 am
RB,
He did say that some of the closed dealerships may be “revisited” – fingers crossed.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Except that the electricity from your home isn’t free, and generating electricity at a power plant to charge your vehicle will generate CO2. -Chris
August 11th, 2009 at 8:47 am
Where do you get the 8 kilowatts of usable pack in Volt number? If that number 1s 10 than the miles per charge is 40. I don’t think that the actual battery specifications have been published.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:57 am
I agree! I hated that 230 outlet commercial on the green background on Hulu…. I had no Idea until today that it is suppose to be advertising the Volt. Word to Chevy…. I don’t think that ad campaign is working very well. I thought it was a release date for some new show.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:57 am
This is exciting.
Can this car be exported to overseas markets while being made in the USA just like how the Japanese and Koreans have been doing for quite some time? Can we start putting huge import tariffs on Asian imports to protect domestic economic interests?
This car is a great idea for commute 40 miles or less in length and still even makes sense if you want to take a trip on the weekend using some petro.
Way to go!!!
August 11th, 2009 at 8:57 am
kdawg,
It was in the pdf nasaman posted yesterday.
be well,
Tagamet
August 11th, 2009 at 8:58 am
230 MPG ?
I think they will have to explain to me in a lot more detail of how they can acheive that kind of milage.. I see that the battery can run the air conditioning and most if not all of the accessories… but what about heat ? I you live in the Southern US… it would not be an issue…
Go North… September is coming. Here in Central Alberta Canada… we will be defrosting windshields, warming the cabin of the car (heated seats will help) but the cabin has to have some heat to keep the windows clear.. Electric / battery heating will take a HUGE draw . Have you ever tried running a hair dryer from one of those 500 amp back up batteries? 3 – 5 minutes of life…
The Ford Fusion Hybrid still uses engine heat to warm the interior and defrost the windows… and it still maintains or surpasses its milage claims.
The 2010 Fusion Hybrid that I bought recently claims 5.4 L/100KM (52.3 MPG Canadian) City driving and 6.1 L/100 KM on the Highway (46.3 MPG Canadian ).. Right now I am averaging a combined city / highway milage of 5.6 L/100 KM (50 MPG Canadian).
And that is with normal driving and the AC set to AUTO (keeping the cabin @ 21 C) So both the electric air conditioning and the ICE are running together and separately to maintain the temperature.
I don’t think that 230 MPG is realistic at all…
As mentioned above… If the Volt can acheive and maintain 50 – 70 MPG overall.. that would be great .
August 11th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Look at the factors they mention. Electrical use is factored in. The Leaf will probably get in the 250-300 range. 2 different cars, 2 different market segements. Without BEVs available, those consumers might purchase an EREV Volt but with BEVs the mpg ratings matter not. Those comfortable with the BEV range will by the BEV. It will be far superior for their needs. Those wanting rapid refillable range and the flexibility it provides will not purchase a BEV, and it matters not what the mpg ratings are. These buyers will by an EREV, ICE, PHEV, or Hybrid.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Hey, did anybody notice that Statik posted a question on the webchat at http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/ today? He’s still alive!
August 11th, 2009 at 9:11 am
The 230 city calculation uses $3.83 as the price of a gallon of gasoline.
Over 100 mpg combined…. ?
102 miles traveled.
First 60 under battery power, leaving 42 under gasoline power.
First 60 miles cost $1, leaving 42 costing $2.83.
$2.83 = 74% of $3.83 (1 gallon)
42 miles = 74% of ICE mpg
56.7 = 100% of ICE
102 mpg combined (?)
=D~
August 11th, 2009 at 9:13 am
oh hush!
Will this number affect the CAFE fleet average for GM?.. if so it would allow some interesting things.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Seems like a pretty realistic number for City efficiency to me. The problem is this number by itself doesn’t mean a whole lot and they KNOW the highway number too but don’t give it, other than a reference to greater than 100mpg.
More important than anything else in this press release is the 25KWh/100miles. This equates to 32 miles AER for 8KWh. So the city AER rating for this methodology will be 32 miles. This seems like a bit of a buzz kill.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:22 am
I thought GM recently hinted that the controls would basically limit to 8kwh from full battery in CD mode and the aim is to provide this 8kwh for 10yr/150,000 miles.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Best thing in my opinion is that if the EPA confirms the number, people will now look at the volt in a new way.
Its no longer an EREV, 4 passenger car worth 40,000.
its a “for 40k, you get 230 MILES PER (FRIGGIN) GALLON car!! and you pay for that tech”
the 230 MPG is THE selling feature now (if confirmed). and connot be viewed as a comparable to the Prius. (the plug in version just got fast tracked methinks…)
the Greenies will LOVE that number… star powered pre orderes just finished the first 10,000 right…about……….
now.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:23 am
I got interrupted by the database crash. To continue my post,the poster above me (#20 RVD) is no doubt somewhat correct. The mpg clearly will vary based on the amount driven. The more driven per day (per recharge cycle) the lower the mileage will be) Assuming you can find overnight recharge to recharge everyday on a long trip the maximum availble driving time (with standard voltage recharge) would be about 12 hours. In regaards to mileage, this would be the most severe condition. (~50 MPG) Under more typical condition the mileage will be higher. The less driven the more closely will the EPA figure be approached. Another words to sell the Volt to the public,it needs to be emphasized that EREV-s best benefit currently would for those who want to take advantage of electrification without the limitation of BEV but with little mileage advantage for very long trips.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Is it a 110 or 220 volt charger?
August 11th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Metric, shmetric…. I demand a fuel efficiency of 83 furlongs per bushel!
August 11th, 2009 at 9:27 am
A city cycle requires much more starting and stopping than a highway cycle. I can’t think of any application in city driving that would require someone to use more than 30 miles of range before recharging. Saying “hey the Volt only gets 32 electric miles in city driving and not the 40 advertised” is a little nit-picky if you ask me.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:33 am
Is anyone else having site trouble today? I’m struggling to get a post to “submit”. This is an 8th try.
Be well,
Tagamet
acronym omitted just to test site “issues”
August 11th, 2009 at 9:35 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/12/business/12auto.html
Take Care
Arch
August 11th, 2009 at 9:36 am
That is going to be a marketing coup de grâce. I’m sure GM is smart enough to pay for a really great marketing campaign to launch the plug-in era. No, not the same company that they used for the EV1. That was horrible. Simply horrible.
Go GM! 230. Heck, I would make hats!
August 11th, 2009 at 9:36 am
Great now we have to come up with a ‘term’ for a person who ‘lurks’ looking for Statik
This sticker is both dangerous and inconvienent but I do love fig newtons!
August 11th, 2009 at 9:37 am
If this posts, I guess it’s ok.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 9:39 am
I think yes is the answer.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:46 am
I hope you’re right about the general population viewing the number favorably. But the greenies will call bullshit because the MPG in charge sustaining mode has not been released and shock of shock it still uses stinky ole gas.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:47 am
have someth particular in mind? let’s here it
I plotted a dependence of MPG on ave daily miles, and guess what?
It starts at 50 and goes to infinity and beyond. You could also make it 3D (add battery min SOC variable) and get even more absurd numbers.
I wonder why GovM decided on such a modest number as 230?
Why not 300? Or better yet 500? I guess we will see those numbers too.
Sooner or later. Probably on Chinese made cars first similar to 1000W audio equipment peak output
August 11th, 2009 at 9:50 am
I’m glad to hear that he’s alive and well. He’s sorely missed here! Thanks for the heads-up.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 9:51 am
[...] That 230mpg figure comes with caveats [...]
August 11th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Fasten your seatbelts….
230 mpg is so absurd, I don’t even no where to begin. To me, if you get in a car with a 230 mpg rating on the sticker, I fully expect that car to be able to drive a distance of 230 miles and only have burned a gallon of gas…but I guess that’s just being crazy now isn’t it? I was reserving comment on this issue until I got the full explanation this morning as I didn’t want to jump the gun on something I wasn’t sure about. Sadly to me, Lyle’s suspicions of the 230 logo were correct. The way I see it, this 230 mpg rating can only hurt this car. The reason being, the number is disingenuine. It will never get 230 mpg. Ever. What it will do is drive 40 miles on electric, and then maybe get 40-50 mpg when the gas gen set is running. What in the world is wrong with just saying that??? There’s no mile long formula to go through, no disclaimers to print, no lawyer gibberish needed, just the facts, thank you very much! I visit this site everyday and constantly read about this car, and I can barely wrap my head around how the EPA is figuring the 230 mpg rating, now throw that number at anyone else and expect them to understand? How are customers going to react when they actually realize that they are not getting 230 mpg? I wonder if they will feel duped???
The BEST products sell themselves based on their own merits, plain and simple. I firmly believe the Volt can and will do just that given the chance. But to willingly accept this ludicrous rating the EPA is foolishly compiling, I am sad to say my respect for the GM team has dropped susbstantially upon this news.
Bring on the minuses, but this is how I feel.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Lyle, your title for this post is not correct. The Volt did not get a 230 MPG EPA rating!
This figure is GM’s own calculation and has yet to be certified by the EPA. Pretty disappointing to have a misleading title on such an important announcement.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:01 am
The Volt has a “smart plug” that senses either 120 or 230 and uses either.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 10:01 am
The 100 miles per 25 KWH is an important number. I think that the so called pure BEVs will be hard pressed to beat this number given their extra battery weight. Of course, here I am assuming that the extra battery weight is greater than the weight of the range extender. 100/25 KWH is the number that will show case the EV refinements that GM has spent so much time and money on – something the BEV makers may not have had time or money to do yet.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Yeah, you can never achieve it. What conditions are necessary to be ablle to put 1 gallon of gas in the Volt and go 230 miles even if you include the AER?
That’s right it won’t.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Re: CO2, your point is well taken, and I think Dan is well aware of that. But FWIW “the smokestack is a lot more scubbable than the tailpipe.”
It’s just easier and more economical to deal with the problem at the power plant (even a coal one) than on-board the vehicle.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Agreed and I’m not so sure this great big number is in GM’s best interest. Best to market the car as a 40/40 machine or whatever.He get Jose Canseco he was a 40/40 guy and probably needs the work.
The Volt an EV-ER on steroids.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:21 am
This extraordinary MPG calculation could seriously backfire against GM. First of all, when the average consumer thinks of MPG, they think it means how many miles they can go on one gallon of gas, not how much gas the average American will use in a year. Right now, most people have no idea that the MPG they can expect on a volt will primarily depend on their daily driving distance, which means that many will find that they get much higher than 230 MPG (or 100MPG combined) on an annual basis, and many will get much lower than that. The standard deviation is way too high for these numbers to hold real value.
Plus, nowhere in this press conference do they say what the ICE fuel economy is. Why won’t they reveal this to the public?
I really hope that in the coming weeks and months, GM clarifies their MPG calculations and explains it to consumers in a way that they can understand. At this point, declaring that the Volt get 40 miles AER, 230 MPG city and 100 MPG combined just serves to confuse anyone who isn’t an ardent follower of the Volt’s progress. Heck, I visit this site almost every day and I’m still confused…
August 11th, 2009 at 10:21 am
That’s why I thought it would be a cool marketing system to link up dealers with the nearest solar installers and get some kind of special deal that if you buy a volt you can get a discount on the solar install. It would be good marketing for the Chevy dealer and the solar dealer. Think about it.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:23 am
This is the news story that will turn heads and minds. 230 MPG shouts “long range vehicle.” No range anxiety with that EPA estimate IF GM emphasizes that you fill it up with gasoline and plug it in. Way to go GM. Go, go VOLT.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:31 am
What’s up with the charger?! I thought it would plug into a US standard 110 outlet?
August 11th, 2009 at 10:31 am
“it is estimated the Volt will get low 30s at 65mph average”
Can you please provide a link to your source.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:31 am
Can I put in a gallon of gas and drive nonstop 230 miles? If not, that’s not 230 MPG. Plain and simple.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Nope, I can only reply to my own posts.
kdawg,
The formula is in nasamans pdf link from yesterday.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 10:34 am
And the “hardcore advertizing” campaign got a jump start right after the GM news conference ended —both CNN & MSNBC headlined the Volt’s 230 mpg city figure & MSNBC’s commentator said “that’s quadruple the Prius’ mileage”!
August 11th, 2009 at 10:35 am
“More important than anything else in this press release is the 25KWh/100miles. This equates to 32 miles AER for 8KWh.”
EXACTLY!.
However, I can still live with that figure, it’s the $43,000.00+ figure I can’t handle……
August 11th, 2009 at 10:42 am
Yes it crashed on me twice. Not the car the website!
August 11th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Exactly, Here’s what worries me.
Average person see’s “230 mpg EPA rating” and asks “So if I put 1 gallon of gas in the car I can expect to drive around 230 miles right?” …
“err umm … No, you’ll drive 40 on electric and then about another 50 on your 1 gallon of gas”
Average person’s brain turns off and instantly decides that the whole thing is a load of PR crap because 40 + 50 is not even close to 230.
I get it, you get it, we all get it… but the average person won’t and I’m worried that the whole 230 mpg rating is going to backfire and be a PR disaster.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Yeah!.. we beat back the japanese.. again.. this time with help from the koreans!
Kimchi and the American Flag rippling in the wind.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Lyle,
I’m reading at other websites that “230″ is only coming out of GM – not EPA yet.
About how they arrived at 230, if we go by Lyle’s guess the other day, where the suggested logic was that the EPA would drive 11 miles off of gas after exhausting the battery drive of 40 miles – what would the EPA come up with for a pure battery (electric) car (like the Nissan LEAF) where there is no ICE? Would that be infinite miles per gallon?
EPA should come up with different ratings scheme for such cars otherwise they are not able to visualize the future of transportation.
Just my 2 cents…
August 11th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Capt,
On the fastlane site they acknoledged the 32 AER, but said that the ACTUAL Aer would still be 40. The 32 takes other things into account like running the AC some of the time and ambient temps.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 10:55 am
NEVER drive over 40 miles? Never is a long time. What happens if there is a storm and you lose power for 4 or 5 days?
August 11th, 2009 at 10:55 am
What? You do not have the metric system in AMerica? What do you use for measuring? Your hands or feet?
August 11th, 2009 at 10:55 am
I think this number will only apply to EREVs or other PHEVs with an EV range and an ICE range. The methodology used to generate this number doesn’t work for either a conventional ICE vehicle or a BEV.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Not to be the damper on this but with this rating, how can I achieve that range of 230mpg miles? Not even Ideal conditions will allow that. This is a “Double Edged” sword. I know in my ICE car I can get my 24MPG on one gallon, and john10101010101….something, he gets about 50+ on average per gallon.
So if I put in one gallon of gas in the Volt, I can go 230 miles? so 2 gallons !260 miles? Then that gas tank will only be 2 gallons MAX.
Something is wrong with these figures. I think GM should’ve held off on this announcement. Of course they can blame the EPA test procedure. Many think they don’t know WTF they’re doing anyway. Remember how they used to test? Basically the car was on a treadmill.
I don’t believe at all the 230 figure. GM & EPA, go back and redo the test’s because if I can’t get 230 miles from one gallon and one full charge, you’re full of sh|t.
1 Gallon of 50 miles + 40 miles AER 230MPG!!!!!
fyi, a “divide by 0″ is a mthmatical error, just in cas you didn’t know.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:06 am
terryk #37…
The best way to look at “actual fuel use” is a measure of 12 months time and distance. 12,000 miles per year on battery power (only).
This is 365 days at about 33 miles per day. Charge the Volt each day at a cost of $1 more-or-less.
We use $365 to travel 12,000 in one year.
If one gallon of gasoline cost $3.83 then $365 will buy 95 gallons. 95 gallons will drive 12,000 on battery power only.
12,000 / 95 = 126 mpg (electric gallons)
Now if we go need to drive further. Say a trip across country and maybe a couple of 4 day vacations. We add another 4000 miles distance for the year all being on gasoline. The figure I get using $3.85 per gallon of gasoline @ 56 mpg is 71 gallons of actual gasoline used. This cost $274 more dollars.
Now add $365 battery dollars to $274 actual gasoline dollars. It’s a total of $639 cost to drive 16,000 miles in a year.
$639 @ $3.83 = 166 gallons (71 actual and 95 electric equivalent)
16,000 / 166 = 96 mpg combined
This is a full year of driving including serious vacation travel. This is also a comfortable car with peppy performance and very quiet operating design.
*note* If you opportunity charge. Meaning you charge somewhere other than home a few days a month. The consumer cost drops and in effect raises mpg to the driver. 102 mpg combined is a realistic figure.
=D~
August 11th, 2009 at 11:06 am
They didn’t decide, they based it on the method that the EPA is considering using..
It may not be an official formulae…but it allows them to say” we used an approved agency’s proposed test method and got “x”
makes for great media, and if the methodology is adopted, them it si not an absurd / random number is it..it will have been done as per the bar that all cars are measures by
August 11th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Dave, I think you’re going at this the wrong way. The methodology is to first calculate the EV range. Then you calculate the city range in charge sustaining mode. Then you use real world figures to calculate how many miles of the total miles driven will be driven in EV mode (this is the utility figure).
Are you sure they’re using the price of gas? I haven’t seen that anywhere.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:08 am
The GM – EPA approach is entirely reasonable. Their dilemma is this:
The mileage is a major variable depending on the amount dirven between recharging. This is what must be emphasized so that the public understands.
This is how you get 100 miles per gallon. This is your highway mileage.
Start with a fully charged car to your summer home 100 mile away. Recharge over night.
Drive home the next day.
(You have driven 200 miles on approx. on 2 gallons of gas (assuming 50 mpg for gas mileage driven.)
As far as the 230 mpg city. It depends entire the type of daily drives one does.
Drive 60 miles a day after recharge. The mileage is about 150 MPG,
Drive 50 Miles a day after recharge. The mileage is about 200 MPG
Drive 41 Miles a day after recharge. The mileage is about 2000 MPG
Drive 40 or less Miles a day after recharge. The mileage much higher yet.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:18 am
I really hope that in the coming weeks and months, GM clarifies their MPG calculations and explains it to consumers in a way that they can understand.
But there’s the rub. Getting people to buy this, or any electric/hybrid requires them to understand that it’s radically different to an ICE car. People who are not interested in cars, and not interested in technology will not be interested in an EREV 40 with E-85 ICE Genset and 112KW AC Motor. Tooo much new info. 230mpg is a shocking enough number that people will really want the benefits from, and totally understand. They can learn all the new jargon if they like, or they can just enjoy cheaper, greener motoring. How many prius drives understand how their car actually works? Not that many, they just know it’s economical. By pushing the benefits rather than the technology you can get sales from the (largely stupid) mass public.
as for 230MPG, it’s not ridiculous, outlandish, fake, or any other term you want to throw at it. i’ve run my numbers, i’ll complete 8,500 miles a year on electric only (work run), approx 4160 electric pleasure miles and approx 3840 petrol pleasure miles. If the ICE makes 50mpg(imp) then i’ll use 76.8 gallons a year. That means my car will travel 214 miles for every gallon of petrol i put in it. sounds like 214mpg to me. Yes, I KNOW i need to pay for the electricity, but i will still have travelled 214 miles for every gallon. i call that a win, especially as it will save me over £2,300 ($3,795) a year.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Chevy Volt: 230 Mile Per Gallon , source:CNBC Government
http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?p=230+mpg&n=21&ei=utf-8&js=1&fr=yfp-t-501&tnr=20&vid=0001559081932
=D~
August 11th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Give me a break! The EPA rateing has NOTHING to do with non-stop milage (It never has). It has everything to do with how much gas you will use on average. Take the number of miles you drive in a year and divide by the number of gallons of gas you had to buy during that year. That is your milage – the one that matters at any rate. For the average driver that number should be about 230 mpg assuming the EPA driving cycle. I fully expect that my milage will be much higher than 230 mpg. Get a clue folks – the idea is to reduce the total amount of gas you have to buy to meet your transportation needs.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:37 am
[...] It tells me nothing. Presumably it includes charging the batteries from the electrical grid. In GM’s press release, GM Chief Executive Officer Fritz Henderson says, “The key to high-mileage performance is for [...]
August 11th, 2009 at 11:41 am
LazyP,
Thanks. I’m trying a cold reboot.
So far, so good….
Be well,
Tagamet
August 11th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Frank Weber is doing a live web chat this afternoon (Tuesday August 11) at 4:45 PM. Hopefully he will clarify the MPG issues:
http://www.chevroletvoltage.com/index.php/Blog/chat-with-frank-weber.html
August 11th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Tag:
I have had problems with this site all day. It crashed a few times already. Perhaps the volume of visitors to the site today is overwhelming the server?
August 11th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Give me a break! The EPA rateing has NOTHING to do with non-stop milage (It never has). It has everything to do with how much gas you will use on average. Take the number of miles you drive in a year and divide by the number of gallons of gas you had to buy during that year. That is your milage – the one that matters at any rate. For the average driver that number should be about 230 mpg assuming the EPA driving cycle. I fully expect that my milage will be much higher than 230 mpg. Get a clue folks – the idea is to reduce the total amount of gas you have to buy to meet your transportation needs.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:48 am
First mass produced car to be produced? It’s not even on the road yet. We need to wait to 2011 to make such claims. Until then the Tesla and Fiskar and everyone else making pure electric cars have the highest MPG rating. Are they throwing in the home charger for free when you buy the Volt or is that going to be another $1,000+ option?
August 11th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Arch,
According to the NYT article the LEAF gets 367 mpg. Now I’m thoroughly confused!
Be well,
Tagamet
August 11th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Yes, but you don’t get my point. I want to know both extremes, aka when you simply run the volt without batteries.
When you plan a 760 miles trip, you go need two full tanks right? so you do 40m electric, 360 gas, refill tank, 360 miles, and you arrive.. is the 100 MPG still valid after the *second* time you refilled your car?
If it is the case, then this proves having a the ICE being a simple generator drastically enhances the overall efficiency in real terms. This is what I want to verify.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:57 am
The press release states:
“Based on the results of unofficial development testing of pre-production prototypes, the Volt has achieved 40 miles of electric-only, petroleum-free driving in both EPA city and highway test cycles.”
Seems to indicate that they have verified that they will achieve the 40 mi. range under both the EPA city & highway test cycles.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:57 am
When I could not get on this site all morning, I went over to chevroletvolt.com to see Bob Lutz’s post on the subject. A commentor claimed that 60% of the pack will be used (9.6kwh) instead of 50% (8kwh), for whatever that’s worth.
I’m thinking we may have to wait until someone on this board actually buys a Volt to find out what actual, “charge maintenance mode” mpg is like. I’ve been very optimistic that 50 mpg would turn out to be lowball, but the continuing reluctance to give out this figure has brought me down to earth, a bit.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
“I equate the metric system in America to soccer”
… and bottled soft drinks.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
GM is so lame, they just set themselves up for a Class Action Lawsuit with this absurd 230 MPG claim. This is circus and GM is a juggler in it.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
They’ve officially gone from “once a day” to “at least once a day.” That may not sound like an important distinction; but at one time, lifetime of the battery pack (at least for warranty purposes) was thought to be based on a single cycle per day.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Tagamet,
BillR asked:
“If I drive my fully charged Volt on a country road at moderate speeds, say 45 to 50 mph, on a beautiful day so I don’t need AC or heat, and there is no traffic or stops, and there is a 20 mph tailwind, I might only need 150 Wh per mile on average. With 8 kwh usable in the battery, this equates to 53 miles AER.
However, in your recent response you state “The Volt is designed to consistently provide the up to 40 mile battery range over the vehicle life”. Does this mean the BMS will limit AER to 40 miles from full charge, regardless of energy consumption?”
Greg Cesiel (GM Senior Staff Engineer) responded:
Quote:
” …the battery is designed to provide a consistent amount of energy over its life. If you drive the Volt as you describe it will be possible to exceed 40 miles from the battery.”
August 11th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Dividing by zero is undefined.
Dividing by a very small number, very near to zero, that’s another matter.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
So the window sticker will look something like:
CITY 230 – - – Combined 100 – - – Highway 60
With that in mind, it does take the edge off the ‘long distance commuter’ promotions and will now focus more on the ‘around town benefits’ of the new VOLT.
No wonder New York was on the ‘first to get them’ list.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Must be throwing in tow-truck milage.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Has anyone considered the concept that the Volt will be nothing more than a CAFE-killer? In other words, it will sell only a few thousand Volts a year for the express purpose of raising GM’s fleet CAFE ratings? That allows them to sell a lot more gas guzzling cars (and maybe trucks and SUV’s too, if they launch a production Converj). Am I being paranoid?
August 11th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
The number is a bit ludicrous and possibly misleading, but it does get the point across that this is not an average hybrid car. This car is different from what people are used to. No, you won’t will be able to drive it 230 miles in a single day on one gallon of gas. But plenty of people will drive 230 miles a week and use just a single gallon of gas. I would probably go all month without using any gasoline and certainly go farther than 230 miles.
An educated consumer should really know all the relevant statistics to compare the upcoming plug in cars and other hybrids. Things like AER, MPG, Kwhr/100mi, and battery size, chemistry, depth of charge, and charge rate. That’s a whole lot of numbers that I want to know and understand. But people want one simple figure to focus on, something simple to get the point across. It looks like GM is going to run with 230 MPG. I’m sure they’ll also prominently mention 40 miles AER to get the point across you don’t have to use any gas at all for regular commuting. But the 40 mile AER figure runs the risk of the Letterman misunderstanding. On hearing 40 miles electric range some people dismiss it immediately and decide they’d rather check out the Nissan Leaf with 100 miles range.
“Your mileage may vary” was never so true as with the Volt.
Your actual mileage will be somewhere between 40 MPG and infinity (40 to be pessimistic). If average driving patterns lead the EPA to a rating of 230 MPG then that’s a fine number to settle on. Once the Volt has been out there a while you can have actual customer testimonials like “I drove my Volt 10,000 miles this year and only used 20 gallons of gas”.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
GM still needs to help the market understand what the Volt is and does–I listened to a piece on CNBC this morning that was a stumbling, bumbling indication of what the general public probably knows about the Volt so far–one “expert” said it goes 40 miles then you have to recharge it, another said 300 miles. Oh, boy.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
go look at the pics on chevrolet voltage…. the one shown here is the non-portable 240 volt version. The portable one looks like 110/ with plug…..
August 11th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
The photo is of a defibrillator.
They include one with every volt. When the realization of money spent for product received settles in, you’ll need it.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
That’s a 20% hit from the EPA city cycle. Seems pretty big compared to what the efficient ICEs and the Prius took in 2008 with the new methodology for City rating. The good thing is the driver can choose to mitigate this by avoiding friction breaking and moderating AC use, audio power, etc. I think 36 or so would be practical in summer heat without pissing off other drivers or melting yourself.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
And why is everyone so angry about this?
If it’s true that most people drive less than 40 miles per day, say on Monday thru Friday, and then on the weekends they actually use the ICE Extender, what’s the problem?
If for 15,000 miles per year I only use 65 gallons of gas, that’s GREAT!!!
Don’t worry. Be happy. Like the little ‘zero plug’.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
O wrote :
There goes the money you just saved on gas!
—————————————————————————————–
Obviously, the first buyers are paying a premium for the novelty. On the other hand, even if you don’t save a penny switching from oil to electricity, you still gain something : energy independence.
You stop giving away your money to OPEC, which is, by itself, a good enough reason to buy a Volt. Not to mention the greenhouse effect you help refrain not using oil.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Arch
What’s happening with geothermal?
RB
August 11th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Is this the first crack in the armour? Is the volt D.O.A.? Is the volt really a toad that will get leapfrogged before it even makes it’s first jump?
What’s the real reason nobody outside of GM has driven the volt in range extender mode?
REPORT: GM admits Volt concerns to U.S. Treasury
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/08/11/report-gm-admits-volt-concerns-to-u-s-treasury/
/inquiring minds want to know
August 11th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
If the Volt gives me 230 MPG city…
If I take my fully charged Volt on a 50 mile trip, where the first 40 miles are on the highway and the last 10 are in the city… I should expect to get ~230 MPG for the city part of my trip, right?
NO… and this is why declaring the 230 MG as a city calculation is inaccurate and misleading.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
You are quite right
I stand corrected.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Yes, Obama closed your dealership and he’s gonna off your grandma too. A bit melodramatic.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
MPG is a pointless metric in anything with 100% electric drive, except to game the CAFE rules so that automakers gets extra credits to make more 8 mpg full size SUVs or big engine cars with less fines or bad press than otherwise. My suggestion is that consumers completely ignore MPG when looking at electric drive vehicles.
The real news is 25 kWh / 100 miles, about the same as a Telsa Roadster (TR) (EPA-certified electricity consumption for a 2008 TR was 28 kWh / 100 miles), though the Volt is a heavier vehicle with less than supercar but still good performance. kWh / 100 miles is the standard EPA metric for 100% electric drive vehicles.
My high performance electric motorcycle uses 2 kWh / 100 miles, so it’s 12 1/2 times more efficent that the Volt. You do the math on the MPGe on my vehicle if you want. I could care less about anything with gasoline gallons.
You want the short cut? Anything with all electric drive (range extender or not) beats a full gasser, those last century old fashioned things that use the MPG metric. Period. That’s why the Volt is awesome – all electric drive for the performance acceleration and luxury quiet win.
If you want to compare electric drive vehicles to each other on efficiency and performance, only two things matter:
1. kWh / 100 miles (lower is better)
2. torque feet (torque foot pounds / vehicle weight pounds) (higher is better)
Volt:
25 kWh / 100 miles, 40 AER
273 torque foot pounds / guess 3500 lbs, so around 0.078 torque feet
My electric motorcycle:
2 kWh / 100 miles, 12.5 more efficient than the Volt, 40 AER
around 0.147 torque feet, fully laden, about double the off the line launch of the Volt.
Now you know why I like my electric motorcycle = high performance.
math hint: pounds / pounds = 1.
http://www.convertunits.com/from/newton+meters/to/foot+pounds
(most automakers don’t report vehicle weight in terms of newton forces)
Leaf:
common guesses between 24 to 30 kWh / 100 miles, 100 AER
206 ft lbs / guess 3000 lbs, so around 0.069 torque feet, has a better 0-30 mph time than an Infiniti G37
Probably has similar efficiency and performance to a Volt, greater power pack range, smaller before topping off range.
BTW, since I never drain my pack and sometimes top if off when the grid is off-peak, as it’s convenient to me, as I run errands, overnight, etc, the whole range concept often discussed on this board is pretty meaningless to me as an actual user. But I understand that the whole MPG thing for electric vehicles is credits for gas hogs for automakers, so go for it, GM, if that makes it easier for you to produce more Volts sooner.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Friggin statik! Not only did I notice that statik posted, but his question was a great one! (The best one actually). Basically he asked how the Volt go could go 40 miles on a charge, which is 200 wh/mile, when the EPA estimate for city driving was 100 miles on 25 kWh, which is 250 wh/mile or a range of 32 miles.
The answer was that the EPA estimate for city driving includes things like passengers, cargo, and the use of things like AC.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I’m sorry I dont have the link.. A GM engineer revealed/let-slip how many city/hwy cycles the Volt could do on a battery charge.. the cycles are well known and from that the range was extrapolated at higher speeds.. results also agreed with published Tesla data. Speed and aerodynamic drag take a big toll on electric range.
Getting back on subject, this will be a marketing coup for GM, the $40k talk just blew out the window.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
koz,
I wonder how the LEAF gets 367 mpg? I know I posted this, but I never know when it will actually “go”.
Be well,
Tagamet
August 11th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Presumably that’s the 220 volt charger. Charge twice as fast as 110, or maybe better if it’s a 50 amp circuit. If you charge on 110 you probably risk tripping the circuit breaker if you try doing anything else in your garage while your Volt is charging, like running a shop vac or power tool. I imagine the Volt charging off of 110 must use pretty much the entire 15 amps it’s allowed on a regular outlet. Putting a dedicated circuit in your garage for the Volt would be a good idea. Might as well be 220 while you’re at it.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
I’m glad you understand how it works, but the average car buyer doesn’t. Most people don’t look at MPG as an annual calculation, and when given a fuel economy rating of 230 MPG, most people will think “Well, I can get 230 miles out of one gallon of gas, and 460 miles out of two gallons…” and then be disappointed when they realize that the Volt doesn’t work that way.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
CJS says
“fyi, a “divide by 0″ is a mthmatical error, just in cas you didn’t now.”
——————
Oh, we know You put one in the middle of a complicated calculation, something like 40 miles divided by 0 gallons, and all sorts of things can come out the other side. (smile) Just depends on what other little numbers are put in to make the error less obvious. Fun number, but has no real-life meaning.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
If they are trying to rqualize and combine battery and gas propulsion then, dropping one should equate to the other. Since the Volt behaves identically to a BEV while in charge depleting mode, it’s battery portion should be the calculated the same as a BEV. Since there is only a small amount of gas propulsion used for the Volt’s city rating, it stands to reason that a similarly efficient (miles/kwh) BEV should receive a similar rating. If not, then the system is useless.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
0 to 230 in a VOLTEC second . . . now just bring it on! Will the NEW GM speed up the timetable? They have kept on track thus far, let’s see if they can find a way to shave a month or two off the timetable.
To all the doubters – the VOLT is coming. Without question, this is a gamechanger and will cause many to take notice of GM. Do not look to the VOLT to be the final answer, but rather the lightening bolt that starts a sea change in the world of automotive propultion. Sure there will be competitors, variations, and alternatives. But the VOLT effort by GM – and the fact that they have chosen to make their development so public – has started in motion a chain of events that quite possiblly would not have happened without the VOLT. At least the shear pace of this development would not have happened.
Go VOLT. Go GM. Bring it on.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Tag, I honestly can’t figure out how Nissan is getting that number, at least for the US drive cycles. Now it’s true that when they do these conversions they start with the fact that a gallon of gasoline contains about 33.44 kWh of energy (or something like that). So if say a LEAF would go 367 miles using 33.44 kWh, then it would get the 367 mpg they’re talking about.
But when you do that the numbers aren’t very believable. The Volt’s are pretty eye-popping: 230 mpg using that electric-gas equivalent means the Volt would be using 145 wh/mile. That’s pretty amazing. But the Nissan number suggest the LEAF would use under a 100 wh/mile. That’s not very believable since those are numbers you get from the science project cars that weigh 500 pounds. IMHO.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
I meant “chevroletvoltage.com.”
Blog is still very hard for me to reach / read.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Just as GM would be foolish not to offer a BEV.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
In most other blogs on this topic, everyone is griping that the 230 MPG number contains hidden assumptions about miles driven between charges. Unless those assumptions are standardized or known, then this complaint is valid. In my opinion, using just one number to describe efficiency does not cut it any more.
For that reason, I would prefer separate ratings for gasoline and electric operation. It could work like this:
Gasoline: 50MPG x 10G
This means the car has a 10 gallon tank and gets 50MPG when running on gasoline (hence 50×10=500 mile gas range).
Electricity: 5MPK x 8K
This means the car stores 8K of energy and gets 5 miles/K (hence 5×8=40 mile electric range).
For those who care, you could also explain that a “K” is a kilowatt-hour (aka kilojoule), and their electric bill should show that cost (usually around 10cents/K).
This could also be extended to work with less powerful fuels like E85:
E85 Ethanol: 45MPG x 10G
IMHO, this would be simple enough for Joe Consumer to understand and make comparisons, yet provide all the needed detail to determine costs, efficiency, and range. And it works for every type of vehicle. Too bad I don’t work for the EPA.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
the DOE formula estimates 367mpg for Nissan LEAF : from http://twitter.com/NissanEVs
August 11th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
MPG should not have a TIME factor in it! Its distance traveled per amount of fuel. Period. This is basic stuff people.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Your reasoning is just a bit too plain and simple. Have you read, or even better understood, any of the other posts on this page?
August 11th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Sorry, i mistyped a number in the electric part. It should have read:
Electricity: 5MPK x 8K
This means the car stores 8K of energy and gets 5 miles/K (hence 5×8=40 mile electric range)
August 11th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
So how much does it cost in electricty to charge this vehicle from dead to a full charge assuming the charging the battery system is only 50% efficient?
August 11th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
GENERATOR MODE MPG
If there is a bit more (raw) data on EPA numbers
we could backtrack what is the actual mpg fuel consumption in charge sustaining mode
specifically does any one know what is the breakdown between electric only and gasoline miles?
August 11th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Hype like this only impresses people who can’t do math. If I had a all electric vehicle, would it not get infinite MPG. The public needs to look at $/mile over the life of the vehicle. A diesel jetta makes more economic sense than a prius for the total life cycle costs.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
You’re forgetting there is a kWh-Gas equivalent. If you go 10 miles in EV mode you’re not getting infinite miles per gallon, you’re getting whatever the equivalence works out to. (1 gallon gas = 33.44 kWh).
As for not being able to go 230 miles on an actual single gallon of gas, that’s easy. Drive 30 miles to work. Charge. Drive 30 miles home. Charge. Repeat four days in a row and you’ve gone 240 miles without using even a gallon of gas.
Now that may not be the scenario you had in mind, but different scenarios happen all the time. You won’t get city mileage when driving in LA during rush hour. Does that mean that every mileage sticker in America is “full of shjt”? At some point you need to realize that the solution to a problem can’t be simpler than the problem.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
They have to be more sexy than the honesty you demand allows them to be. They have to in order to market the Volt. If they don’t, the average consumer will look at the real, out-on-the-highway-after-an-hour-of-driving, 40 mpg or so, and say, “Oh, the Volt only gets 40 mpg. Nothing special for a $43,000 car. Think I’ll look at a Prius.”
230 mpg is probably a reasonable equivalence to the actual affect that driving a Volt will have on a person’s fuel budget. That’s what you have to make a consumer understand and this does that. At least I think so. They can put the figures you’re looking for in the fine print.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
And a Prius has been shown to do even better $/mile than a Jetta diesel because of the higher costs of diesel.
I say buy a Prius ($25k) instead of a Volt ($40k) and make good use of the extra $15,000 you saved.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
It may be worth noting that this car may be out of many people’s price range. (Sources: http://www.marketnewsvideo.com/?id=200908Volt081109&mv=1 & http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/19/chevy-volt-plug-in-hybrid-priced-at-40-000/ )
August 11th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
This has nothing to do with the Volt, but I did like the fact that the GM guys lost the suits and ties. They’ve much more approachable. Not that they should never wear a suit and tie — many times that will be appropriate — but if you noticed they were dressed much more like the audience asking the questions. I thought it helped dispel the us/them divide.
Also Phil Colley seems to do a very good job of the web interaction stuff over at fastlane. I really think his videos are much better for Youtube than the ones the production companies do.
Now if they can sell some cars and JGTWOTR they’ll be in great shape.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
So under this type of calculation what does the Tesla get? 10,000 miles per gallon?
August 11th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Melodramatic or not, I’m still feeling low about “my” dealership closing.
My grandma is safe and sound, out in the cemetary.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
I fully expect that car to be able to drive a distance of 230 miles and only have burned a gallon of gas
OK. So drive 30 miles to your workplace in the Volt. Use no gallons of gas. Charge the Volt. Drive home 30 miles. Use no gallons of gas. Charge the Volt. Repeat for four days and you’ll have driven 240 miles without using even a single gallon of gas.
Of course this ignores the energy equivalency of electricity and gasoline, and it is a favorable scenario. But it’s probably a very realistic scenario for city driving where you’ll see many short trips with lots of opportunity for recharging: Take kids to school. Come home. Recharge. Go to store. Come home. Recharge. Take kids to soccer. Bring them home. Recharge. The fact that you can come up with a scenario in which the 230 mpg isn’t reasonable doesn’t mean the number isn’t reasonable for its intended purpose.
Keep in mind that it’s for city — not highway and certainly not freeway — and that for a realistic number you need to factor in opportunistic recharging.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
I meant plugging in.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
That depends on the mileage of the car transporter that delivers it
August 11th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
It has been discussed, but not recently (I think our late-great commentor statik took a wag over a year ago).
Whatever EPA allows GM to use for the Volt’s mpg will reflect the degree to which it will be allowed to figure into CAFE. The explanation for the number really doesn’t need to be more complex than that.
This is one of the many reasons why this announcement makes me a bit queasy. It’s the kind of “It’s true but” things that have a way of coming back around to bite the one who said it.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
The article describes a “worst-case scenario” document that GM was required to file with the government. Nowhere in the article does it mention the Volt’s performance in “range extender mode.”
The primary risk, according to the article, appears to be that other companies will be able to move faster than GM in bringing similar products to market (which is often the case for those who follow, rather than lead).
August 11th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
A button has been spotted on early mock ups of Volt instrument panels labeled “hold.” It’s my hope that this mode forces the range extender to come on regardless of the SOC in the battery; this would be made-to-order for this hypothetical situation.
I do think the “230″ number will end up being mis-interpreted by the public; and that this is something to be concerned about when planning advertising.
But really, it doesn’t matter what the procedure is, provided all competing vehicles have to calculate this number according to it. How many know what that number rating inside of new refrigerators actually means? Buyers only know that “higher is better,” and it gives a metric against which competing units can be easily measured.
The question then becomes, how do you decide what “competing” vehicles are? This number would be useless to apply to a Prius, or to an ICE vehicle. Would it apply to the plug-in Prius? I’m not completely sure. It would definitely apply to the announced Hyundai or BYD EREVs, if they are ever actually produced.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Ah, the fabled $25k Prius. If you can find one equipped to sell at that price, by all means buy it. Have yourself a nice long trip down a short road.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
“. . . . it will sell only a few thousand Volts a year for the express purpose of raising GM’s fleet CAFE ratings?”
_____________
bingo
/oh, and don’t forget the desired “halo” effect
August 11th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
It must be worth noting, it gets pointed out multiple times in each and every thread here.
I’ll just remind you that no actual prices have been announced by GM. Wait for the sticker before experiencing your ‘electric shock.’
August 11th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Your reasoning is mostly correct. They are using formulas to simulate equilavent gas usage for AER mileage, so the rated MPG isn’t solely gas burned.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
How about this mileage:
(N – 14) supertankers of oil / total miles driven by all Americans in one year
where N is how many supertankers we imported before the Volt
and 14 is just a wild guess
The mileage rating was always for *comparison shopping* only and not meant to relate to the real world. There are lots of EPA estimates for cars on the road now that are way off the mark.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Yeah, that’s my question too. Very important, IMHO.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
It’s anecdotal, sure, but IIRC, I recently saw where something like 1.2KW is delivered to the Volt, using about 12 amps draw, when using a standard 110v circuit.
Since 15 amps is typical on a household circuit, there’s a LITTLE breathing room. Plus, some 110 circuits are 20-amp circuits*, buying you some more headroom if that’s how you’re wired up.
Also, I’d point out that usually there’s more than one circuit involved per room in a wisely wired house or garage. Furthermore, sometimes the ‘bridge’ between the upper and lower sockets is removed, permitting upper socket and lower ones to be wired separately, which means TWO breakers are involved on the same duplex outlet.
Lots of variations are possible – when in doubt, ask an electrician. I’m just looking to point out, that charging your Volt doesn’t automatically mean you can’t do anything else in your garage.
Having said all that, I agree a dedicated circuit would be best.
* = 20 amp circuits use a slightly different, with the neutral blade oriented horizontally, but still compatible with normal appliances. See here:
http://cache1.smarthome.com/images/4537w.jpg
August 11th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
“* Tentative EPA methodology results show 25 kilowatt hours/100 miles electrical efficiency in city cycle”
That’s CITY cycle (32 mi AER). Highway cycle is going to be less. So just a rough guess we’re talking maybe mid 20’s AER real world highway.
Now you’re down to probably high 20’s AER real world combined everyday usage. If this turns out to be the real world numbers for the volt, it will be more than a buzzkill, it’ll be a major setback. (IMO)
August 11th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
… and I find that I cannot reply to myself (which I need to do when it crashes on me before I can edit), unless I allow the “time remaining” on the original comment to decrement to zero first.
Also, didn’t the red message used to say “Comment is posting, please wait a moment” -? Now it says “Comment is posting, please wait a comment.”
Picky perhaps, but I’ve been wondering when the trolls will be pulled in favor of the hackers.
(just tried to post this twice and it “failed,” lol)
August 11th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
[...] that’s not a typo folks. This morning GM announced that their first electric car to hit the market in late 2010, will drop with a ridiculous 230mpg [...]
August 11th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
The only Thing the averg. person will take away from this is 230MPG ,,, for the next 1 1/2 years GM will have all the bragging rights . And this fact will be crammed in to john Q public heads nonstop for the next couple of years , this is a Hugh day for GM . Congats to all who are working hard to make this car !!!
August 11th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Well actually if you recharge every 32 miles for 7 days you won’t have used the gallon of gasoline so maybe on the eighth day you don’t recharge at all and use that gallon for say 30 miles. You just driven 260 miles on one gallon of gas and used about $1-$2 for 49 kWh of electricity.
It seems clear to me that the city number by necessity includes daily charging.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
No doubt about it, when they put that 230 mpg city number on the sticker of the Volt at the dealership, it’s going to make people’s jaws drop.
If you want do your part to help America get INDEPENDENT of foreign oil from petrodictators and gazillionaire oil sheiks from the Middle East, the Volt is definitely the vehicle to get. It’s a MISER when it comes to gasoline. It’s also a no-compromise kind of car not much different than how you drive now. The oil sheiks aren’t going to like it too much.
With the Volt, the American people will have a POTENT weapon to throw at Wall Street oil schemers and oil sheiks if they want to jack up the price of oil. If and WHEN there’s another huge gas price price spike (and there WILL be), Volt owners will just laugh. Gasoline prices will be something they rarely think about. That’s the peace of mind that INDEPENDENCE gets you.
People that drive a Volt might only have to fill up their tank 3-4 times per YEAR. They can fill it up with E85 too if they want. I’d like to fill it up with algae based “bio-gasoline” from “Sapphire Energy” myself. http://www.sapphireenergy.com/ The “electric fuel” for the Volt will ALWAYS be cheaper per mile than gasoline. Electric powertrains are just plain more efficient than mechanical internal combustion engines. I bet the maintenance and repair costs on the Volt will be pretty low. Fewer moving parts when you are driving in electric mode you know.
If the battery durability exceeds expectations and goes for 200,000 miles like some of the Prius batteries are, there’s going to be some happy GM customers in America in the years ahead. There will be less wear and tear under the hood of your Volt since it will be running in electric mode probably 75%+ of the time.
Resale values should be good. Those IC engine parts should be in “like new” condition after 150,000 miles. People that buy a used Volt might be able to get a new (hopefully, MUCH cheaper) battery replacement and keep on driving that same Volt for another 150,000 miles … no problem. You could see 2011 Volts on the road for a LONG time. 2011 Volts with 400,000 miles on them might be routine. Who knows?
August 11th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Hey Toyota…
How are your Balls feeling right about now.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
No doubt about it, when they put that 230 mpg city number on the sticker of the Volt at the dealership, it’s going to make people’s jaws drop.
If you want do your part to help America get INDEPENDENT of foreign oil from petrodictators and gazillionaire oil sheiks from the Middle East, the Volt is definitely the vehicle to get. It’s a MISER when it comes to gasoline. It’s also a no-compromise kind of car not much different than how you drive now. The oil sheiks aren’t going to like it too much.
With the Volt, the American people will have a POTENT weapon to throw at Wall Street oil schemers and oil sheiks if they want to jack up the price of oil. If and WHEN there’s another huge gas price price spike (and there WILL be), Volt owners will just laugh. Gasoline prices will be something they rarely think about. That’s the peace of mind that INDEPENDENCE gets you.
People that drive a Volt might only have to fill up their tank 3-4 times per YEAR. They can fill it up with E85 too if they want. I’d like to fill it up with algae based “bio-gasoline” from “Sapphire Energy” myself. http://www.sapphireenergy.com/ The “electric fuel” for the Volt will ALWAYS be cheaper per mile than gasoline. Electric powertrains are just plain more efficient than mechanical internal combustion engines. I bet the maintenance and repair costs on the Volt will be pretty low. Fewer moving parts when you are driving in electric mode you know.
If the battery durability exceeds expectations and goes for 200,000 miles like some of the Prius batteries are, there’s going to be some happy GM customers in America in the years ahead. There will be less wear and tear under the hood of your Volt since it will be running in electric mode probably 75%+ of the time.
Resale values should be good. Those IC engine parts should be in “like new” condition after 150,000 miles. People that buy a used Volt might be able to get a new (hopefully, MUCH cheaper) battery replacement and keep on driving that same Volt for another 150,000 miles … no problem. You could see 2011 Volts on the road for a LONG time. 2011 Volts with 400,000 miles on them might be routine. Who knows?
August 11th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Hi! If you’re interested in checking out watching CNBC’s Phil LeBeau speak to General Motors about The Chevy Bolt you can watch the video here: http://bit.ly/3fh75R
Thanks!
August 11th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Feet, of course! Hands are just for measuring the height of horses.
Frankly, though, I just don’t see the beauty in the metric system. Sure, all the prefixes are in sexy, alluring powers of 10 but the moment you actually try to do any real problems the clothes come off and you get the same old ugly math you had in the English system.
To wit:
Pi is still irrational. Calculations of circles and related objects are still ugly.
e is still irrational. Calculations of exponential limits are still ugly.
Acceleration due to gravity on Earth is still not a nice round number in either system.
And then you have stuff that was defined in terms of the metric system, such as Avagadro’s number yet which works out to some huge fractional number anyway.
And time is still (oddly) universally weird. Even the metric system (SI) uses seconds as a base unit. And yes, I know they don’t -officially- recognize minutes and hours in the metric system, that’s really just a cop-out because every country that uses the metric system DOES use minutes and hours. At least as far as I know (though I’m not a horologist or anything).
So, let’s face it. The choice of an arbitrary slice of the circumference of the Earth is just as arbitrary as the choice of some arbitrary dead King’s foot size.
P.S. Mathematicians might note that Pi and e are related (Euler’s formula) and so probably shouldn’t count as two items. But from an engineering perspective, they’re used for entirely different purposes so there!
August 11th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
(click to show comment)
August 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
I smell Sheep !
August 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
I thought that garage looked a little too perfect.
And for those of you with clean garages, I commend you. I on the other hand will have my work cut out for me over the course of the next year to clear out a palate of stucco mix, some plywood, some inflatable children’s pool toys and some old windows just to clear out enough space to park a car in there, let alone get in and out of it.
However, I can run 100A at 220V from my subpanel in there, heh heh heh.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Talk about Bovine Scat, Frank just face-planted in a pile of it!
It’s hard to fathom how a supposedly-competent marketing person would take a raw number from an unofficial test and go public with such a claim.
While it MAY be possible under VERY limited conditions to come up with 230 mpg within the 40-mile range of the battery, to suggest that this is achievable on in wide scale use is not just scurrilous, but untrue.
The risk of over promising and under delivering is disappointment, mistrust, scorn and rejection, setting back the program for years and alienating even fans of the Volt.
So, GM – and everyone else out there willing to prpagate this kind of overhyped greenwashing – get REAL about this conversation!
Or, risk the Volt marketing hitting a brick wall more times than a NHTSA crash test.
I wish you well, but – DAMN – you’re making it tough!!
Kelly
Driver of an Hymotion converted PHEV Toyota Prius
“Don’t Believe the Hype!” – Public Enemy
August 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Dwayne,
You have a lot to learn.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
The oil schemers will move on to other commodities like electricity. But yes this is a positive thing.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I have read that when you combine the city and highway EPA miles per gallon estimates for the Volt, you will get around 124 MPG. Trust me, just getting over 100 miles per gallon will get a LOT of people’s attention. There really ARE going to be a lot of people that don’t do a lot of highway driving who will probably use ZERO gasoline every year … or maybe buy 1 or 2 tanks a year. The Volt is a revolutionary car. No doubt about it. It’s going to change the world.
There are LOTS of positives with the Volt. Lots of very good reasons besides the environment why this car should be very popular in the years to come. You better start saving up for one like a lot of people are. Be sure to get on a waiting list or you might have to wait til 2012 to get yours.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Thanks Tag, I’ll take a look.
(and yes, i’ve had lots of trouble w/the site today too)
August 11th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Did you notice that some joker is going down the list adding “+” to all of your comments, LOL?
Probably the will-o’-the-wisp formerly known as statik, hehehe.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Yes.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
For the uninitiated, Fark.com is a self-proclaimed “news aggregator.”
What this appears to mean is that members of the site submit links to news stories on the internet, and if they are chosen by the moderators, they get posted along with the witty or provocative headline that they have composed for it (and this seems to be the main point of the exercise).
There are also comments sections for each submitted story (so that you can make comments on stories from sites which don’t allow reader comments). These comments range from smart@$$ quips to the outright grotesque, with flame wars, politics and occasional good arguments.
You can tell a lot about what the young, hip demographic is thinking from visiting there, sadly.
Okay, have I prepared you sufficiently? Here is the all-important Fark headline for the “230 mpg Volt” story:
“Chevy Volt to get 230mpg in much the same way that your mom can say she’s ‘lost weight’ and Obama can say 45 million are uninsured: by fudging the numbers”
Comments section (if you have a strong stomach):
http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4567878&startid=53494006
Actually, these are going better than I expected.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Assuming that anybody wants to buy the gas guzzlers. A pretty big assumption, IMHO.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
You better stop ‘dogging’ us around.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
At some point we will have to accept that this site has been subjected to a “statik discharge.” Alas…..
August 11th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
My rough #’s
the first 40 miles = 8kwh = 0.22gallons of gas
however, gasoline is only roughly 25% efficient, so really we are talking about 0.055 gallons of gas
40/0.055 = 727mpg
This is what i come up with for energy equivalence for the first 40 miles. As your trip distance increases your MPG decreases towards 50mpg (assuming that’s what the Volt gets in RE mode)
People saying “if I put one gallon in i should go 230 miles” are not understanding the number 230MPG. MPG is a rate, not a distance. This rate, in the Volts case, changes over distance. So the # you come up with depends on where you draw your line.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Alas, we can hope, but ultimately we must accept that this site has been subjected to a “statik discharge” ….
August 11th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
“Greg Cesiel (GM Senior Staff Engineer) responded:
Quote:
” …the battery is designed to provide a consistent amount of energy over its life. If you drive the Volt as you describe it will be possible to exceed 40 miles from the battery.””
So that pins it down, the 40 miles will not be software limited but controlled by using up 8kwh from the battery.. that means I could get 60 miles of range out of it .. not driving like a maniac!
August 11th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
That is a very good question in some geographic areas. Although, in my neck of the woods I’m far more likely to 1) die of swine flu 2) be struck by lightning 3) become mortally injured in a slip and fall tub or shower accident.
Considering those odds, a better question would be: if I died shortly after forgetting to plug it in for the night, would anyone in my family plug it in so that my final ride could be all electric. I’d like that.
That’s as close to never as a bloke’s gonna see in this life!!!
August 11th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
this is complete crap. if it happened to a toyota prius everyone on here would be complaining.
dont get me wrong im all for the volt and im waiting for one, but that information is misleading.
say it gets 40 miles electric and then 50 miles gas after that
you can even explain how much each kilowatt cost or whatever but dont say it gets 230 mpg
thats lying
August 11th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Lawrence”I want to know both extremes, aka when you simply run the volt without batteries.”
I don’t want to try to put words in your mouth and interpret your meaning so I’ll just leave my question short and rhetorical:
Are they planning on selling Volts without batteries?
August 11th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
“Tooo much new info. 230mpg is a shocking enough number that people will really want the benefits from, and totally understand.”
Exactly! It makes the general public realize that the Volt represents a radical break from petroleum dependance without sacrificing the versatility that the ICE has made us used to.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
How could it get 230 mpg w/o using gas. Doesn’t the current green favorite get 50 mpg and use gas.
I don’t want to get myself worked up about what “greenies” might think only from my imagination and preconceptions, before the hwy and combined numbers are even released and there’s not a bit of public reaction yet to the city number.
I’ll bet the “average person” is going to react in unexpected ways to say the least.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Old efficiency metrics = MPG
New efficiency metrics:
* 100% electric drive all the time, range extender or not = Golden.
High efficiency, performance and luxury characteristics built in.
* Not 100% electric drive = Bear does this in the woods.
* Full gasser = That’s sooooo last century.
The Volt is Golden, so is the Leaf. Do you prefer Faberge or Tiffany?
August 11th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Having experience in very small towns I understand how you’d feel about your dealership. People in large cities just wouldn’t understand how small towns work. But what I don’t understand is why you connect this to Obama. GM made some business decisions. It didn’t ask anyone in the Obama Adminsitration about them (Henderson testified under oath to this). These weren’t political decisions and, in fact, the only thing overtly political are the bills to intervene in the business and open the closed dealerships.
I think this is what Koz meant by the Grandma reference. It just seems that there is a lot of wild stuff out there which bear no relationship to reality. That the Obama Administration sat down and decided which dealers to keep open would be one of these.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Your Momma! Ha Ha Ha…made myself laugh…Boarder.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Noel and Sparks,
Cute on the “discharge”. Actually yesterday it was all (-)’s (lol)
Like I care.
I got 2 questions answered in the Weber chat though.
Be well
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
_____________________________________________________
I’m a big Chevy Volt fan but sorry guys I’m not excited about the 230 Volt marketing campaign. The 230 number is very convoluted requiring way too much explanation to be meaningful from a marketing perspective. I think it hurts the Volt more than helps it…JMHO
_____________________________________________________
August 11th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
RB
I can not say for sure because I have not received an electric bill yet.
Beyond that I LOVE IT! A small fan runs 24/7. For the first time since
I moved in 25 years ago the floor and ceiling are at the same
temp. The air coming out of the ducts is very cold. The fan runs so slow you have to listen to hear it run. The compressor is now in the
basement too. I can not hear it either. If I open the basement door I
can hear a little whine from the pump that pumps the water around
underground. I have not even turned on the breakers on to the hot water heater. Geothermal unit is making ALL of the hot water. So far so good. I will let you know more when I get my first electric bill.
Take Care
Arch
August 11th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
1 KWh = 28, 800 Kjoules
August 11th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
So maybe we should start looking at fuel economy in terms of carbon production. All these different automobile power plants combinations will start to confuse us (well me anyway). A quick Google search says a kW-Hr produces about 1 pound of CO2 and a gallon of gasoline will produce 6 pounds of CO2. Certainly there are conversion efficiencies for each and different source of electricity can make a difference too.
GM say 25 Kw-Hrs per 100 mile and I’ll assuming 25 MPG for a decent efficient standard car. These two produce about the same amount of carbon. Lots of arguments one way and the other I suppose.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
I think GM has done a great job so far on the Volt, but this is misleading.
We’ve been told that the Volt will go 40 miles AER and then get 50 MPG after that. Or, if you put 1 gallon of gas in it, it will go 90 miles.
Using a number like 230 MPG is just setting potential customers up for disappointment.
If I was GM, I would play down the 230 MPG rating, based on the philosophy of pleasing customers by under-promising and over-delivering.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
When you exit a highway and reach a high traffic area, you will still have regen, ICE off at stops, battery assist for low speed electric propulsion and high torque requirements.
So a hold on using up your electric range would make little difference when arriving in a high traffic area. And from my limited ability to visualize such a scenario would appear to be unnecessary.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
There have been a million different ways proposed to account for Volt mpg just at this site alone. If you worked for the EPA, after thousands of hours of debate you would have long ago quit in frustration.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Two new facts at the Frank Weber webchat:
http://www.chevroletvoltage.com/index.php/Blog/chat-with-frank-weber.html
This had been suspected for a long time, finally settled, from our own pirate:
“5:47
[Comment From CaptJackSparrow]
no 12volt starter motor? Then what turns over the ICE to start it?
5:48
Frank Weber: The generator within the electric drive unit, which is directly coupled to the engine.”
The other hint:
“5:37
[Comment From SRSCHRIER]
Would it be possible to drive the Volt from Detroit to Chicago at 65 mph on a single tank of gas for the range extender?
5:40
Frank Weber: Not sure on the exact distance between Chicago and Detroit but if it is around 300 miles you should be fine. But you can always stop at a gas station if you need to (you won’t be as lucky if you are driving a battery electric with a 100 mile range.)”
August 11th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
I completely agree.
To say the Volt gets 230MPG is only telling 1/5th the truth.
I’m a huge Volt fan, but I think this number is totally irrelevant. Just think about it: The fuel rating is based on about 10 miles of gas driving and 40 miles of driving on stored electricity. The majority of driving isn’t even on gas in this method, yet the 230MPG rating is all consumers are hearing.
What about the efficiency of the electric drivetrain? After all, this is an electrically propelled vehicle. How many miles per kilowatt-hour does the car get? Will the EPA sticker have that information? What about miles per charge? What about estimated cost to charge the battery? In a vehicle that makes gas an auxiliary power source, consumers need to know information about the primary source of energy- the electricity stored in the battery pack.
If I visit one of the few remaining Chevy dealers in my area and find a Volt with an EPA sticker that just says 230MPG, I will be very disappointed, and I think many many consumers are going to be misled.
If I could set the standard, I would show how many miles per gallon the car gets while burning gas (highway and city), and show the miles per kilowatt-hour the car gets while “burning” electricity (highway and city), and then clearly list the miles the car can drive on stored battery power. The number will be more like 50MPG on gas, not 230MPG. Then if they want to throw out some make believe 230MPG number based on a specific driving length, so be it, just make sure it’s all clear exactly how to achieve that number. In addition, they could include a chart to show your MPG based on the estimated miles you drive in a day, with the 230MPG bold showing the official EPA number. But one figure based on one driving length is so misleading.
I am in favor of the consumers being given accurate and relevant information on the sticker. This 230MPG rating is going to turn around and bite GM in the ass once people start driving these cars.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Ray,
Here in Global Warming Purgatory, I have a hunch that GM has some really, really terrific ideas up their sleeves for AC efficiencies to be highly consistent, even for our 104 degree days.
You see, the AC draw is a steady state. And, all the AC air can be directed solely at the driver. There are lots and lots of other ideas that I will be contributing to GM (privately) over the next year, but, this is the point where I won’t disclose anything more about those ideas. (Likely, GM HVAC engineering has already thought of most, if not all, the things I would suggest anyway).
But I would not at all be concerned about the AC taking more than about 3% to 6% of AER, but I can’t tell you why I know this.
Not to worry, the Volt will be cool in all ways!!!
August 11th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Chris,
Will there be that much resistance pushing 8 to 9 kWh into a 16 kWh container?
I’d like to know what losses will occur when conditioning the battery while plugged in, in northern climes?
NPNS
August 11th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
I think SI units are far superior. A ml = a cc and there are a thousand of them to a liter. How many ounces (fluid or weight?) to a cubic inch? How many inches in a mile? It is easy to figure that there are 100,000 cm to a km. And what’s up with pounds force and pounds mass? Fahrenheit temperature is based on some rare and bizarre substance, but Celsius is based on the most common substance on our planet; it freezes at zero degrees and boils at 100 degrees. And on it goes.
In college, my thermodynamics professor would give us problems mixed in SI and English units. It was so much easier for me to just convert everything into SI, work the problem, then convert back to English if necessary. I once expressed velocity in furlongs per fortnight (and got it right), just to demonstrate how ridiculous and arbitrary English units really are.
And if we used international standard units, it would make it easier to export American made products.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
That devil is certainly in the numbers or at least in the formulas. I have only seen the overview of factors that are being used. You would have to dig all the way in to see if 367mpg is realistic. I think DonC mentions further down in the comments that 367mpg equates to less than 100wh/miles. If this is accurate, 367 is totally unrealistic. I would be very surprised in the Leaf’s wh/mile is noticeably less than the Volt’s, and actually expect that it will be slightly higher in the city. It may be lighter but it’s CdA will be worse. The rest of the power elements (motor, power electronics, accessories, etc) can’t be much different.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Something about combined mileage..again from the same chat:
“”
5:09
[Comment From Doug - Chevrolet VoltAge]
John Hayes asked: “Plenty about the marketing seems off to me too, especially the 230mpg rating……
5:12
Frank Weber: We want to be transparant and that is why we are keeping the public informed about the results we discover. The point is, the 230 mpg rating applies to only city driving where you can assume that you have charged your car on a daily basis. Although the highway number will be lower, the combined value will still be a triple digit label. ”
EPA calculates combined mileage by mixing 55% of the city cycle with 45% of the hwy cycle, and the Volt achieved 230mpg for the city cycle.. (since 55% of 230 is 126mpg!!) if we assume the hwy cycle mileage will be 50mpg then the combined number will be 148mpg..
still a very high number.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Jackson,
It always had the comment/moment typo. I think the GOOD news is that it must have been a super high volume day here.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Ray,
Up there in Alberta, the very same ideas/new functionalities will have you absolutely comfy-cozy on a snowy-frigid morning when you get into your Volt when it has been plugged in overnight!!!
August 11th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
eat so in the Volt I can drive the 500 mile trip from San Diego to San Francisco with just 2.17 gallons of gas? Woohoo.
That’s what the 230 MPG figure would lead people to believe.
Unfortunately, the reality will be closer to this:
(500 miles/40 MPG highway) – (1 “free gallon” of gas on electric) = 11.5 Gallons
So the MPG on the trip would be about 43 MPG
A far cry from 230
August 11th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
It’s 5:52 pm. I had a communications error notice. I had to close out and re-fire up Firefox. So, maybe it’s just that now there are
*******************************************************************************
LOTS AND LOTS OF PEOPLE ATTEMPTING TO READ MORE! **********YESSSS!******************
*******************************************************************************
August 11th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Schmeltz,
This is where I used to joke about having the option on my Volt to have a sign in lights on the trunk that updates the miles I’ve driven without gas – just to annoy, er, educate the person behind me. It’d also be nice to have a linked set of lights spelling out the number of gallons used and the miles actually driven e.g. “9876.6 miles, 2 gallons of E85 burned”
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Concerning Tesla, you can read it under the blogs on their web site. Look for gas/electrical equivalencies and conversion factors. At least one commenter above has written about electric to gas conversion factors here also.
I believe the EPA gas equivalent number at the time was over 350. For an electric two seater that is 700 pounds lighter than the Volt’s weight guesstimates, that doesn’t seem comparably inconceivable.
But it’s as much about guessing the car’s use patterns and net affect on petroleum supply as it is calculating mileage, according to their explanation of the EPA methods as they existed at that time.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Arch,
That sounds REALLY interesting. I’m looking forward to you post on those specifics!
August 11th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
GM is advertising 40 miles AER, so I think that most people will drive a typical highway speed of 60-70 MPH and reasonably expect to go 40 miles on the battery. If the Volt only goes 30 miles, there will be a storm of complaints.
But I hope this is not true, and the Volt does not disappoint us.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Yes, a pretty fair interpretation. GM wanted to cut loose dealers long before government intervention, which started in the Bush admin. It is just becoming too cavalier in posting here and elsewhere in society to attach everything negative real and imagine to Obama. This is unwarranted and just shooting ourselves in the foot. The grandma reference, my apologies RB, was for the similarity I saw between the outlandish assertion that Obama closed car dealerships and those being made that Obama’s healthcare plan will decide who dies.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
The Volt got a lot of attention on Cavuto today. He had an environmentalist singing it’s praises and one of Neal’s Minions (Eric) who was incredibly ill informed (IMHO), who worried about blackouts and whether or not the Volt would ever really be released. We need to get Neal’s butt in a Volt so he can see for himself what the smiles are about (and that he’ll fit).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Numbers don’t me squat when you got nothing to sell today !
By tomorrow all those numbers will be meaningless as competition will not sit idle.
GM deception still at work post bankruptcy. When will you idiots learn.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
good one Jeff
August 11th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
I think it is a big mistake to announce the city only (higher) number, they should have announced the lower highway and/or combined numbers. After hearing 230, people will assume 230 is HW, COMB and CiTY and once they see the lower HE/COMb numbers they are goning to feel ripped off, and say ‘GM’s at it again’
See lots of B-roll shots of the concept car on the news today, GM should burn that film, my cousin having seen neither before, said ‘WOW that’s the volt?’ and I had to say ‘No thats the concept, the brick, the other one is the Volt’ ‘Oh that one is OK looking’
Great day though …
August 11th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Very true DonC and if 230mpg equates to what the median city driving actually results in, it is as accurate as a single city mpg figure can be. There will be very, very few drivers that actually achieve less than 150mpg average for all of their city driving. Really, how many people do a lot of city driving far from home. There is a reason that you are most likely to have an accident within one mile of your house. For the same reason, the Volt will return huge city mileage numbers for most people.
August 11th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Arch
I am thinking about doing what you did and take your report as very encouraging. I’ll look forward to the post-electric-bill next part. thanks.
RB
August 11th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
I don’t think that going from measuring gallons of fuel to pounds of carbon is the solution either. If you charge your electric car from nuclear energy, it will seem infinitely clean and efficient, which is misleading because of the nuclear waste you are creating.
Liquid fuels are sold in gallons and electricity is sold in KWh, so I think drivers need to know miles/gallon for liquid fueled vehicles, miles/KWh for for electric vehicles, and total range for both.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
RB
Let me make this very clear. One half of my July bill was with my old
system. One half with my new system. We powered up the new system July 15. My electric co-op prints out a year long bill history with each bill. August is always my biggest electric bill.
Last year I spent $4500 on propane and electric. The company I bought the heat pump from says this year should only cost me about $1500 electric no propane. If this is true, with the tax breaks for the heatpump the system will pay for its self in 4 years. That’s better than I can do with the Volt. Thats why I made this move.
Take Care
Arch
August 11th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Think you will be able to buy a Volt? Take a look at the 2 year plan from GM:
Volt: GM’s plug-in hybrid is on target for a November 2010 launch. GM plans to build only 200 to 400 cars in November and December 2010, as 2011 models. The production target for 2011 is about 10,000 Volts. A price approaching $45,000 is estimated.
You will be hard pressed to find one at your dealership…
August 11th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
It seemed like Dr. Weber spent most of the chat handling challenges to the mileage numbers. I’m really glad that he got a chance to say that driving the Volt is FUN!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Jabroni, if you could prived a source for this speculation? As best we know the car will be @ $40k, but final pricing will be based upon demand and gasoline prices 6 months prior to release.
“A price approaching $45,000 is estimated.”
August 11th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
John, if you could provide a source for this speculation, I would appreciate it. The number GM has ‘promoted’ and let us believe has been more like 50mpg in charge sustaining mode.
Hiway mileage should be even higher than CSM, when taking the 8kw into account.
“40 MPG highway”
August 11th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Weber has told us before that the gas tank is between 6 and 10 gallons.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/05/26/volt-chief-engineer-on-chevy-volt-gas-tank-size-and-stale-gas-management/
So if we take off 40 miles for aer then we get mpg in charge sustaining mode of between 43 and 26 mpg.
300 – 40 = 260 260/6 = 43, 260/10 = 26
If GM can’t break a real world 40 mpg it’s going to hurt a little bit.
If GM can’t get a real world 30 mpg then it’s going to hurt some more — maybe a lot. It’ll be a major sticking point for anyone who does long distance commuting or plans on using the car frequently for long trips.
/ of course, all of this 230 mpg bs is academic if they can’t get the price of the car down to at least below $30k in the near future. It’ll be a novelty playtoy for the rich greens and a bank breaker for the over zealous enthusiast of average income.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
This appears as the best way that GM can get attention for the VOLT? Come on GM (230 MPG) the way described this is not even practical. Be honest in what you do. You could say, that the VOLT doesn’t use any fuel at all, providing you never drove at any one time more than what the charge would allow.
I am a GM man but I don’t need to see dishonesty start coming out of GM like it roles out in politics. This crap actually got the attention of national news and then, the dialog on the Volt was very weak.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
[...] Chevy Volt Gets 230 MPG City EPA Rating | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt …The definitive source for real-time news, information, and discussion about the Chevrolet Volt electric car.GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site – http://gm-volt.com/|||GM: Volt To Get 230 MPG In City – Detroit Local News Story – WDIV …7 hours ago DETROIT — General Motors Corp. says its Chevrolet Volt rechargeable electric car should get 230 miles per gallon of gasoline in city driving. Tuesday, August 11, 2009.ClickOnDetroit.com – ClickOnDetroit.com News – http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/|||Darryl Siry [...]
August 11th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Phil Lebeau reported on CNBC that the range is based on 100 miles , but as we all know, the EV range is only 40 miles. shame on CNBC and Phil Lebeau:
Here is how it is calculated:
40 miles requires about 8 Kwh, assume 6 cent/Kwh (night time, lower rate), so the cost is about $0.48, assume the gas price is $2.50, then $0.48 you can buy 0.192 gal, so here is the mileage: 40/0.192= 208 mpg, of course my calculation is slightly different from that used bg GM, but the basic idea is the same! Also you can see, if the gas price go up, then the mpg will be even higher, if the gas is $4/gal, the mileage will be 332 mpg.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
mister_techie, hardly suprising, given the cost of the battery alone, but thanks for posting sources.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Have you seen the video on MSNBC – freaking liberal’s can’t understand the technology. They are saying the Volt is only designed to be used around your local area and not driven across country. They are also complaining about having to find some place to plug it in. These people are such idiots. We should flood MSNBC with complaints just as with did with D. Letterman and tell them to get the story right. They are also failing to mention the goverment tax rebate which brings the price of the Volt very close to the price of a fully equiped Prius. Typical ignorant media. The idea of investigative reporting has not existed for decades.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Ok assuming 50mpg in generator mode:
MPG on the trip would be 55MPG. Still quite far off of 230.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
like the 3 cents a mile that GM has said the Volt will due (is that HW, COMB, City?). What is the Diesel Jetta’s cost per mile?
August 11th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Yeah. Too bad this “advertising” is wasted on a car you can not actually buy.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Hope they include these with the owners manual of the vette and the escalde as well …
August 11th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
You know with all the complaints about the number, and I agree that it’s really not a “real” number I wonder how many people remember the farce claims of the Prius when it first hit the streets. Toyota intentionally tuned the Prius to deliver high numbers from the EPA testing. GM has just done the same exact thing. Both are misleading but with the Volt at least we have the oppertunity to hit those numbers.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
GM says that the 230 is a conservative number, and that the official EPA number will be higher. No lawsuits …
August 11th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
nuclearboy writes, “Take that, Toyota.”
Hey, nuclearboy, do you think Toyota is going to take this lying down? Let me fill you in on the answer: No.
When the Volt was simply a pointless, over-expensive exercise in GM asserting its manliness, Toyota was OK with ignoring it. They probably expected the EPA to do the right thing and publish a number that consumers would actually find useful (like 40 miles on electricity and then such-and-such mileage after the battery was depleted).
Now, they are looking at a situation which, from a PR standpoint, is very unpleasant.
I predict Toyota will act. GM is not going to like what comes next.
—
The EPA has let everybody down. Can you put a gallon of gas in the thing and go 230 miles? If not, the fuel economy rating is a lie.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
GM hasn’t said 50mpg in quite a long time and all answers to the mpg after battery depletion have been extremely evasive.
If you simply look further up the page, another poster has come up with a good estimate of fuel economy, 26 to 43mpg, based on information from Frank Weber.
—
If the long-range fuel economy was better than the Prius, don’t you think GM would be more than happy to say so?
August 11th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
YMMV gets taken to a whole new level.
The difference between expectations and real-world results will likely be extreme. Even a small margin-of-error calculates to a large quantity when the number is that big in the first place. Add to that the hard time consumers already have understanding the impact of summer & winter and the role speed plays on efficiency.
It’s not going to be pretty. The current hybrids and their plug-in upgrades have already demonstrated this.
The variance is confusing. It’s also far from a guarantee. What purpose does 230 MPG actually serve, rather than just saying +100 MPG?
The estimated rating seems to be going in the direction of horsepower & speed, meaningless beyond what the typical consumer actually uses.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
I saw the chat.
By “handling” you must mean avoiding, redirecting, blocking and woops . . . time to go.
(there were 2 questions that directly asked him what is the mpg in charge sustaining mode, there were at least 5 others that would logically have had mpg in RE mode included in the answer)
230 mpg in car that you can’t drive more than 300 miles, that sounds more like confusion than fun.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Carcus1
You sound like you’re channeling statik. You just can’t see the positive and I wouldn’t even venture a guess as to why. Or do you think that the Volt *isn’t* fun to drive? Shrug,
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
John S
What would the Nissan figure of 367 mpg lead you to believe???
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
“I wonder how many people remember the farce claims of the Prius when it first hit the streets.”
… and the disasterous hybrid Highlander. When it was still just planned, they started out saying “50 mpg,” then it started slipping as the release date approached. “40.” “30.” “Well, maybe not 30, but darned good for a vehicle of this size.”
August 11th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Jabroni,
Under-promise, over-deliver.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!
August 11th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Most likely, the next thing they push will be “Hydrogen.” Half the nation has already been duped, and it hasn’t even properly started, yet.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Many people say that for every Prius sold, it allowed Toyota to sell one additional Tundra. I don’t know how much truth there is to that. Take it for what you will.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
I tried. Hard.
His answer to my question was a total dodge, and his answer to another question, where he claimed the charge-sustaining MPG would be ‘misleading,’ was QUITE startling. I guess we don’t see eye to eye about what exactly is ‘misleading.’
August 11th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
230 mpg is artfully contrived but as Shakespere said “too clever by half.”
August 11th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
How come auto makers don’t follow Bill Gate’s lead? One of the richest men in the world got that way by offering inexpensive personal computers. So far it seems like auto makers are using Jobs’ mentality instead of Gate’s, I’m waiting for the Gate’s approach before I buy an EV (mass produce at a truly affordable price and they will have the market). How complicated can it be? People have been driving electric vehicles for years, since something like 1909 (Leno owns a 1909 electric car). Anyone ever seen the documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car”? It was GM & Ford and Big Oil. I for one will not buy into a lease only option for an electric car, and I won’t be spending over $20K for one.
b
BTW, all this talk of off-peak electric costs is meaningless, if everyone has an electric car charging up for 8 hours at night while they sleep, there will no longer be any such thing as off-peak electricity. The only option is to also install PVs and wind turbines on our homes to power our cars. PV batteries’s off-gas hydrogen, which can be stored to use in Hydrogen/Electric cars. Follow the Aptera’s lead and put PV’s on top of the cars to power the AC systems. Aptera btw is scheduled to release this October.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
[...] Chevy Volt Gets 230 MPG City EPA Rating - GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site [...]
August 11th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Will they used this waiting list as the official waiting list? Hmm wonder If i’m under 10,000……
August 11th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Guys 26? Not even a logical, my Ion gets up to 37 on the highway, admittedly 43 could be the case, but from my math its 300+40, and a 6 gal tank, making CSM 50mpg and Highway 56.6.
http://www.kgoam810.com/Article.asp?id=1451971&nId=1&spid=30365
“If you simply look further up the page, another poster has come up with a good estimate of fuel economy, 26 to 43mpg, based on information from Frank Weber”
August 11th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Cavuto (on his 6pm business show) seemed a bit misinformed, talking about being stuck in the desert, after depleting the batteries, he seemed to think it both a parallel hybrid and then a BEV. I agree get him (get every mouthpiece) in the seat.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
I wish they had not done this.
If I charge the battery full and have 1 gallon of gas in the tank will it go 230 miles ?
There is enough good things about Volt that they need to hype this useless statistic to get people to buy …
And now comes the word that EPA is backing away from these figures – they haven’t tested Volt.
EPA backs away from GM claim of 230 mpg for Volt
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/08/11/epa-backs-away-from-gm-claim-of-230-mpg-for-volt/
August 11th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
It is true that the majority aren’t up to speed with the volt as such.
The problem is that those numbers aren’t exactly honest IMO.
People are going to assume that the gas tank holds 6 gallons and that equates to 6 x 230miles 1,380 miles woohoo! BUT the stated range on a full tank of gas is only about 300 Miles or so – What gives?
Hopefully not, but this may leave a distrustful image of GM with many potential buyers when/if the true “real world” numbers come out.
It’s a great advertising gimmick but the reality will soon be pointed out by the likes of Toyota etc. that on gas it still only really gets 50 miles/gal.
I think eventually cars should be rated in energy efficiency equivalent i.e. KWH/Mile Electric and Gas as it levels the playing field and stops this nonsense.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
and we thought the old EPA mpg #s were inflated … JK
August 11th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Hmmmmmmmm .
TIGER hear late next year , breake even .
Tiger has 4 billion friends fix this .
God Bless
August 11th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
How about saving the EV potential for your residential area after a drive on the Interstate?
August 11th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Yes, Statik did have the best question. Even though he has left us, he is still the MVP.
I do find it interesting that people seem to be casting the EPA methodology in such a way that it sounds unreasonable. As if “AC” was a foreign term. It sounds much more realistic than what GM is doing to get their “up to” 40 number.
Perhaps this will end the, “I’m guessing GM is underestimating the electrical range and it will be more like 60 miles” posts.
We now know that “up to” means and we can also probably expect high 20’s for the highway range.
I think GM has known this for a while and is planning to tap into the 8KWh reserve as needed to get the 40 miles. Hence the second battery and the price jump.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
Todd, I heard the report on the radio. It isn’t that the reporters are liberal or conservative. It’s because they didn’t do their homework.
It sounds like they gave the reporters about 30 minutes to learn all they could about the Volt and then go on air.
…the comment: “This vehicle is to be used around town, can’t go long distances with it”
HUH? This is the point of EREV. You are not bound to your local area.
=D~
August 11th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Lyle was interviewed on fox by Deagen McDowel, but I guess she didn’t mention it to Neil. They could put static and me on and be “Fair and Balanced” (lol)
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road To Neal!!
August 11th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Good point. Even calling it 200+ would give a clearer impression. It’s out now and after all the reviews and criticism comes forward, EPA could even change the methodology.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
EVNow says: If I charge the battery full and have 1 gallon of gas in the tank will it go 230 miles ?
————————
Good point. Plug-ins should be rated in Gallons Per Year (GPY). MPG ratings for plug-ins are confusing and debatable, but GPY is pretty obvious.
With a typical driving pattern, assuming you only charge overnight:
Vehicle ……………… Gallons per year
Volt ………………….. 37
Prius ………………… 228
30 MPG car ………… 380
20 MPG car ………… 570
Assumptions:
Volt: 40 miles all-electric range, 50 mpg thereafter
The Chevy Volt’s Electric Range is 40 Miles in Both Highway and City Driving
http://gm-volt.com/2009/04/24/the-chevy-volts-electric-range-is-40-miles-in-both-highway-and-city-driving/
Typical driving pattern:
• 30 days at 8 miles per day
• 50 days at 16 miles per day
• 240 days at 30 miles per day
• 30 days at 60 miles per day
• 3 days at 450 miles per day
11,390 total miles per year
More info here:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/GallonsPerYear.xls
August 11th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Its amazing how many here have missed the point of the Volt MPG.
The whole point of this dual mode vehicle is to optimize the electric mode vs. the ICE mode both “green” reasons; dollar bills and environment (as well as getting off oil) electricity is much less expensive than gas. So the MPG has to dove-tail with this idea. The MPG therefore should reflect this. The idea is simple how one uses the two modes will determine both the economic and environmental benefit, hence the 230 and 100 MPG values above.
see my post above #34 1LazP Reply:
August 11th, 2009 at 11:08 am
The dealer can show such a table showing miles driven per charge daily driving vs.mileage
August 11th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Totally agree…
I had a bunch of folks roll their eyes at the 230 mpg figure because they know it’s an electric car and the EPA is cheating by allowing the car to plug in to get to that number. It’s totally unrealistic and does more harm than good. Another misstep by the Government and or GM.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
No unit system is naturally superior.
I use SI when doing most engineering problems but English when working others.
Each system has it advantages.
Sure its nice to have 0 to 100 for pure water. But F has the advantage of being more graduated in the area which humans care about.
I could just as easily express velocity in terms of hectometers per Julian Year….
Any unit system is arbitrary. Metric/SI had the advantage of a systematic approach to choosing it arbitrary values, but they are still arbitrary and do not work well for all situations.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
The earth is flat
August 11th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Anything is possible
Raser Technologies To Release New Electric Hummer
Published:07-August-2009
By Staff Reporter
Hummer H3E is a plug-in electric vehicle with an on board range extender
Raser Technologies will release its 100-mpg extended-range electric Hummer H3E this month. The vehicle is designed to go about 40 miles in all-electric mode, after which a small gas-powered engine kicks in and powers a generator which then recharges the batteries.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Yes Dave, I realize their lack of actually working is the problem. The liberal statement was only made because the video was on MSNBC known for liberal reporting. I would have said the same on the conservative side if the video was on Fox. The news, both sides never seem to get it right. I just want my Volt.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
Funny thing is soon after GM released this info – Nissan tweeted “Nissan Leaf = 367 mpg, no tailpipe, and no gas required. Oh yeah, and it’ll be affordable too!”
I think the market is way more than what Nissan & GM can produce at this time. They should be looking at converting 200 million vehicles to PHEV/BEV – not making these confusing mpg claims.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
How does adding that complication gain you something? Send me to school, I just don’t see the advantage.
Trying to leave ICE pollutants on the interstate and out of your neighborhood?
August 11th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
And, all the AC air can be directed solely at the driver.
I think I’ve heard talk of cooled as well as heated seats since these are more efficient.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
The efficiency is already in the number of miles driven. You can’t count it again. IOW if you go 40 miles on 8 kWh, then this is equivalent of going 160 miles on a gallon. I’m not understanding where the .055 factor is coming from.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Yeah, it’s one of those “the sky is falling” disclosures.